@Lou

A "legitimate" offer is one I'm honestly prepared/able to fullfill, the way I do it doesn't matter.

While we all may suspect that AInc's offer was legitimate, the judge only has the evidence provided to make that call.

The 3.5/9 sources are a complete non-issue has Hyperion has sofar failed to provide any evidence that they have even asked/complained about it, meaning they have (silently) accepted the status-quo on this matter.

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Lou

Contracts are effective when all parties have signed them, not when they are drafted.

But don't you put a date on the contract when you sign, next to the signature to determine just that (when the contract is in effect) ? The "signed date" so to speak ?

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Lou

Quote:

As for the "Oct" date on Olaf's contract... Isn't it obvious that "discussions" are made before contracts are signed.

But that would mean discussion were had (and a contract drafted) for getting sources from Olaf *before* the OS4 contract was signed. Which makes saying "but oh, we expected to get these from AI" in 2007 somewhat disingenuous.

Quote:

Contracts are effective when all parties have signed them, not when they are drafted.

If you sign a document which says that "On this n-th day of month X, we do ABC", and it isn't the n-th day of month X, you need to either make that damn clear somewhere (like scribbling a different date over it, as seen in the OS4 contract), *or* accept that for all intents and purposes, the n-th day of month X was when you signed it.