Re: An attempt to sneak Internet voting in viatheback door?

From: Arthur Keller <voting_at_kellers_dot_org>
Date: Mon Jun 22 2009 - 12:50:18 CDT

Cascella, it was Alan Dechert who quoted Nolan Bushnell, not me.

In contrast with Alan, I believe that there is a place for patents.
But patents involve the release of an enabling disclosure in exchange
for the right to restrict others from using the invention. If you
have filed patents, then there is no longer any need to maintain
secrecy on your concepts, as they will be published anyway.

If you intend to rely on the concept of trade secrets, while there is
widespread agreement that encryption keys must be maintained as
secrets, the algorithms should be made public as security through
obscurity is no security at all.

So I call your bluff. If you have filed any patents, please post
their disclosures. If you intend to keep the inner workings of your
voting system secret indefinitely, then you have lost all credibility
on this list. If you intend to release the details of your system at
some point in the future, then feel free to post those details when
you can make them available. Until then, your unsubstantiated boasts
should be considered trolls.

Best regards,

At 7:29 PM +0200 6/22/09, compodinamic wrote:
>Dear Arthur
>I do not write very well in English but I hope to make me
>understand, because concepts are very important.
>The man who says this does not tell lies, but stupidity. He forgets
>one important thing: "what he says is gospel for Monopoly" which is
>precisely what the Monopolies want that people believe and think.
>They, the Monopolies, however, filing the patents and make many more
>patents than it can do. Only they have right to patent, only they
>must have patents, and when someone tries to make the patents, they
>have problems or their patents have been criticized for not serving!
>The cost of patents is due to the fact that monopolies have decreed
>that the patent is " Cosa Nostra". In practice these gurus or
>depressed speaking of the ineffectiveness of patents system,
>neglect or are ignorant about a vital fact: the idea is always
>unique, and the idea born with an act of love, and the inventor is
>the port where the incoming idea materializes. The monopolist is
>materialist in itself, and does not know nor what is love or even
>what is the future, he looks only to the past or present at most,
>can not generate any idea ever. Are only small (inventors)
>generating ideas, the monopolist that have the great resources can
>only develope the past. Small (inventors) is the future that is
>accomplished, the great (the monopolist) is the present that
>becomes the past. That's why the monopolist say, as your friend,
>that ideas "Few if any ideas are brand new and ideas, by themselves,
>are crap. It is impossible to own any idea and patents are, in most
>fast-moving businesses, a waste of time."
>----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Dechert" <>
>To: "Open Voting Consortium discussion list" <>
>Sent: Monday, June 22, 2009 6:24 PM
>Subject: Re: [OVC-discuss] An attempt to sneak Internet voting in
>viatheback door?
>>>Arthur, you are absolutely right. Unfortunately the big companies
>>>that are always short of ideas but they have huge resources. They
>>>make us ( small fishes) a morsel, if there is no protection .
>>Cascella, read this recent article by Nolan Bushnell:
>>Note in particular where he says,
>> >
>>May 13, 2009
>>The Secret to Patents
>>Posted at 12:03 PM
>>When starting a company, many entrepreneurs believe that their
>>ideas are of massive value and they become paranoid that someone is
>>going to steal them. So they spend precious time filing patent
>>applications and hire expensive lawyers to craft non-disclosure
>>agreements to protect their intellectual property. They are crazy.
>>It is easy and expensive to be granted a worthless patent. The
>>Patent Office does a vanishingly superficial job of looking at the
>>validity of a patent, and the only patent with even the slightest
>>potential of being worthwhile has to be litigated. And that rarely
>>occurs except in the drug industry. I know of no business that has
>>made its mark because of patents.
>>Think of it like this. A patent is like a giant canon: You can
>>point it at someone but, assuming your business is small, the
>>company in your crosshairs will look at you and look at your giant
>>canon and they will almost immediately make the calculation that
>>you are bluffing. Your canon is not frightening because your
>>competitor knows that, to fire it, you must spend $500,000. That's
>>the cost of a typical patent lawsuit. Perhaps if your company gets
>>massively successful you can play that game but, even then, few do.
>>If you don't have the $500,000 in extra cash you may as well not
>>have a patent. And if you still think your patents are worthwhile
>>just try to get a lawyer to take a patent-enforcement case on
>>contingency. The attorneys know the odds.
>>I speak from experience. I held the patent for virtually all the
>>video games that were produced from 1970 through 1978 when the
>>microprocessor updated my patents. We chose not to litigate against
>>anyone who copied us and put our money into our business. We
>>dominated the market and never regretted the distraction of
>>lawsuits and litigation over patents.
>>Few if any ideas are brand new and ideas, by themselves, are crap.
>>It is impossible to own any idea and patents are, in most
>>fast-moving businesses, a waste of time. Creativity can be learned.
>>It can also be shut off. Spend you money of marketing or on
>>production or on other things that maximize market share.

Experienced advisor to leading edge startups and
accomplished expert witness on patent infringement cases.
Arthur M. Keller, Ph.D., 3881 Corina Way, Palo Alto, CA  94303-4507
tel +1(650)424-0202, fax +1(650)424-0424
OVC-discuss mailing list
By sending email to the OVC-discuss  list, you thereby agree to release the content of your posts to the Public Domain--with the exception of copyrighted material quoted according to fair use, including publicly archiving at
= The content of this message, with the exception of any external 
= quotations under fair use, are released to the Public Domain    
Received on Tue Jun 30 23:17:07 2009

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Tue Jun 30 2009 - 23:17:20 CDT