Thank you for your kind comment.
I have a deep respect for the idea that the late Gervase Markham had in 2005, but as far as can be told from his blog post and subsequent internal communications in W3C, his idea was abandoned and not put into practice. It seems it was abandoned for the same reason that nobody has heard of Scriptlock until now. The world wasn't ready for it.
Indeed the invention can emulate the CSP nonce in IE10/IE11. So what proof do you need?
Unfortunately, just like nobody was interested in Gervase's idea. Nobody was interested in my invention. In 2012 I wrote to several of the big companies after my patent was published to see if they wanted to use the product. I got no reply.
Disheartened I let the idea go and went back to my day job, though I kept the website up all this time.
No, we can't use what we know now to change history: In 2011 nobody practicing the art of computer security believed that embedding a password in plain text into a web page could in any way add to the security of the page. So, as far as can be told, nobody put it into practice. Two different patent examiners agreed. In 2011 I showed it could be done within the browsers available at the time and that it did work. Heck, the original version worked in IE9!
As to my motives to do something now:
I am a 45 year old father of six children, two of whom have disabilities, one very severe. 18 months ago I was diagnosed with a rare combination of cancers (Thyroid cancer and Lymphoma), which has left me struggling to function every day.
For the last six years I have had to watch on as the biggest companies in the world use what looks like my patent… and now I’m struggling to support them and I can’t do anything about it.
The patent system was devised to protect small inventors like me. But to small inventors patents are worthless. It costs millions of pounds to enforce them and in this case would entail me going up against the biggest companies in the world, which I find a terrifying prospect.
It was my hope to be able to revive my invention and build up a business based on it with the view that maybe one day I might have the financial strength to address the bigger problem. My letter was simply to seek the support of people benefiting from this invention with a voluntary contribution. I made a gross error in judgement with my approach and choice of words. Sorry.
I have offered to pay any costs they incurred getting legal advice.
The fights been knocked out of me by this cancer, so as I said to Gareth, I'm not sure I can be bothered.
There is a voluntary scheme in place on my website if anyone does want to contribute.