@fairlanefastback

Quote:

fairlanefastback wrote: @Tigger Quote: 4) We have a wire from McEwen for $2500 We have a request, not proof it went through. Something Hyperion specifically pointed out.

They did point that out, but they also pointed out that only $24750 had been paid, so they cant have it both ways, which is what they seem to be doing. If the $2500 from McEwen didnt go through that might be more interesting, but given the $24750 quote from the Hyperion lawyer, I'm guessing they got the money and are now trying to imply they were short $250 thought they wrote receipts for the whole amount.
-Tig

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.

@Hans

Quote:

Hans wrote: @jingof Quote: Clearly, Hyperion owning AOS4 was not part of the "good faith" intention of the contract, so I think the burden of proof is very, very high for Hyperion. They will have to prove beyond any doubt that these circumstances arose. And probably, they'll need to explain why they invoked the ownership transfer clause without due notice or opportunity to remedy. The same goes for Amiga Inc. as well. The "good faith" intention of the contract was that Hyperion should pay the developers and make a profit by marketing and selling Amiga OS4.0.

Hans, I think you have the logic reversed here. You're essentially saying, good faith (or lack of it) can override the written word (ie. turn a buy-back into a buy-in). I'm saying good faith, or lack of it, can _not_ override or nullify the written word. Our points are polar opposites, but you are equating them.

As you said, the parties can't agree on the good faith interpretation, which is exactly why the Judge is forced back to the written word.

_________________
Vic-20, C-64, C-128
Amiga 1000, 3000
AmigaOne X1000

@Tigger

I have said enough.
we wait for the Judge.
He has the option to sit on his Injunction decision until the main suit is settled.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Toaks

First if any post was off topic it was yours. Maybe if Scabit or you didn't mention him then Tigger may not even have bothered to reply.

Second, Tigger isn't ranting he is discussing. He makes claims/points some of which get countered and he replies to those. Just because you don't think he's right or maybe you just don't like him doesn't make him spreading fud.

Also, if any other had made the same remark but replaced Tigger with Toaks how would you have reacted ?

Funny how he now is labeled a BAF tho..

Now, stay on topic, your second post is as off topic as the first. consider this a moderator request.

Last edited by Seer on 06-Jun-2007 at 05:36 PM.

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

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

fairlanefastback wrote: @Tigger Quote: It doesnt really matter Spectre, Hyperion signed a bill of sale for the OS with Itec on April 23, 2003. The language game can be played all day. Hyperion issued a reciept for partial payment in relation to the clauses related to the buy-in/buy-out.

They issued a receipt to ITEC, they signed a bill of sale with ITEC.


Quote:

Hyperion knew that Itec had bought the OS at that point

Obviously they say differently.[/quote]

Actually they arent saying different, they admit they sold the OS to Itec, Ben personally signed the bill of sale.
-Tig

_________________
We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world.

@Tigger

Quote:

who exactly is writing lies again?

Why...that would be you Tigger. Anyone who looks at the long and painful 1000+ post thread about this lawsuit will clearly see your dozens of posts about the topics I've noted above.
Not sure why you wish to taint the Amiga communities view of Hyperion so much...but you surely have your reasons. Personally, I would like to wait for the evidence and the court decision to see if there is reason for me to dislike Hyperion or the OS4 coders, but I guess that makes me unusual.


Scott

_________________
AmigaOne uA1-c 512M RAM - Only Amiga Makes It Possible!
Check my blog AmigaOne Computing

@Tigger

Quote:

Hyperion agreed to the transfer to Itec on April 23, 2003, they again agreed to the transfer to KMOS when they signed the Arctic agreement. Hyperion took money first from Itec and then from KMOS treating them as legal successors of AI, Washington, no court has ever ruled that AI Washington was insolvent, much less before April 23, 2003.

Hmmm...you do know that the Freidens testimony expliclity indicates that they never signed an "Arctic agreement". Since Ainc can't produce a signed copy, this agreement is invalid. You should read some of Hyperions supporting devense material before commenting my friend.

Scott

_________________
AmigaOne uA1-c 512M RAM - Only Amiga Makes It Possible!
Check my blog AmigaOne Computing

@Tigger

Here I go again.

The fact that Hyperion have not transfered the source code raises some questions:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_purchaser

Last edited by Spectre660 on 06-Jun-2007 at 05:57 PM.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@scabit

I agree, I feel there is just way to much bias going on here from everybody concerned. The only person's opinion here who really counts is the judge's and I really don't understand the "emotional" investment about one company being in the right and one company being bad. These things happen, it's not a happy thing but that's why we have the law and judges etc. to work out things like this.

It's also very obvious we have posters here too who feel they have a personal stake in what happens for whatever reasons and honestly it would be good to have them take a step back and re-evaluate what they are saying to the community and why. I believe they should also reveal what gives them such a personal stake that they feel a need to post things and sway opinion.

I don't mind being an interested observer, but honestly I come here to find out what people are doing with the machine, the architecture and get a sense of community. I am not looking to read court case material I can find somewhere else or get caught up in the "drama".

If you dislike one party or other, it doesn't change anything. I have (in the past) posted my own problems with companies and getting them to be supportive. However my entire reason for doing so is not to stain the companies, but to try to gardner support from them, to show them they are missing out in opportunity (if they are even listening) that is potentially profitable. Not to villify.

This is getting to be kinda too much like watching Fox News versus CNN.. If I want to hear about what the president is doing good I watch Fox.. If I want current events I turn on CNN..

Another definition

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/License

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Tigger

Quote:

Actually no, Hyperions lawyer in courts arguement was that they only paid $24750 but they wrote receipts for $25K, that appears from the evidence to be true, but hurts not helps Hyperions case unless Hyperion comes up with info from AI acknologing the $250 debt and not paying it.

Reciept for $25000, ok. Note that $25000 plus all outstanding debts is required, so a $25000 reciept is not definite proof.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@scabit

Quote:

Hmmm...you do know that the Freidens testimony expliclity indicates that they never signed an "Arctic agreement". Since Ainc can't produce a signed copy, this agreement is invalid. You should read some of Hyperions supporting devense material before commenting my friend.

What I don't understand is why people are mixing things up all the time here?

What would "the Freidens testimony expliclity indicates that they never signed an "Arctic agreement"" have to do with anything if we have already established that the Friedens are not a part of Hyperion and only 3:rd party contractors?

@Hans

Quote:

First they had to do extra work because the original hardware never materialized. After that Amiga OS 4.0 could not be sold in it's finished state (we were told 2 years ago that it was done, but no new hardware meant that OS4.0 final became a prerelease update) because of lack of hardware, preventing Hyperion from getting a return on their investment.

As for no hardware, well I know for a fact that I bought my A1 (the fastest avaiiable A1) which was in no way the first hardware incarnation, I even waited for the faster cpu's, and when I finally recieved it, it was almost exactly 1 year before any version of the OS was presented.

The only thing I can derive from this is that Eyetech had a hard time selling expensive systems targeted for a specialty market that was dubious at best that any OS would arrive at all.

The question of hardware is more likely to hurt Hyperions case than anything else.

I've always been a fan of Hyperion, or more rightly the developers, because OS4 is a mighty achievement but exactly what Hyperion is not as clear as it has seemed to be, which is what scares me.

_________________
Fixed A1G4XE 7455 RX933PC with fried CPU
Sapphire Radeon 9100 128mb
ESI Juli@ 24bit 192kHz Envy24HT
Sil 680 Ultra Ata 133 E-ide
SeaGate Barracuda 120gb 8mb cache

@jingof

Quote:

jingof wrote: @Hans Quote: Hans wrote: @jingof Clearly, Hyperion owning AOS4 was not part of the "good faith" intention of the contract, so I think the burden of proof is very, very high for Hyperion. They will have to prove beyond any doubt that these circumstances arose. And probably, they'll need to explain why they invoked the ownership transfer clause without due notice or opportunity to remedy. The same goes for Amiga Inc. as well. The "good faith" intention of the contract was that Hyperion should pay the developers and make a profit by marketing and selling Amiga OS4.0. Hans, I think you have the logic reversed here. You're essentially saying, good faith (or lack of it) can override the written word (ie. turn a buy-back into a buy-in). I'm saying good faith, or lack of it, can _not_ override or nullify the written word. Our points are polar opposites, but you are equating them.

No I'm not saying that good-faith can override the written word. Previously you said the following: Quote:

In the absence of solid and indisputable proof of #1, the Judge is forced back to the "good faith" interpretation of the contract, which favors AInc. And without #2, the judge is far less likely to side with the party attempting a silent and subversive contract interpretation (subversive with respect to owning AOS4).

This suggests that the court will go back to the "good-faith" interpretation of the contract instead of sticking to the letter of the contract. What I wrote built up on the same idea, except from Hyperion's perspective, instead of Amiga's. Finally I suggested that they'll have to go back to the letter of the contract.

Quote:

As you said, the parties can't agree on the good faith interpretation, which is exactly why the Judge is forced back to the written word.

Yes; and the written word sounds like it's a buy-back, not a buy-in; the written word also says that if Amiga Inc. goes bankrupt then Hyperion obtains the rights to Amiga OS 4 and can continue to develop it. There may be some leeway for examining the intent of the agreement and arguing about definitions, but the wording of the license agreement matters the most. It's all fun and games for the lawyers.

Hans

Last edited by Hans on 06-Jun-2007 at 06:54 PM.

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@Seer

With respect, what ever happened to encouraging people not to take "bait"? If Tigger had an isue with his being mentioned by scabit or toaks he could have pressed the report button and PM'd you guys no? Instead Tigger accused scabit of making stuff up further degenerating this thread. I also hope you guys are noticing the join date and post count of the account starting this thread. I know its hard to police but it makes one wonder if people have started 2nd accounts here.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 06-Jun-2007 at 07:02 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 06-Jun-2007 at 06:56 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@jingof

Quote:

Clearly, Hyperion owning AOS4 was not part of the "good faith" intention of the contract, so I think the burden of proof is very, very high for Hyperion. They will have to prove beyond any doubt that these circumstances arose. And probably, they'll need to explain why they invoked the ownership transfer clause without due notice or opportunity to remedy. (BTW, Does anyone dispute that the "good faith" interpretation of the contract did not envision Hyperion owning AOS4 under "normal" circumstances?) Don't get me wrong - I'm no Ainc. groupie. It just seems to me that fundamentally, the Judge must choose between two legal remedies here: Enforce the original "good faith" interpretation of a written contract Force ownership transfer due to exception clause invoked silently

A couple of points, I think there could be good argument made that Amiga Inc., was not concerned at the time with AmigaOS and was really letting it go or in other words just letting someone else have a shot at it and was just willing to see what would happen. They wanted to focuse there time and money on AmigaDE/AmigaAnywhere.

The judge may look at $25,000 in the contract and say well if you guys were actually serious about a “NEW” AmigaOS then that amount is a joke so you obviously didn't care a whole lot.


The same thing also may come across crystal clear to the judge with the $25000 figure when you think about the fact that Amiga Inc keeps bring up how many years it took to finish AmigaOS, which I think hurts then. As in ALL those years they couldn't seem to be bothered to piece together payments totaling a paltry $25,000?? To the judge that may not make sense.

If AmigaOS is SOOO important to their business as they say, why would they not have made every effort to document ALL payments made, get receipts and verification that payments were being made toward AmigaOS, and get a “Paid In Full” at some point, especially when they claim they thought they paid for it back in 2003 or whatever when they say Hyperion was in need of money and almost bankrupt and they gave then the money in full.

The judge may see this as not really caring about AmigaOS at all, until, after the fact. Now until AFTER it was done. After Hyperion was finished, and they have gone above and beyond what was needed in the contract, after they didn't pay the money, after AmigaInc failed to make a new OS after 6 months, after everything they realized that AmigaOS became much more than some add-ons to AmigaOS 3.9, it became a completely new amazing OS. Now Amiga Inc. is trying to pull a fast one and get it for $25000.

Maybe the judge will see that Amiga Inc, didn't bother at all for years, to keep copies of signed contracts, didn't bother to even try to keep track of an insignificant payment amount, didn't bother to come up with sources, etc.

Not until they saw the finished product. NOW Amiga Inc., is interested and all of sudden we hear nothing about AmigaAnywhere... how odd as I though that was the corner stone of their business???

Last edited by AmigaHeretic on 06-Jun-2007 at 07:13 PM.

_________________
A3000D (16mhz, 2MB Chip, 4MB Fast, SCSI (300+MB), SuperGen Genlock, Kick 3.1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in my day, we didn't have water. We only had Oxygen & Hydrogen, & we'd just shove 'em together

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

fairlanefastback wrote: I also hope you guys are noticing the join date and post count of the account starting this thread. I know its hard to police but it makes one wonder if people have started 2nd accounts here.

Oh, so a new member is automatically suspect!

So, how does a new member join without initially having a recent join date and low post count?

_________________
Vic-20, C-64, C-128
Amiga 1000, 3000
AmigaOne X1000

@fairlanefastback

Next time PM me please, it's a bit hard to request others to stay on topic replying to off topic replies but I don't want it to seem you were ignored.

Tigger and Scabit allready both got a PM from me about this, and I got a few PMs from other posters as well. Besides, Tigger ignored Toaks post, only refuted the claims made by scabit in perhaps a not so good way. So far no real fouls have been made by any "side" (this or any other thread about A Inc Vs Hyperion, well, far more innocent then any AOS vs MOS topics usually generate (kidding really)

Not all moderating is done in public, and my reply to Hans was just to show Tigger wasn't that much off topic as he was indirectly asked to step in. (Not to mention Toaks post if it was reported I guess it would have been moderated, I think it's to late now for that. Good point tho, Toaks doesn't get reported, Tigger does for the same thing, Toaks seems to get mad at being "slapped" Tigger reacts calmly to any moderation he receives.)

BTW, you may want to read one of the topic starter's first posts here



Ok, last request to stay on topic, if you want to know what is off topic ask jingof

Last edited by Seer on 06-Jun-2007 at 07:20 PM.

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

@Steff

Quote:

Steff wrote: The only thing I can derive from this is that Eyetech had a hard time selling expensive systems targeted for a specialty market that was dubious at best that any OS would arrive at all.

They chose hardware with bugs that prevented Linux from working reliably, making it unsellable to markets they were relying on. MAI Logic also never made enough money to stay afloat (for the same reason). First people wouldn't buy the hardware because there was no OS4 and they wanted to see it first. Next, OS4 prereleases started coming out but new hardware was no longer available for those that had waited.

Quote:

The question of hardware is more likely to hurt Hyperions case than anything else.

It's not an argument by itself. It's just an explanation of how things went wrong. If hardware had been available then the current lawsuit probably wouldn't have happened.

My point was that, under the license agreement, Hyperion was supposed to earn much more than $25000 for making Amiga OS4.0. It's just that Amiga Inc. didn't have to pay them the full amount because the profits would come from OS sales. That it never happened due to lack of available hardware is really not important. It fits in with Hyperion's arguments and their stance that they have a right to market and sell Amiga OS 4.0. Unfortunately for them, the license agreement does not explicitly state this.

Hans

_________________
http://hdrlab.org.nz/ - Amiga OS 4 projects, programming articles and more. Home of the RadeonHD driver for Amiga OS 4.x project.
https://keasigmadelta.com/ - More of my work.

@jingof

Quote:

jingof wrote: Oh, so a new member is automatically suspect!

Automatically? No. But I'm not the only one who has mentioned there are posts that would make one wonder if its occuring a bit lately since the case. I'm just mentioning its something the admins may want to look at more closely these days, login ips and the like. It is a TOS issue if its occuring.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@Seer

Thanks.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200