[NTLK] NewtonTalk Digest, Vol 59, Issue 8

Mark Kuberski berskyboy at gmail.com
Fri Nov 16 13:27:50 EST 2018


Mmmm

Ok makes sense,
So without the possibility of buying it, are there any other packages that might be good for the MessagePad 130?

Thanks,
Mark

Sent from my iPhone

On Nov 16, 2018, at 10:00 AM, newtontalk-request at newtontalk.net wrote:

Send NewtonTalk mailing list submissions to
   newtontalk at newtontalk.net

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
   http://lists.newtontalk.net/mailman/listinfo/newtontalk
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
   newtontalk-request at newtontalk.net

You can reach the person managing the list at
   newtontalk-owner at newtontalk.net

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of NewtonTalk digest..."


Today's Topics:

  1. Re: Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware (Andrei Chichak)
  2. Re: Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware (Grant Hutchinson)
  3. Re: Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware (Vladislav Korotnev)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:38:05 -0700
From: Andrei Chichak <newton at chichak.ca>
To: newtontalk at newtontalk.net
Subject: Re: [NTLK] Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware
Message-ID: <FF7897AC-DC85-497B-A227-866509547FBA at chichak.ca>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=utf-8

The copyright on software would be the same as any other copyrightable work. (yes there is a copyright on software, see Apple vs Franklin)

Since the software was written after 1980 but before 1998, it should be covered by copyright for 85 years.

The ownership of the copyright would pass along to the heirs.

As for abandonware, trademarks can fall due to nonuse and being undefended, but not copyrights. Assuming that something is abandoned and therefore not copyrighted is like finder?s keeper?s, no it?s not.

A
(not a lawyer, just a software developer)

> On 2018-November-15, at 9:59 AM, Grant Hutchinson <splorp at me.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Nov 13, 2018, at 10:31 PM, Mark Kuberski <berskyboy at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware?  I have 10 days left on my trial.  And I would like to register it.
> 
> I would assume that it can be classified as abandonware, given that Hardy Macia (the author of Silk and the other Catamount Newton titles) passed away in 2013. Also, Kagi (the registration and payment system used for Catamount software products) shut down two years ago.
> 
> However, I might be able to locate an extra activation code for it.
> 
> g.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> http://newtontalk.net/
> http://twitter.com/newtontalk




------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:34:03 -0700
From: Grant Hutchinson <newtontalkmessages at gmail.com>
To: NewtonTalk List <newtontalk at newtontalk.net>
Subject: Re: [NTLK] Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware
Message-ID: <F84B7F21-743F-45B3-B1C6-BBF436A2C341 at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8


>>> Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware?  I have 10 days left on my trial.  And I would like to register it.
>> 
>> I would assume that it can be classified as abandonware, given that Hardy Macia (the author of Silk and the other Catamount Newton titles) passed away in 2013. Also, Kagi (the registration and payment system used for Catamount software products) shut down two years ago.
> 
> The copyright on software would be the same as any other copyrightable work. (yes there is a copyright on software, see Apple vs Franklin)
> 
> Since the software was written after 1980 but before 1998, it should be covered by copyright for 85 years.
> 
> The ownership of the copyright would pass along to the heirs.
> 
> As for abandonware, trademarks can fall due to nonuse and being undefended, but not copyrights. Assuming that something is abandoned and therefore not copyrighted is like finder?s keeper?s, no it?s not.

I completely understand this.

But that's not exactly what I was getting at. To me, "abandonware" is simply a piece of software that has is no longer maintained, supported, or otherwise readily made available by the author. It's a still useful orphan.

I'd love to know if Hardy's heirs have any interest at all in those forgotten software treasures of his.

g.




------------------------------

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 16 Nov 2018 09:02:42 +0900
From: Vladislav Korotnev <vladkorotnev at gmail.com>
To: newtontalk at newtontalk.net
Subject: Re: [NTLK] Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware
Message-ID: <E265ED1D-B1B0-4B67-AB62-60C3A7253C5E at gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain;    charset=windows-1251

Would that mean though, that if there is more and more software which is not registerable, and nobody interested in protecting it, it would be necessary to crack it in some way in order to use it?

Or did Kagi use some general system for all of the applications, so breaking one essentially breaks all of them?

It would be an interesting project to reverse engineer some protection schemes on the Newt software :-)

// Ak.R.

iOS/Mac/Windows & Web developer
Vaporwave/ambient producer, sound/video engineer

Genjitsu Gadget Lab Member 001
http://genjit.su

Sent from my iPhone

> On 16 Nov 2018, at 08:34, Grant Hutchinson <newtontalkmessages at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
>>>> Anyone know if Silk 2.0.2 is abandonware?  I have 10 days left on my trial.  And I would like to register it.
>>> 
>>> I would assume that it can be classified as abandonware, given that Hardy Macia (the author of Silk and the other Catamount Newton titles) passed away in 2013. Also, Kagi (the registration and payment system used for Catamount software products) shut down two years ago.
>> 
>> The copyright on software would be the same as any other copyrightable work. (yes there is a copyright on software, see Apple vs Franklin)
>> 
>> Since the software was written after 1980 but before 1998, it should be covered by copyright for 85 years.
>> 
>> The ownership of the copyright would pass along to the heirs.
>> 
>> As for abandonware, trademarks can fall due to nonuse and being undefended, but not copyrights. Assuming that something is abandoned and therefore not copyrighted is like finder?s keeper?s, no it?s not.
> 
> I completely understand this.
> 
> But that's not exactly what I was getting at. To me, "abandonware" is simply a piece of software that has is no longer maintained, supported, or otherwise readily made available by the author. It's a still useful orphan.
> 
> I'd love to know if Hardy's heirs have any interest at all in those forgotten software treasures of his.
> 
> g.
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> http://newtontalk.net/
> http://twitter.com/newtontalk


------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------

http://newtontalk.net/
http://twitter.com/newtontalk

End of NewtonTalk Digest, Vol 59, Issue 8
*****************************************


More information about the NewtonTalk mailing list