effects and incompatibilities between GPG1.0.6 and PGP CKT 06

[Florian Weimer]

Johan Wevers <johanw@vulcan.xs4all.nl> writes:

> Florian Weimer wrote:
> 
>>> Attention: It is the PGP CKT version from Imad R. Faiad, not the NAI PGP.
>> So why is he using the PGP trademark?  This is quite confusing.
> 
> The CKT (Cyber Knights Templar) pgp versions are based on the released NAI
> sourcecode,

Ah, I see.  These versions have a questionable legal state.
Personally, I recommend against using them.

> I don't know if and how the name "pgp" is trademarked;

It is, of course.  It's probably even a registered trademark in quite
a few counries.

> but since there are GPL programs like pgp 2.3a using that name
> before any company used it I'm not sure if NAI can claim explusive
> rights.

PGP 2.3a et al. were relased by 'Phil's Pretty Good Software'.
Mr. Zimmerman probably sold the trademark together with his other
rights.

> Fact is that they don't seem to go after all those altered versions.

But nobody can be sure that they won't in the future.

> And this is not exclusive for pgp; I have some changes I apply to
> each new version of gpg I use as well.

Well, GnuPG is free software, so you are certainly allowed to do that.
In contrast, NAI explicitly forbids to distribute modified versions.