Hi, actually, I was just referring to the idea of patenting the algorithm itself in relation to, in some extent "emotional", issue of software patenting. In this case, a patent will be almost worthless because there are many possible algorithms and a patented algorithm will just be bypassed by other programmers. Read: "there's no money in it".
Government certification is another matter. This differs from country to country. Personally, I will not attempt to develop a grouper myself. I dont have the needed deep knowledge and my spare time is very limited. regards, elpidio On Monday 28 June 2004 14:44, Joachim Mollin wrote: > Hi, > > you are right. The code is trivial, but it must be checked and approved by > a German authority. So it is better to integrate a commercial product, > which is most often installed. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.Net email sponsored by Black Hat Briefings & Training. Attend Black Hat Briefings & Training, Las Vegas July 24-29 - digital self defense, top technical experts, no vendor pitches, unmatched networking opportunities. Visit www.blackhat.com _______________________________________________ Care2002-developers mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/care2002-developers
