@cdimauro

Quote:

Then why such machines aren't called "Amiga"?

Again: narrowly defined subset of Amiga brand.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: So, was Amiga Technologies the only one entitled to define a plan? I mean: in the post-Commodore history. That is job of (numerous...) Amiga parent companies.

Were/are they entitled to change the plans, or the only allowed plans are the ones defined by Amiga Technologies?

@cdimauro

Quote:

Was created by Commodore as a proper trademark. Like AmigaDOS.

Quote:

But no AmigaOne trademark was created.

Proprietary rights in relation to a trademark may be established through actual use in the marketplace

You don´t need registration to create trademark (depending on jurisdiction of course).

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Then why such machines aren't called "Amiga"? Again: narrowly defined subset of Amiga brand.

Doesn't change the question: if this is an Amiga, you should be allowed to use this word alone in the description of the AmigaOne products.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Were/are they entitled to change the plans, or the only allowed plans are the ones defined by Amiga Technologies?

Of couse they may have their own plans... In the end only original plan of Amiga Technologies was realized... several years after bankruptcy of such company.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Was created by Commodore as a proper trademark. Like AmigaDOS. Quote: But no AmigaOne trademark was created. Proprietary rights in relation to a trademark may be established through actual use in the marketplace You don´t need registration to create trademark (depending on jurisdiction of course).

In fact. You can use the trademark as you wish, and that's what Amiga Inc. did.

But an Amiga trademark doesn't mean that you identify an Amiga machine.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Doesn't change the question: if this is an Amiga, you should be allowed to use this word alone in the description of the AmigaOne products.

What is Amiga? If Amiga is product of Amiga company, then AmigaOne is Amiga.

Quote:

you should be allowed to use this word alone in the description of the AmigaOne products.

Why?

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Were/are they entitled to change the plans, or the only allowed plans are the ones defined by Amiga Technologies? Of couse they may have their own plans... In the end only original plan of Amiga Technologies was realized... several years after bankruptcy of such company.

So Linux and x86 were legitimate successors of Amigas, since there were plans to use both.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Doesn't change the question: if this is an Amiga, you should be allowed to use this word alone in the description of the AmigaOne products. What is Amiga? If Amiga is product of Amiga company, then AmigaOne is Amiga. Quote: you should be allowed to use this word alone in the description of the AmigaOne products. Why?

To answer both: if it's an Amiga, you can reference to the product as an Amiga, when the product is described.

Is it an Amiga? Yes or no? If yes, use that word. It's simple.

@cdimauro

Quote:

So Linux and x86 were legitimate successors of Amigas, since there were plans to use both.

Linux and x86 were even used in two legitimate Amiga products (dAmiga and Amiga Mini)!

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: So Linux and x86 were legitimate successors of Amigas, since there were plans to use both. Linux and x86 were even used in two legitimate Amiga products (dAmiga and Amiga Mini)!

Good, we reached a point. So, PowerPC wasn't the only processor used by post-Commodore machines.

@cdimauro

Quote:

To answer both: if it's an Amiga, you can reference to the product as an Amiga, when the product is described.

By this "logic" you could also call FreeBSD Amiga (yes, you can).

I think you meant such product can be legally marketed as "Amiga" without any prefixes or sufixes.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Good, we reached a point. So, PowerPC wasn't the only processor used by post-Commodore machines.

Favourite CPU architecture of Bill McEwen was Alpha, but he never found suitable hardware partner.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: To answer both: if it's an Amiga, you can reference to the product as an Amiga, when the product is described. By this "logic" you could also call FreeBSD Amiga (yes, you can). I think you meant such product can be legally marketed as "Amiga" without any prefixes or sufixes.

Exactly. For example, writing something like: "The AmigaOne X1000 is an Amiga computer based on PowerPC, bla bla bla".

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Good, we reached a point. So, PowerPC wasn't the only processor used by post-Commodore machines. Favourite CPU architecture of Bill McEwen was Alpha, but he never found suitable hardware partner.

That was a good thing, since Alpha was killed after a few years.

@cdimauro

Quote:

Exactly. For example, writing something like: "The AmigaOne X1000 is an Amiga computer based on PowerPC, bla bla bla".

As I wrote in some of my previous posts in this thread, AmigaOne history is interesting also in this context. Amiga.Inc and its representatives marketed AmigaOne as "Amiga hardware" or "Amiga product", so in pre-2009 Settlemet Agreement era answer to your question would be without doubt YES. Settlement Agreement clearly defined AmigaOne as brand licensed by Amiga.Inc to Hyperion, so answer should be NO. However, Amiga.Inc may have other opinion and use AmigaOne as example of Amiga trademark usage with computer hardware (like it did with AmigaOS 4.1 on the field of operating system software in legal dispute with Cloanto).

@cdimauro

Quote:

That was a good thing, since Alpha was killed after a few years.

Bill was sometimes like king Midas - but everything he touched turned into pile of ashes.

Last edited by pavlor on 12-Aug-2015 at 08:28 PM.

@pavlor

Quote:

AmigaOne history is interesting. At this time it was "Amiga" product (and marketed so on Amiga.com). However, as Amiga.Inc itself didn´t produce any hardware, AmigaOne became Amiga brand licensed to other companies

So, you're pretty much saying "Amiga" (no prefix no suffix) licensed to CUSA as well as to IContain never happened. gotcha.

Quote:

However, Amiga.Inc may have other opinion

Better.

Quote:

Bill was sometimes like king Midas - but everything he touched turned into pile of ashes.

not bad, but I would have gone with "is" and "touches" and "turns".

#6

Last edited by number6 on 12-Aug-2015 at 09:22 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 12-Aug-2015 at 09:10 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@number6

Quote:

Quote: Bill was sometimes like king Midas - but everything he touched turned into pile of ashes. not bad, but I would have gone with "is" and "touches" and "turns".

Actually i would also replace the ashes with a decidely less noble material :/

_________________
Scarabocchi Binari - Italian AROS Blog
Binary Doodles - English language AROS Blog

@pavlor

Quote:

Bill was sometimes like king Midas - but everything he touched turned into pile of ashes.

I would make distinction between Amiga Inc. as company left
after separation by Commodore that had competent people and
even hired more when first ones left and it's owner.

On the other hand Bill was the person involved in all kinds of
strange business practices (mostly creating fictive companies
and taking loans with few legal threats here and there).

In the case of famous agreement it was the judge that advised the
parties to come up with agreement and in such case party that
would refuse to do so would risk more in US court than the other.

If that case happened in Europe and was handled by civil law I think
Hyperion would probably win the case instead signing agreement.
Biggest difference is that by default in most law systems if there is
an agreement then every party must pay for it's own expenses while
if case is won then the "losing" party must pay all expenses (legal
fees , travel expenses , legal taxes etc).

Last edited by blizz1220 on 13-Aug-2015 at 05:47 AM.