David K. Trudgett
Fri Sep 14 03:59:01 2001
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
On Friday 2001-09-14 at 09:27:34 +1000, David K. Trudgett wrote:
> On Thursday 2001-09-13 at 10:12:09 +0200, Werner Koch wrote:
> > On Thu, 13 Sep 2001 08:45:51 +0200, disastry said:
> > > it is in .dk not in .org:
> > > http://www.gnupg.dk/contrib-dk/
> > Sorry, my fault. I corrected the README.idea
> No problem. I've got the files now. I'll let you know how I go with
> it (well, at least if I have any further problems!).
I do have a further problem. The signature is from an unknown key and
therefore cannot be verified. The signature is not made by the official=20
GnuPG key, and worse, there is no indication in the file as to which
key it is supposed to have been signed by. *What's going on here,
guys?* This is plainly not acceptable. The copyright notice is in the
name of Werner Koch (dd9jn), which should have been signed by that key=20
(Werner Koch (gnupg sig) <firstname.lastname@example.org>), but is not.
Another question I have, is with the veracity of this claim, made in
the idea.c file:
* DUE TO PATENT CLAIMS THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE SOFTWARE IS NOT
* ALLOWED IN
* THESE COUNTRIES:=20
* AUSTRIA, FRANCE, GERMANY, ITALY, JAPAN, THE NETHERLANDS,=20
* SPAIN, SWEDEN, SWITZERLAND, THE UK AND THE US.
If IDEA is free for non-commercial use, how can its *distribution* not
be allowed because of patent claims??? This does not make any sense at
all. How was it that PGP could be legally distributed with IDEA in the
first place? Answer: *it was not illegal to do so*.
Can somebody please explain to the unenlightened? :-)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----