McEwen brought it up in an email, and then Hyperions lawyer made a big mistake and brought it up during the hearing. So as far the court knows its a real offer and has to be treated as such. So either Hyperions lawyer made a big mistake or it was a legitimate offer. I have already told you why I think it was turned down. -Tig
A legitimate offer is a contract in writing already signed by the proposer and waiting to be signed by the party to whom which the money is being offered. An email conversation does not a legitimate offer make...so to speak.
For your other argument about what source they actually wanted...it does not mean that AI was no longer legally obliged to hand over their source code. 3.5 & 3.9 sources were also called out in the contract and Olaf didn't have those so anyway you look at it, AI didn't provide all (or any) of the source code stipulated in the contract.
As for the "Oct" date on Olaf's contract... Isn't it obvious that "discussions" are made before contracts are signed. I could work out a contract with you and date it today and we may not be able to sign it for 10 years because certain external conditions have not been met. 10 years later those conditions are met, as long as nothing else has changed, that 10-year old contract can then be signed by both of us and effective immediately. It's stupid to think that just because it was drafted on a certain date that it goes into effect on the draft date and not the signing date.
Contracts are effective when all parties have signed them, not when they are drafted.
So as far the court knows its a real offer and has to be treated as such. So either Hyperions lawyer made a big mistake or it was a legitimate offer. I have already told you why I think it was turned down.
8 crawler(s) on-line.
155 guest(s) on-line.
0 member(s) on-line.
Lou 
