Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

PKWare Files a Patent Application for Secure .zip

Posted by michael on from the dumb-de-dumb-dumb dept.

prostoalex writes "The battle of ZIP formats might intensify as PKWare filed an application with USPTO to obtain a patent on its Secure Zip technology, which pretty much involves archiving with strong cryptography. If the patent gets granted, PKWare will license its algorithms for other software manufacturers. A representative of Aladdin Systems summed it up: "The good thing about the .zip file format was that you knew you could send it to everyone. Now that's getting broke.""

6 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Use PGP by Nathan+Ramella · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Doesn't PGP already compress things before it encrypts? (Adds to the difficulty in decyphering it..)

    --
    http://www.remix.net/
  2. 7-zip by fredrikj · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Everybody, start using the (open source) 7-zip instead.

  3. just another example... by Satan's+Librarian · · Score: 5, Interesting
    of a a company going to hell after its founder is gone, it can't innovate anymore, and it starts getting beaten to a pulp by its competitors.

    seems like a familiar story to me.

    --
    I write code.
  4. encrypting version of gnu tar by phr2 · · Score: 4, Interesting
    Would an encrypting version of GNU Tar be prior art? I put Blowfish into GNU Tar in the mid 90s and posted to Usenet about it in 1996 and at various other times. I've offered to send out copies and a few people have asked for and gotten them. I'd think that constitutes publication.

    There's also a Usenet thread about encrypting archive programs including some modified Zip programs.

  5. help, I don't understand by lfourrier · · Score: 4, Interesting

    1. "What we've filed a patent for is the whole method of combining.zip and strong encryption to create a secure.zip file," said Steve Crawford, the chief marketing officer at PKWare. The patent was filed with the Patent Office on July 16, he said.
    2.In May of this year, WinZip developed its own method of strong encryption, which incompatible with the PKWare product.
    3.Crawford believes that WinZip will be a potential licensee. "The basic approach of combining encryption of.zip is covered by the patent, so what WinZip has done, I believe, would be covered by the patent."

    If 3 is true, 2 is clearly prior art. So why patent?

    There is something rotten in IP kingdom.

  6. Except Katz didn't innovate that much. by Watts+Martin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Except that they started out in hell, because their founder ripped off Thom Henderson's ARC to make his original program.

    Back in the BBS days, we were all rallied to support good ol' Phil against the evil Big Company, System Enhancement Associates, who was suing to keep Phil's faster PKARC from eating the original ARC program's lunch. BBS sysops were encouraged to boycott ARC. It worked. It ruined System Enhancement Associates.

    Except the funny thing is, SEA was right. They won the lawsuit because Katz hadn't just reimplemented ARC, he stole their source code. That always gets left out of the retelling, even though the reason ZIP exists as a format is because Katz was ultimately prevented from using the ARC format and compression routine. The reality is also that even then, PKWare was a bigger company than SEA ever was. ARC was a commercial program, but had a very unusual license (for the time) allowing people free access to the source code if they wanted to port it to non-DOS platforms. Katz baldly abused this license and, in the end, got away with it. ZIP did end up with an improved compression scheme which I presume PKWare came up with, although there's some evidence that the all-but-ignored ARC 7 outperformed it. (PKARC was, IIRC, based on ARC 5.)

    Ben Baker has a description of the history of this whole affair at the website of Thom Henderson (ARC's author). Henderson also has his own commentary, which I would describe as "gently acid."