Re: Blackberry should sue every tech company ever
Thank you for the clarification. I agree that I haven't looked at the greater content. Therefore, my descriptions may have lacked necessary details. However, my protest remains. First, I claim that the description you have provided from the patent body is unoriginal, and is essentially identical to my meaning--the description of the generation is basically saying "we use a random number generator to generate a key using a seed", I.E. not at all new. Therefore, it mostly hinges on whether anyone else had checked two values for complexity before. This is a basic cryptographic concept. Even if nobody had thought of that, you can hardly claim invention of a cryptographic challenge. The high-level code you provided all fits into my facetious function "weLikeThisKey", but would require about three lines of code assuming I write it nicely:
bool weLikeThisKey(key k, key q) {
keyComplexity ck=complexityOf(k);
keyComplexity cq=complexityOf(q);
return ck.isAppreciablyBetterThan(cq);
}
Perhaps blackberry could patent the content of their complexity checker (I'm giving them a lot of the benefit of the doubt here), but not the process of using a complexity checker. If that were the case, it would functionally limit any comparison of values with some function, as that function could provide a benefit for a cryptographic key.
In addition, a patent's content is supposed to be summarized in its abstract. You have not yet told me why all of my quick descriptions of patent contents are incorrect. If any of them are correct, then blackberry has patented something that already existed. At the very least, blackberry entirely failed to explain the new concept in their abstracts. I believe that perhaps that is because there is no new concept in most of these patents. My point, therefore, remains unchanged.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
