@umisef

Quote:

umisef wrote: @Lou Quote: Again a snippet is taken and crtiqued. Hyperion didn't sign it until after they signed the OS4 contract, so all is well. No, all is *not* well. At least not in the world where Hyperion now claims (or at least Hyperion apologists here at awn claim) that they were oh-so-surprised about not getting the sources from AI, and that dealing with that surprise is partly responsible for a 3 month project taking 6 years to complete. It is blindingly obvious that Hyperion knew that they were going to use Olaf's sources before they signed the OS4 contract. Having a contract "drafted" in October is just one of many pieces of evidence that shows that. Quote: I forget the exact wording, but atleast a psuedo-deadline was established that indirectly defined the contract as active upon signature. I never said this contract was perfect nor did I dispute and critques of Ben's legal drafting skills. Again --- if you sign a document which as its first line says "This agreement is made and entered into as of this 10 day of October 2001" (docket 26, 4th collection of exhibits), and don't make any effort to indicate that the signature was *not* made on that date, that is the date of the agreement. BTW, clause 2.01 of that contract is interesting. Seeing as OS4.0 has now been "final" for a year, and was apparently "released" in 2004, Olaf could well argue that "the duration of the AmigaOS 4.0 project" is over. At which point he has absolutely no obligation to allow further CVS access. Nor is he obliged to provide Hyperion with a copy of the CVS content unless and until he is paid in full. If Olaf wasn't as nice a guy as he is, Hyperion and its contractors might find that the very source code they were planning on holding for ransom is actually unavailable to *them* until *they* pay up. Which would be quite unlike rain on your wedding day, really :) Furthermore 2.02 is interesting. It suggests that ownership in contract work that was done for Amiga can be transferred by the contractor to a different company merely because Amiga failed to pay for it. Given that most of OS4's code base appears to be contract work, and given that there is at least a serious suggestion that the contractors have not been paid (or not been paid in full)[1], that's a precedence that I suspect Hyperion would prefer now not to have set.... [1]: Normally, having partly paid would strengthen the argument that things can't be sold elsewhere --- but Hyperion's own record of taking the money, then saying "but it wasn't the FULL AMOUNT, so it doesn't count" does make such arguments a bit weak...

Perhaps Olaf is playing favorites as well...and perhaps he took money from Hyperion in the name of Amino, like Hyperion accepted money from Tachyon and others in the name of Amino... Which just goes to show their insolvency further and is also part of Hyperion's "damages".
Why don't we just create an UNBIASED chart of contract violations and see who's violated the most and stop all this point-counter point banter?