[NTLK] Planning to crack Bernie’s BookReader if abandonware. Does anyone else need this app?

[Michael Sheflin]

Hey all, someone pointed out to me that my email might have implied I was
making a moral or ethical endorsement.  As I've mentioned before, I'm a
lawyer - though not a copyright lawyer.  I was making a hypothetical
appointment about the requirement that a copyright holder be involved in
the prosecution of a lawsuit in order for someone to potentially be exposed
to liability.

Personally, I think the copyright system - at least regarding electronic
copyright issues - probably stifles inovation in a way that makes it maybe
even arguably constitutionally suspect.  Although I tend to prefer to buy
old hardware (for the firmware) and software from original owners so that
the copyright use transfers under the First Sale Doctrine, I don't
personally care morally or ethically, and I didn't mean to sound judgmental.

Best,
Michael

On Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 8:53 AM Michael Sheflin <sheflinm at gmail.com> wrote:

> Beg your pardon - financial benefit is a *component of a fair use defense.
>
> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 8:51 AM Michael Sheflin <sheflinm at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am not sure you can be prosecuted criminally if there no financial
>> benefit (to you).  However, to your point, the federal government can
>> prosecute people without involvement of the copyright holder - probably
>> just not under these circumstances.
>>
>> Otherwise, the financial argument Forrest raised is a compensation of a
>> fair use defense.  However, courts may not be thrilled that the entire
>> source code will have been used.  Fair use - as an archetype - would be
>> like borrowing a snippet of copyrighted text to use in a non-commercial,
>> educational presentation.
>>
>> As I noted before, with no comment from anyone - that I saw, Bernie
>> appears to be dead, sadly.  It seems unlikely permission will be given.
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Sep 18, 2021, 2:29 AM Laurence W Brown via NewtonTalk <
>> newtontalk at newtontalk.net> wrote:
>>
>>> a practical consideration is: who is going to enforce any copyright? the
>>> rights-holder, heirs, or a corporate beneficiary? attempting to contact all
>>> rights-holders would help alleviate potential liability. the moral issue
>>> particularly applies to heirs, so they should certainly be permitted to
>>> benefit from any rights that might belong to them…
>>>
>>> (all hale our Disney overlords.)
>>>
>>> -L.W. Brown
>>> via 8s+
>>>
>>> > On Sep 17, 2021, at 23:20, Forrest <newton_phoenix at mindspring.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > I hate to chime in on this—but here goes.
>>> >
>>> > Andrei is of course correct. This has been a heated discussion ongoing
>>> in the many years I’ve been proud to be a part of NTLK.
>>> >
>>> > One should ALWAYS first endeavour to obtain the registration key or
>>> code by accepted methods—payment made, etc. However as the years roll on
>>> there are less and less of these sources still available. Some have been
>>> grand enough to donate the source code for the software or a key generator,
>>> but that’s been the minority.
>>> >
>>> > While there is no reasoning with the copyright law and no grey area
>>> within it, IIRC the solution was often stated this way—will the infringer
>>> profit from this intrusion? The Newton is more than 20 years old, it’s not
>>> a hotbed for new development. While defeating a registration code by a hack
>>> or other means (as opposed to using the correctly obtained one) is against
>>> the copyright law, what is the user going to accomplish? If it’s for
>>> personal use and that’s as far as it goes (meaning that key or hack is not
>>> passed on so others could do the same), again if memory serves that has
>>> been less frowned upon.
>>> >
>>> > I mean, wasn’t the software created so it could be utilized,
>>> ultimately?
>>> >
>>> > But that doesn’t make it right, as Andrei points out.
>>> >
>>> > These are questions to ponder.
>>> >
>>> > Mahalo,
>>> > Forrest
>>> >
>>> > Sent from my T-Mobile iPhone 11
>>> >
>>> >> On Sep 17, 2021, at 2:15 PM, Michael Rebar <michael.rebar at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >> Appreciate the warning. If the developer comes forward and has a
>>> link to pay for the app will do so. Till then, the app was deconstructed to
>>> learn how it works.
>>> >>
>>> >> I am using these apps to learn how NewtonOS functions as some of the
>>> code is similar to my AI under development.
>>> >>
>>> >> AIRA will be open source, and have come to learn from the “Love
>>> Notes..” movie that similar algorithms were used as part of HWR. If the
>>> same logic array is used to put speech to text in the BookReader app then
>>> it gives me some confirmation I am on the right path.
>>> >>
>>> >> Since this development cycle will take more than the 7 days the app
>>> allows for use, I do not think waiting 75 years makes sense before cracking
>>> the security to learn from this nearly 20 year old software.
>>> >>
>>> >> Newton does not belong in a museum, nor do the apps. Funny how “old”
>>> tech still has present purpose. I would have struggled a lot less
>>> developing AIRA if I had realized NewtonOS has similar DNA.
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >>>> On Sep 17, 2021, at 12:23 PM, Michael Rebar <
>>> michael.rebar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Have not heard from developer so planning to crack the shareware
>>> protection on this program since likely abandonware.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Does anyone else need this program? If so let me know.
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Or does someone already have a key gen?
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Sent from my iPhone
>>> >>
>>> >> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>
>>> >> http://newtontalk.net
>>> >> http://twitter.com/newtontalk
>>> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >
>>> > http://newtontalk.net
>>> > http://twitter.com/newtontalk
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> http://newtontalk.net
>>> http://twitter.com/newtontalk
>>
>>