Poster | Thread |
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 4-Mar-2011 15:07:40
| | [ #41 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @pavlor
Quote:
Yes they can distribute ROMs, but Workbench UI must be hidden. |
Well, if you can clearly outline who Amiga Inc. IS atm, I would be interested, since I've tied Itec to the iContain deal without anyone denying it as of yet. And we still have the individuals within the company who might think they own individual parts of it.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 4-Mar-2011 19:15:48
| | [ #42 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
tomazkid
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 5-Mar-2011 4:52:42
| | [ #43 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 31-Jul-2003 Posts: 11694
From: Kristianstad, Sweden | | |
|
| @bump-number6-bump
Nice find.
Regarding China, is Amiga used in any new products using the Lotus Pacific license?
_________________ Site admins are people too..pooff! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 5-Mar-2011 12:59:35
| | [ #44 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 5-Mar-2011 13:36:53
| | [ #45 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @cgutjahr
Can you clarify the 3rd trademark "Powered by Amiga"?
Would it be correct to say that one expired?
If so, then what would that mean to anyone else wishing to use it?
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
kolla
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 5-Mar-2011 14:57:14
| | [ #46 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 20-Aug-2003 Posts: 2852
From: Trondheim, Norway | | |
|
| Next week, Cloanto will trademark "Drawer" and "Tool" as well.
It's pathetic, really. _________________ B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 5-Mar-2011 15:17:43
| | [ #47 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @kolla
Quote:
Next week, Cloanto will trademark "Drawer" and "Tool" as well. |
I want to trademark "3 drawers short of a full installation", which applies to a lot of the posts we see nowadays.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Krischan76
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 6-Mar-2011 6:50:35
| | [ #48 ] |
|
|
|
Member |
Joined: 25-Dec-2007 Posts: 47
From: outside the looney bin | | |
|
| I found this by the Swedes to be helpful (hope it's not redundant):
safir |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
tomazkid
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 6-Mar-2011 7:09:01
| | [ #49 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 31-Jul-2003 Posts: 11694
From: Kristianstad, Sweden | | |
|
| @Krischan76
Yes, nice with a graphical map, but that one does not contain "Workbench", or the China/Far East.
Though, would guess Shoe will update it when he gets the time _________________ Site admins are people too..pooff! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 8-Jul-2011 17:06:05
| | [ #50 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @tomazkid
hmm...file access for shoes's .pdf now requires authorization.
Back to topic. I see people still arguing about what the settlement agreement is NOT. Let's try a post on what it IS, instead.
http://www.justia.com/dictionary/stipulated-judgment.html
agreement...yes....settlement...yes, but in the end it "becomes" a judgment by definition. Hope that helps.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 24-Dec-2011 13:10:55
| | [ #51 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @thread
Just a brief update since a few comments have been made recently and an action taken as well.
@persia
Quote:
Does Amiga Inc have the right to distribute UAE with aOS roms? |
Regardless of the answer to that, we now see an action by Hyperion regarding such distribution, if that helps.
Quote:
Introducing the new Emulation drawer with official AmigaOS 3.x ROMs and Workbench files. AmigaOS ROMs are provided for all classic Amiga models and the CD32 platform. Added RunInUAE contribution to utilize the new Emulation drawer. |
source - AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4 Released
Many comments in the thread have been fairly consistent regarding OS3.5/9, but I thought I would post a few newer comments.
December, 2011: Quote:
The 3.5 and 3.9 updates strictly consisted of updated material and contributions by 3rd party developers: Amiga International did not own the end product in any way whatsoever.
Big chunks of 3.5/3.9 came from the publisher Haage & Partner, who chose not to continue further product development after the 3.9 release. This is also part of the reason why there is none of the Haage & Partner developed code in the OS 4 release. |
credit Olsen
August, 2011: Quote:
AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9 was developed by Haage & Partner who retain the source code to this day. |
credit ssolie(several relevant posts)
#6
Last edited by number6 on 24-Dec-2011 at 01:21 PM.
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Franko
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 24-Dec-2011 13:39:13
| | [ #52 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 29-Jun-2010 Posts: 2809
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @tomazkid
Quote:
tomazkid wrote: Who has the rights to AmigaOS 1.x and 2.x ?
Hyperion Entertainment has the right to AmigaOS 3.1 to develop AmigaOS 4.x ?
Haage and Partner has the rights to AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9?
Cloanto has the right to use OS 1.x, 2.x and 3.x in AmigaForever?
Does anyone here know who owns what in this mess?
|
Answer = No-One...
Cloanto only have a license to distribute them as part of their Amiga Forever package and under that license you are not allowed by law to make copies of them to use on a real Amiga...
I've said it many times before because of all the past legal cases, the liquidation of Commodore, unsigned contracts, contracts that weren't signed within the legal time frame, missing signatures, missing paperwork etc... Which all led to any of the later legal rulings/ decisions made in favour of A.inc & Hyperion to be actually invalid...
ANY ONE who could afford to hire a decent legal team could prove almost all contracts or legal rulings invalid due to the very simple facts that there were too many legal errors made in the early days which were either ignored or not even disclosed before the signing of later contracts or legal rulings...
I'm surprised no one has ever realised this (especially Number 6 who seems to study these things a lot) and has not seen the very obvious legal mistakes that were made when Commodore first filed for liquidation...
The answers are all out there on the net but it's a very long, tedious & boring task going through everything and spotting these glaring legal errors that were made right at the start of it all...
So in reality no-one actually legally owns much of it at all... _________________
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 24-Dec-2011 13:43:59
| | [ #53 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @Franko
Quote:
I'm surprised no one has ever realised this (especially Number 6 who seems to study these things a lot) and has not seen the very obvious legal mistakes that were made when Commodore first filed for liquidation... |
You assume I'm compiling this in order to express my own conclusions? No. I merely quote whom I feel are reasonable sources, as well as news articles. I leave it to others to draw conclusions, if they so choose.
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
damocles
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 24-Dec-2011 14:17:11
| | [ #54 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 22-Dec-2007 Posts: 1719
From: Unknown | | |
|
| Nevermind, didn't realize this was a dead thread being brought back to life.
Last edited by damocles on 24-Dec-2011 at 02:21 PM.
_________________ Dammy |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
number6
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 19:15:30
| | [ #55 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 25-Mar-2005 Posts: 11540
From: In the village | | |
|
| @thread
For what it is worth, from Amiga Inc.'s own wiki:
Quote:
In 2010 Commodore USA acquired rights to the Amiga name. |
Source
#6
_________________ This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author. *Secrecy has served us so well* |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 20:03:36
| | [ #56 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3728
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @Franko
Quote:
I've said it many times before because of all the past legal cases, the liquidation of Commodore, unsigned contracts, contracts that weren't signed within the legal time frame, missing signatures, missing paperwork etc... Which all led to any of the later legal rulings/ decisions made in favour of A.inc & Hyperion to be actually invalid. |
Exactly free Amiga stance, however no-one has legally proven this and challenged Amiga Inc (and partially Hyperion as sub licensee)._________________ Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
blizz1220
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 20:18:24
| | [ #57 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Jun-2013 Posts: 437
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @vox
Vox you don't have a clue about law ...
You wouldn't understand difference between legal right , obligation , judgment , jurisdiction , license or intelectual property to save your life ...
Quote:
Exactly free Amiga stance, however no-one has legally proven this and challenged Amiga Inc (and partially Hyperion as sub licensee). |
And that is also wrong ... One important thing to note here is that HyperionMP didn't make any false legal statements here on this issue so far ...
But he did let people say and believe in false legal statements (not that it would be to his advantage or his job to correct them).
One thing to notice here is that nobody is taking AEon into account and they have all sort legal implications being hardware manufacturing company making AmigaOne computers and selling AmigaOS ...
As much as Hyperion gets his right from Amiga Inc. (yes licensee "gets" it's right from the owner and if the owner is no longer in possession of those rights licensee looses them too) Aeon "gets" his rights from Hyperion ...Last edited by blizz1220 on 09-Aug-2013 at 08:28 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
vox
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 20:43:48
| | [ #58 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 12-Jun-2005 Posts: 3728
From: Belgrade, Serbia | | |
|
| @blizz1220
Quote:
Vox you don't have a clue about law ... |
Yes I don`t. As social worker, I am up to Family and Social Insurance Laws, intellectual rights are area of special expertise, even for lawyars.
However, my common understanding is that as long Amiga Inc exists they are the solely legal owners of those names.
Quote:
And that is also wrong ... One important thing to note here is that HyperionMP didn't make any false legal statements here on this issue so far ... |
Good. I am having a hard time grasping who is the negative guy here?
Not that I like the way Hyperion MP and Steven communicate, but they consider that to be professionalism. But my stance is that Amiga Inc just didn`t know what to do with AmigaOS (they did promised some ACK related hardware) and that Hyperion did all the job, as well as that Acube/A-EON are nice AmigaOne continuation that offer support and progress, even at heavy prices. Its way better then to period when there was no hardware and OS progress was even slower (sometime between OS 4.0 Classic and OS 4.1.1)
Quote:
As much as Hyperion gets his right from Amiga Inc. (yes licensee "gets" it's right from the owner and if the owner is no longer in possession of those rights licensee looses them too) Aeon "gets" his rights from Hyperion ... |
I do believe AmigaOne and AmigaOS trademarks are kind of passed to Hyperion for sublicensing, instead of A-EON getting them from Amiga Inc. Since there is a court document of this, Amiga Inc death (looking forward to it) would not endanger those two brands. And empty nutshell name has been raped several times by now by other licensees Last edited by vox on 09-Aug-2013 at 08:45 PM.
_________________ Future Acube and MOS supporter, fi di good, nothing fi di unprofessionals. Learn it harder way! |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
blizz1220
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 21:08:40
| | [ #59 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 12-Jun-2013 Posts: 437
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @vox
Quote:
However, my common understanding is that as long Amiga Inc exists they are the solely legal owners of those names. |
No that is wrong ... Amiga Inc. "owns" name Amiga to be used to create computer and can make Amiga computers or give that right (for huge amount of money) to someone ... *these* they just own , can't give Also *AmigaOne* and *Amiga One* ... Same for "*Amiga OS**" and "*AmigaOS*" ...
Anyone could start making "AmigaResearch OS" as long that Os has it's logo and doesn't cause confusion to the existing brand ... If Morphos (crazy example to prove a point) was to change name to "AmigaResearch OS" and create it's own logo (different from AmigaOS logo) and start selling their os (which is owned and copyrighted by them and a completely different product from AmigaOS) they would be legaly "right" , and morally too...
This is just an example , I have no knowledge about any such plans.If A Inc. was to sue (or Hyperion) they would be wrong but people don't like that sort of thing hanging over their heads so steps should be taken to avoid any chance for a success of such legal action (hence there would be no legal action , better hire a lawyer upfront then. when you're sued already and it's too late)
Quote:
Good. I am having a hard time grasping who is the negative guy here? |
Negative guy is the one who sues Vox because nobody in the existing market has interest to take another court case to battle for this tiny market.Bill McEwen went through a couple of bankruptcies but he probably still has more than enough money hidden somewhere to pay lawyers to start causing hell again and Hyperion has economic interest not to see Morphos or Aros on the market so they could take legal manouvers to stop that.And Aeon is sitting on the same legal chair as Hyperion.
As all of this is happening users are building their own hardware and writing their own software and this kind of situation is impossible to maintain for long.Last edited by blizz1220 on 09-Aug-2013 at 09:31 PM. Last edited by blizz1220 on 09-Aug-2013 at 09:30 PM. Last edited by blizz1220 on 09-Aug-2013 at 09:29 PM. Last edited by blizz1220 on 09-Aug-2013 at 09:10 PM.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
ssolie
| |
Re: Who owns what? Posted on 9-Aug-2013 21:49:38
| | [ #60 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 2755
From: Alberta, Canada | | |
|
| @number6 That is from our collective wikipedia. Feel free to correct it if you wish. Some fellow who calls himself "Xorxos" seems to think it is correct. _________________ ExecSG Team Lead |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|