@Tigger

Quote:

And surely you arent arguing that a delivery years later is a best effort?

Perhaps. Originally OS4 was supposed to be noting more than a straight port of OS3.1, IIRC. Nobody seemed happy with that so things changed. Should both sides have been more attentive to their contractual obligations (or lack there of), hell yes! The fact that neither were meant I had to extend the benefit of doubt to both. However, AI used up that benefit and are "dead to me". While Hyperion isn't all that far behind, they're "on notice". Hyperion still has a chance to redeem themselves in my mind.

Quote:

This gets refuted everytime it comes up. First of all Umisef has quite convincingly argued that the sources for 35 and 3.9 are not part of the contract, at this point I agree with him. Hyperion didnt want the sources from AI, they wanted the sources from Olaf, because Olafs sources were better. Thats why they signed a contract with him on Oct 10, 2001 before the Nov 3, 2001 contract and why Olaf is included as the buildmaster in the Nov 3, 2001 contract and why Ben Hermans said in the interview published on Nov 7, 2001 that they were using Olafs code, it was superior to the code AI had (which Olaf in fact tells us he provided to AI, so we can get rid of the AI didnt have 3.1 code rumor). So I'm a little confused they signed a number of contracts before Nov 3, 2001 to get parts of the OS, Ben in an interview done at worst 4 days after the contract is signed says they have everything they need to do the OS, and you want to blame the delay on they getting sources late? And remember as we know from the Olaf email, Hyperion didnt pay him a dime of the money they owed him until 2006, so its hard to blame "the cost" of getting software from other sources for the delay because until 2006 they paid him nothing for his OS 4 work and even then only paid him less then 10% of the money he was owed.

I didn't mean to imply that 3.5 & 3.9 were meant to be included. Though I admit that's exactly how it sounds. I also don't recall every detail exactly as it transpired, nor have I read every thread pertaining to AI and its legal battles, nor do I have the time to review every thread pertaining to AI and its legal battles (there are just too many). Regardless, it wasn't like AI didn't go along with the feature creep. They seemed as happy about the added functionality as Hyperion was. As I said, they could've demanded the straight 3.1 port. Nothing I've heard so far states that AI were all that unhappy with Hyperion's vision for OS4 until relatively recently. And by that I mean within roughly a year prior to AI's legal action against Hyperion. Yes there were concerns, but nothing 'deal' breaking.

Quote:

First of all your analogy is really bad. Secondly it appears they have been paid over 40K for a $25K buyback. We have 2500 from McEwen, 2250 from Tachyon, 20000 from Itec, 7200 from KMOS and then 8850 from KMOS for a grand total of 40800. Hyperions position is that they dont know what they checks were for so they get to keep the money, which is funny because they requested both the 7200 and 8850 as part of legal negotiations for the buyback, read the letter from AIs lawyer cancelling the contract, we disagree we owe you any more money on the buyback, but are including the $8850 to settle the issue. Throw in the $25K check from June and whether the buyback has been paid should not be an issue to anyone.

FYI, I was using samface's analogy, not my own. Anyway, do you have a link to this letter, cause I'm not going to slog through every document filed by both or either side. I also am curious to know if there were correspondence that made clear that these four separate entities were paying towards the buy-back? Also, did Hyperion not do other contract work at the behest of AI like the PDA port? I thought that was the basis for Hyperion's confusion as to what funds went toward what contract? At least that how I remember Hyperion's position. Again, keep in mind, I'm giving Hyperion the benefit of the doubt as I only doubt AI at this point in time.


I have to say that I'm not defending Hyperion because I agree with their actions without question. But given a choice between AI and Hyperion, I find it hard to find a rationale to side with AI. Other than being a lawyer, understand all the ins & outs since post Gateway, and being positive AI is absolutely in the right. But from my perspective, AI has done nothing but play lip service... To everybody save maybe AI's CEO, CTO and AI's board of directors. What little credibility they had died ages ago! So why is it that all of a sudden there's a resurgence of support for AI?

Tigger, If you like I'll start trashing Hyperion too, fine. I can do that, and sincerely too. Hyperion was stupid not to draft a better contract in the first place (although I suspect there may have been far more good will on all sides then then now). They were idiotic not to renegotiate it when they started adding features so as to codify exactly what they were delivering when. They were absolutely moronic not to do so when it appeared there was a changing of the guard when KMOS stepped in. Especially since KMOS looked like it had capital. And when checks start rolling in from everyone and there uncle, I certainly would want to know what those funds were supposedly paying for. I really don't care. I just can not accept that AI deserve more benefit of the doubt than Hyperion. The scales just don't balance out in my opinion.

Now if you're talking about a purely, purely legal argument. I suppose that would depend on whether or not I thought both sides should be punished for being legally incompetent; if I were familiar with every piece of evidence entered into the various legal actions concerning AI and/or Hyperion; and/or if I were a contract lawyer. On the first point, I will say I think both were pretty incompetent. That or were hoping that the lax terms would benefit one or the other further down the road. The third point, I'm not a contract lawyer. The second, as I said, I have not read seen every piece of evidence entered into these cases. Nor have I gone through every thread dissecting the goings on in each case. I have no intention to either. There's just too much to keep up with and I've got better things to do.

Last edited by ShadesOfGrey on 30-Jan-2008 at 04:22 PM.

_________________
Unless otherwise explicitly stated, this message is not meant to affirm nor deny, defend nor offend any faction within the 'Amiga' Community.