"Steven M. Bellovin" <smb@research.att.com> writes:

> In message <199907150218.WAA00540@pzero.sandelman.ottawa.on.ca>, Michael Richar
> dson writes:
> 
> >
> >    Perry> No, that's not correct in either case. rc2 was openly published by
> >    Perry> them, rc4 is almost impossible for them to claim trade secret
> >
> >  Okay, rc2 remains as is.
> 
> rc2 is described in RFC 2268, which also notes that it's a registered trademark.

Using the trademark isn't a problem, providing you are not using it to ``endorse
or confuse''.

Saying foo.c implements the rc4 algorithm is perflectly acceptable.

Calling foo.c rc4.c is fine, provided that the documentation makes it
clear that while the code implements the may implement the rc4
algorithm, it is not otherwise related to any products of RSA. Anyone
who can read code can hardly be said to be otherwise deceived.

Julian.