Fault Jumping Attacks against Shrinking Generator

In this paper we outline two new cryptoanalytic attacks against hardware implementation of the shrinking generator by Coppersmith et al., a classic design in low-cost, simple-design pseudorandom bitstream generator. This is a report on work on progress, since implementation and careful adjusting the attack strategy in order to optimize the atatck is still not completed

The Supreme Court’s Chief Justice of Intellectual Property Law

Justice Clarence Thomas is one of the most recognizable members of the United States Supreme Court. Many people recall his stormy Senate confirmation hearing and notice his fiery dissenting opinions that call on the Court to reflect the original public meaning of the Constitution. Yet observers have missed one of Justice Thomas’s most significant contributions to the Court—his intellectual property law jurisprudence. Justice Thomas has authored more majority opinions in intellectual property cases than any other Justice in the Roberts Court era and now ranks as the most prolific author of patent law opinions in the history of the Supreme Court. Thus, at a time when intellectual property has become one of America’s most important assets, Justice Thomas has played an important role in the evolution of America’s innovation law and policy.This Article is the first to highlight the significance of Justice Thomas’s intellectual property jurisprudence. It considers how Justice Thomas emerged as the Roberts Court’s “chief justice” of intellectual property law, authoring more majority opinions than even colleagues known for their intellectual property law prowess. The Article analyzes Justice Thomas’s key intellectual property opinions to understand their importance. It also highlights the distinguishing features of these opinions, including their faithful adherence to textualism, appreciation for the role of remedies, attention to technological and business context, awareness of the impact on intellectual property practitioners, and surprising unanimity. The Article concludes that Justice Thomas’s deep respect for the constitutional separation of powers is at the heart of his intellectual property jurisprudence, as his opinions invite and sometimes nudge Congress to play its leading role in crafting intellectual property law

Conditions and Covenants in License Contracts: Tales from a Test of the Artistic License

Pity the poor Artistic License version 1.0 (ALv1). The Free Software Foundation criticizes the license as “too vague” with some passages “too clever for their own good.” The Open Source Initiative suggests that it has been “superseded.” ALv1’s authors at the Perl Foundation even acknowledge its flaws. Yet it is the ALv1, not the venerable GNU General Public License (GPL), which the Federal Circuit upheld in Jacobsen v. Katzer [535 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008)], establishing at long last that open source licenses are enforceable. Although that outcome received most of the headlines, the case’s greater significance lies elsewhere. Jacobsen v. Katzer teaches valuable lessons about conditions and covenants in license contracts, lessons that apply to software licenses of all persuasions, open source and binary use alike. Moreover, the case raises an important issue about the interplay between contract and intellectual property law: can licensors manipulate the distinction between covenants and conditions in such a way that upsets the delicate balance in copyright law? This article begins with a short description of open source licensing, followed by a discussion of the Jacobsen v. Katzer case and the lessons that it teaches about license contracts. Then, this article presents the questions left unresolved by Jacobsen v. Katzer: (1) Can licensors manipulate the distinction between covenants and conditions, thereby positioning themselves to obtain copyright remedies, particularly injunctive relief, on top of contract remedies; (2) If so, does this unwisely enhance a licensor’s power under copyright law, tipping the balance too far in the direction of copyright holders? The article explores two approaches to resolving this open issue. One approach leaves the distinction between pure covenants and license conditions in the hands of the contracting parties. The other approach attempts to create a principled distinction between pure covenants and license conditions. This article concludes that leaving the distinction to the contracting parties, though not perfect, better supports business model innovation, particularly open source licensing, which contributes significantly to innovation and healthy competition in the software industry. Courts can temper the power of licensors when necessary by utilizing the boundaries already inherent in intellectual property licensing law. These boundaries, coupled with prudence in granting injunctive relief for breach of license conditions, should maintain the appropriate balance within copyright law while preserving the positive role of license contracts

The Value of Dress in the Cecil Household, (c. 1550-1612)

This thesis considers how William Cecil (1520-1598), Lord Burghley, his family, and his household dressed. It investigates how the Cecil household from the middle of the sixteenth century to the early seventeenth century perceived dress and how they demonstrated their political power and social position through their clothing choices. The thesis concentrates on the clothing worn by individuals either every day or during ceremonial or special occasions and highlights the values given to different fabrics, colours, styles, and decorations found in the elite and non-elite wardrobes. Attention to these specific clothing choices and their continuities or changes allows the thesis to show how cloth and clothing was constructed and worn in early modern England and allows for a greater appreciation of England’s interconnections with Europe and the wider world. In addition, this thesis includes a new methodology for examining the early modern experience of dress. It combines a more traditional engagement with textual sources such as household accounts and letters alongside extant objects with historical reconstruction. This methodology moves beyond a linguistic or semiotic interpretive system for dress to investigate ‘materiality’ and lived practice in order to gain access into clothing as embodied practice. This methodology considers how the garments themselves shaped the household and its members as well as the crucial role artisans and craftsmen and craftswomen had in the creation and care of early modern garments. Thus, the thesis explores how cloth and clothing in Elizabethan and early Jacobean society became linked to abstract concepts such as power and authority through the more concrete individual, familial and household identities and associations of those who made, chose, gifted and performed them

Intellectual Property, Innovation, and the Future: Toward a Better Model for Educating Leaders in Intellectual Property Law

Intellectual property (IP) sits at the center of the global economy. Today, producers and users of intellectual property come from both developed and developing nations. Intellectual property matters as much to China and India as it does to Germany and the United States. This reality has driven a monumental demand for lawyers who have expertise in intellectual property law. These lawyers are the new leaders in intellectual property law. The global demand for intellectual property law-trained lawyers triggered a big bang in the creation of advanced intellectual property law programs (IP Programs) at American law schools. The new leaders in intellectual property law from around the globe now gather and learn together in these IP Programs. This Article describes the big bang in advanced intellectual property law programs and the nature of the academic programs that have evolved in its aftermath. The Article argues that by delivering on many of the curricular reforms proposed by the Carnegie Report on Educating Lawyers, IP Programs can better educate these new leaders, and the Article presents a blueprint for doing so. The Article concludes that law schools should embrace their role as a gathering place for the new leaders in IP law and, in the process, become a forum to more deeply consider a variety of perspectives on the productive and just use of intellectual property

Leaky Covenants-Not-to-Compete as the Legal Infrastructure for Innovation

The flow of information that naturally occurs when employees change firms plays a vital role in spurring innovation. Numerous law review articles have explored how covenants-not-to-compete (“non-competes”) can impede this important information flow. In 1999 Professor Ronald Gilson published an influential article concluding that California’s ban on non-competes led to the rise of California’s Silicon Valley and the comparative decline of Massachusetts’ high technology corridor known as Route 128. Despite the scholarly praise for California’s approach, most states enforce non-competes that are reasonable. That may change, however, because many states are re-evaluating their non-compete laws to avoid Gilson’s cautionary tale about the fate of Route 128. But do states really need to ban non-competes in order to provide an inviting platform for innovation? This Article provides an answer to that important and intriguing question by examining, for the first time, whether technology firms actually enforce non-competes. Evidence from Washington State indicates that technology firms rarely enforce non-competes. In other words, non-competes are very leaky—knowledge workers move freely from one technology business to another in Washington just as they do in California. The Washington case study has crucial implications for all states. It suggests that states do not need to ban non-competes in order to foster innovation as many scholars contend. It also shows that leaky noncompetes provide better protection for trade secrets than a complete ban provides. States can offer a fertile legal infrastructure for innovation without banning non-competes by taking steps to assure that non-compete enforcement is leaky, including measures to address the potential chilling effect of non-competes. California, for its part, should embrace the so-called “trade secret exception” to its ban on non-competes to improve California’s legal infrastructure for start-ups and established firms that rely on robust trade secret protection

Complex population dynamics as a competition between multiple time-scale phenomena

The role of the selection pressure and mutation amplitude on the behavior of a single-species population evolving on a two-dimensional lattice, in a periodically changing environment, is studied both analytically and numerically. The mean-field level of description allows to highlight the delicate interplay between the different time-scale processes in the resulting complex dynamics of the system. We clarify the influence of the amplitude and period of the environmental changes on the critical value of the selection pressure corresponding to a phase-transition "extinct-alive" of the population. However, the intrinsic stochasticity and the dynamically-built in correlations among the individuals, as well as the role of the mutation-induced variety in population's evolution are not appropriately accounted for. A more refined level of description, which is an individual-based one, has to be considered. The inherent fluctuations do not destroy the phase transition "extinct-alive", and the mutation amplitude is strongly influencing the value of the critical selection pressure. The phase diagram in the plane of the population's parameters -- selection and mutation is discussed as a function of the environmental variation characteristics. The differences between a smooth variation of the environment and an abrupt, catastrophic change are also addressesd.Comment: 15 pages, 12 figures. Accepted for publication in Phys. Rev.

Conditions and Covenants in License Contracts: Tales from a Test of the Artistic License

The Federal Circuit upheld the Artistic License in Jacobsen v. Katzer, establishing at long last that open source licenses are enforceable. Although that outcome received most of the headlines, the case\u27s greater significance lies elsewhere. Jacobsen v. Katzer teaches valuable lessons about conditions and covenants in license contracts, lessons that apply to licenses of all persuasions. Moreover, the case raises an important issue about the interplay between contract and intellectual property law: can licensors manipulate the distinction between covenants and conditions in such a way that upsets the delicate balance in copyright law? The article explores the lessons taught by Jacobson v. Katzer and the unresolved issue that it leaves, concluding with a proposal that supports the business model innovation characterized by open source licensing

Enforcement of Open Source Software Licenses: The MDY Trio\u27s Inconvenient Compliations

The Federal Circuit’s ruling in Jacobsen v. Katzer [535 F.3d 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008)] finally settled the question of whether open source licenses are enforceable. Unfortunately, three recent cases from the Ninth Circuit have complicated matters. I call this trio of cases the “MDY Trio” in honor of the Ninth Circuit’s prior trio of licensing cases known as the “MAI Trio.” On the surface, the MDY Trio provides a boost for the enforceability of software licenses, but the MDY Trio also creates two significant complications for open source licenses. First, the MDY Trio’s test for distinguishing between licenses and copyright “first sales” does not fit open source licenses. Second, the MDY Trio’s method of delineating between contractual covenants and license conditions will prevent many open source licensors from obtaining injunctive relief. This complication is particularly dire because injunctive relief is the most critical remedy in enforcing open source licenses. My article proposes a modification to the MDY Trio’s test for determining whether a transaction is a license or first sale that better fits open source licenses. The article also proposes a more effective approach to distinguishing between contractual covenants and license conditions by focusing on remedies. My alternative approach capitalizes on the experience of trial courts in granting injunctive relief, serves the public policies underlying copyright and contract law, and better fits open source licenses. Given the importance of licensing as a transaction model in the information economy, other federal courts soon will be deciding whether to follow or diverge from the MDY Trio’s lead in future licensing cases