@linnar




What can I say!

At least I can say that I was probably one of many who saw this as positively the last chance Billy the Clown had to redeem himself and that this was before;

Litigation with Hyperion.
Shafting ACube on SAM and Moana.
Kent.
Picking Hapless the ACKless as a 'manufacturing partner'.
Pretending not to know Jens and Individual.
Pretending that AmigaWorld.Net doesn't exist.
Saying OS5 will be better than MacOSX.
etc etc

Still I have to hand it to y'all - OUCH!

@avekoder

Quote:

avekoder wrote: Oh boy, it's funny to read this kind of old thread. Like this quote from Tigger: Quote: Its not a bold statement at all Rogue. I read the contract, AI contracted Hyperion to write an OS, they claimed they have now paid you for that OS, you are claiming that Hyperion doesnt own portions of the OS, that instead you own them. AI can quite easily sue Hyperion for breach of contract, win and bankrupt the company. Apparently, it was not so easy as people thought a year ago. Kinda put the statements from Amiga advocates on these forums (nowadays and in the past) in a certain light.

Actually its happening exactly as a I predicted, why would you say otherwise? When the case goes to court, Hyperion loses, in fact Hyperion is in worse shape then we thought they were a year ago when that message was posted. Since then AI has cancelled the license, Hyperion has violated the cancellation and we now know that despite what the Friedens said, Exec-SG will be AI's when the case is over.
-Tig

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

@wegster
Quote:

Yes, yes, I believe you are the only one. Anyone else?

Why exactly did you resurrect this thread?
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

Actually its happening exactly as a I predicted, why would you say otherwise?

If it was so easy, AInc could send Bill to the court with a single document: The contract. The court would then immediately decide in favor of AInc.

Apparently AInc don't think it's so easy. They've submitted a lot of documents, and they have a quite high amount of lawyers associated with this "easy" case.

Quote:

When the case goes to court, Hyperion loses

Personally, I'll wait for the court before making such statements. One might look silly afterwards.

_________________
All I want is a boxed hardware+software solution.

@Colin_Camper

Quote:

Litigation with Hyperion. Shafting ACube on SAM and Moana. Kent. Picking Hapless the ACKless as a 'manufacturing partner'. Pretending not to know Jens and Individual. Pretending that AmigaWorld.Net doesn't exist. Saying OS5 will be better than MacOSX. etc etc

Pretty good synopsis. We should post this list to all noobs who have missed the last 2 years of Amiga madness!!!

_________________
"Art challenges technology. Technology inspires the art."
John Lasseter, Co-Founder of Pixar Animation Studios

@Tigger

Quote:

Why exactly did you resurrect this thread?

Its a recent theme across the forums. I've been reading my former selfs postings in the last few days wondering why people were calling me by my old name. I think its signs of desperation. People are trying to capture a time of more hope (or more ignorance, take your pick).

_________________
"Anyone with a modicum of reasonableness may realize that it is like comparing the ride in the world to descend the stairs to catch the milk in the house."

Google Translate

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @wegster Quote: Yes, yes, I believe you are the only one. Anyone else? Why exactly did you resurrect this thread? -Tig

Because now and then it's interesting to take a look back at 'where we were,' opinions, etc...especially when for the most part, from any potenmtial users perspectives..not much has changed. Yes, there's now a court case...yet ultimately, still nothing _produced_ that anyone can buy or use. And of course, at least a few shifts of opinions.

_________________
Are we not done with the same silly arguments and flames yet??!

@Tigger

Quote:

Hyperion has violated the cancellation and we now know that despite what the Friedens said, Exec-SG will be AI's when the case is over.

Hyperion doesn't own the source code to Exec SG, IIRC. For that, they would have to pay the expenses of the Frieden brothers first.

The first thing AInc tried, which was completely logical, was a preliminary injunction, and the judge already nixed that, IIRC.

The scope of US law does not fully extend to the EU. In fact, they would have to sue Hyperion in the EU. And even within the EU, cross-country law enforcement does not always work. AInc. would have to sue Hyperion in Belgium. And the Frieden brothers would have to sue Hyperion in Belgium, if there was a reason (and there might be, because they weren't paid).

But things are very complicated, because the Frieden brothers didn't receive money for their invoices, so the source code (and binary) belongs to them. And to them alone, if there were no other developers. Each developer that didn't receive any money owns their own source code. Which is useless, however, because everything depends on everything. If any bit of the code contains stuff that is owned by Hyperion, then Hyperion can take it away from the developers. The developers can withdraw their association with Hyperion, retaining and modifying the source code, because it's theirs. Hyperion makes/made use of AInc.'s trademarks (or whoever owns/owned them at the particular moment in time), and AInc. tried to severe their contract with Hyperion.

It's a big plate of spaghetti. And meat balls. Whee! The spaghetti monster! I always knew the spaghetti monster created it all.

So, I believe, the judge will have a very hard time to figure out what to do. All parties put OS4 on hold. And everyone's waiting for a decision.

Last edited by voyager2007 on 21-Oct-2007 at 01:22 AM.

@SpaceDruid

What is our old nick?

_________________
2017 Camaro 2SS

@voyager2007

Quote:

voyager2007 wrote: @Tigger Hyperion doesn't own the source code to Exec SG, IIRC. For that, they would have to pay the expenses of the Frieden brothers first.

According to the Friedens contract with Hyperion, Hyperion has to buy the code from them and once that happens it will be owned by AI, (providing its agreed the buyback deal was completed).

Quote:

The first thing AInc tried, which was completely logical, was a preliminary injunction, and the judge already nixed that, IIRC.

The judge nixed it because he said there was no action Hyperion was carrying out that AI could not recover by getting a large check from Hyperion, I actually think thats probably true, I just dont think Hyperion has enough money to compensate them, but AI didnt make that point so the judge cant use it in a finding.

Quote:

The scope of US law does not fully extend to the EU. In fact, they would have to sue Hyperion in the EU. And even within the EU, cross-country law enforcement does not always work. AInc. would have to sue Hyperion in Belgium. And the Frieden brothers would have to sue Hyperion in Belgium, if there was a reason (and there might be, because they weren't paid).

AI doesnt have to sue Hyperion in the EU. If they lose the court case in the US, Hyperion will stop using the AI trademarks etc. Now to get there money and to force Hyperion to buy and give them the code they are owed may take another lawsuit, but the EU isnt going to allow Hyperion to violate Trademarks just because they are in the EU.

Quote:

But things are very complicated, because the Frieden brothers didn't receive money for their invoices, so the source code (and binary) belongs to them. And to them alone, if there were no other developers.

Its not that complicated, first of all the IP for the code belongs to AI and the Friedens and by the contract between Hyperion and AI, now that they buyback has been completed, Hyperion must buy the code from the Friedens and give it to AI.

Quote:

If any bit of the code contains stuff that is owned by Hyperion, then Hyperion can take it away from the developers. The developers can withdraw their association with Hyperion, retaining and modifying the source code, because it's theirs.

I think it funny that you think Hyperion can take code away, but dont realize that things like Exec-SG are based on AI's IP, and they can (and will) prevent anyone they want from selling there IP, which includes Exec-SG and several other portions of OS4 (none of which was clean roomed).

Quote:

Hyperion makes/made use of AInc.'s trademarks (or whoever owns/owned them at the particular moment in time), and AInc. tried to severe their contract with Hyperion.

Which kills the license to use there IP as well.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

but the EU isnt going to allow Hyperion to violate Trademarks just because they are in the EU.

I'm not sure about that.

@Tigger

If Hyperion doesn't pay the developers, they own squat. And If AInc doesn't pay the Hyperion, they own squat either.

If Hyperion paid the developers in part, they own part of the IP. However, if the developers cancel their contracts, and pay back the amounts paid by Hyperion, they might withdraw themselves entirely from those contracts.

AFAIK, Exec SG is a complete rewrite of the AmigaOS kernel. So it might be more like MorphOS. You cannot enforce accusations of imitation when the implementation doesn't contain any of the original source code. In EU copyright and IP law, the implementation matters more than the concept behind the software. Software isn't fully patentable in the EU, only the implementation (and then you would have to have a patent anyway on that, which AInc hasn't).

Trademarks and naming rights, if they're registered worldwide, may be applicable in that case. However, if the software is renamed and rebranded, and would be called something like "Mystery OS", then AInc could do nothing about it, probably.

@Colin_Camper

Quote:

I'm not sure about that.

I am. The EU treats IP ownership very seriously, perhaps more so that the US if anything. In fact the EU is so bound by following the rules by the letter that it gets in the way of common sense sometimes and can result in very bizare legal cases.

_________________
"Anyone with a modicum of reasonableness may realize that it is like comparing the ride in the world to descend the stairs to catch the milk in the house."

Google Translate

@voyager2007

Quote:

voyager2007 wrote: @Tigger If Hyperion doesn't pay the developers, they own squat. And If AInc doesn't pay the Hyperion, they own squat either.

AI has paid Hyperion. Whether Hyperion has paid the developers doesnt impact whether Hyperion is contractually obligated to give the code to AI.

Quote:

If Hyperion paid the developers in part, they own part of the IP. However, if the developers cancel their contracts, and pay back the amounts paid by Hyperion, they might withdraw themselves entirely from those contracts.

For some of the things that might work, however it wont for anything with AI's IP, for example Exec-SG.

Quote:

AFAIK, Exec SG is a complete rewrite of the AmigaOS kernel. So it might be more like MorphOS. You cannot enforce accusations of imitation when the implementation doesn't contain any of the original source code. In EU copyright and IP law, the implementation matters more than the concept behind the software.

Its a complete rewrite by people using the source code for the original exec, which is why its alot different then MorphOS. Its not a imitation issue (though its funny you say that because Ben Hermans of Hyperion in fact said thats one of the reasons MorphOS was illegal in EU, yet you say that can't be true). Do you believe that if someone downloaded the windows source code, they could use that to write a new OS " FLOORS NT" and that
would be totally legal to sell in the EU?

Quote:

Software isn't fully patentable in the EU, only the implementation (and then you would have to have a patent anyway on that, which AInc hasn't).

Even in the EU, you can't take someone elses source code, copy its function and call it your own, otherwise we'd have waveLight, YaMa and Floors NT being sold from Belgium right now.

Quote:

However, if the software is renamed and rebranded, and would be called something like "Mystery OS", then AInc could do nothing about it, probably.

Sorry but you are completely incorrect on this point.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

Even in the EU, you can't take someone elses source code, copy its function and call it your own, otherwise we'd have waveLight, YaMa and Floors NT being sold from Belgium right now.

(BTW, Hyperion mentioned in the court case that the source code wasn't used.)

No matter what you're doing, if your source code is not the same, then it's difficult to prove you based your work upon it.

WINE for instance isn't illegal anywhere, despite it imitates the Windows API.

Linux isn't illegal despite it imitates the AT&T UNIX API, the SunOS API and more.

And hence, AmigaOS 4 can't not be illegal if it doesn't contain any AmigaOS source code, and be renamed throughout, not to use Amiga brand names. The nomenclature throughout the OS could be changed.

So, you could market Floors NT probably. Of course, Micro$oft would be right behind you with all its lawyers. (But still, a court could rule that they would have to tolerate the competition)

Quote:

though its funny you say that because Ben Hermans of Hyperion in fact said thats one of the reasons MorphOS was illegal in EU, yet you say that can't be true)

Oh boy, that's just FUD to drive people to use AOS4 instead of MOS.

MOS is developed in the EU, and no-one bothered to sue them yet (and damn sure, because the concept is running an Amiga compatibility layer on top of a different type of kernel; but the kernel issue isn't really of importance).

Quote:

AI has paid Hyperion. Whether Hyperion has paid the developers doesnt impact whether Hyperion is contractually obligated to give the code to AI.

You cannot reach into the pockets of a naked man!

If I read the court documents correctly, Hyperion owes the developers of OS4 far over a million dollars.
If Hyperion is unable to pay, they will not acquire ownership of the code.

Hence, AInc can flail their arms as long as they want, it won't help.

Some the sections of the contract between AInc and Hyperion might be void, even, because they do not follow common sense. In a software development contract, you do not add such clauses as the buy-back clause. The whole -- very usual -- taking longer than expected case isn't accounted for in the contract. Every single software developer with a little experience can tell you that there's no such thing as a predictable schedule.

This all might influence the way in which the court case works out.

In no way is the customer (AInc.) allowed to take ownership of a product they didn't develop (unless they duly purchase it). All the rights to the product belong to Hyperion until then. That is something that cannot be taken away from them. They might have to give up the Amiga brand, but that's about all that can happen.

And if they truly have used some of the original AmigaOS source code, they would have to rewrite those parts.

But AInc. cannot rip it out of Hyperions hands, just like that. That's plain nonsense.

The whole "oh, we gotta get that OS4 now, and pronto!" or "oh, let's sue them a little and we get it all" thinking isn't very smart.

A lot of work was put into OS4, and none of it has been done by AInc. And that's the key point, methinks.

Last edited by voyager2007 on 21-Oct-2007 at 11:16 PM.
Last edited by voyager2007 on 21-Oct-2007 at 11:15 PM.
Last edited by voyager2007 on 21-Oct-2007 at 11:14 PM.

@voyager2007

Quote:

voyager2007 wrote: (BTW, Hyperion mentioned in the court case that the source code wasn't used.) No matter what you're doing, if your source code is not the same, then it's difficult to prove you based your work upon it.

I havent seen anywhere in the court documents where they say that, why dont you show the reference to all of us. In addition, I have at least 5 postings from the managing partner of Hyperion who talked all about using the AI source code and a message from one of the brothers who told Carl how cool his exec code was on this very site. SO its not really as hard as you think.

Quote:

WINE for instance isn't illegal anywhere, despite it imitates the Windows API. Linux isn't illegal despite it imitates the AT&T UNIX API, the SunOS API and more. And hence, AmigaOS 4 can't not be illegal if it doesn't contain any AmigaOS source code, and be renamed throughout, not to use Amiga brand names. The nomenclature throughout the OS could be changed.

Again WINE and Linux are clean room implementations, OS 4 is not by its very definition. We've had this arguement on this board several times and all the people with experience in this are arguing on my side.

Quote:

So, you could market Floors NT probably. Of course, Micro$oft would be right behind you with all its lawyers. (But still, a court could rule that they would have to tolerate the competition)

No if your programmers looked at the Microsoft code, the court would hand you head to Microsoft and ask them if they wanted a hand as well.



Quote:

You cannot reach into the pockets of a naked man! If I read the court documents correctly, Hyperion owes the developers of OS4 far over a million dollars. If Hyperion is unable to pay, they will not acquire ownership of the code. Hence, AInc can flail their arms as long as they want, it won't help.

Which would mean Ben and Evert will be financially responsible for a million dollars or so it takes to acquire it, I'm not sure what your point is here.

Quote:

Some the sections of the contract between AInc and Hyperion might be void, even, because they do not follow common sense. In a software development contract, you do not add such clauses as the buy-back clause. The whole -- very usual -- taking longer than expected case isn't accounted for in the contract. Every single software developer with a little experience can tell you that there's no such thing as a predictable schedule.

First of all just because something doesnt make common sense to you, doesnt mean it gets thrown out of a contract. Buy back clauses are in software contracts all the time, virtually every product I've ever done has included one. Every single good software developer on this site will not tell you in any way that software schedule cannot be predicted. Do you think Boeing or Lockheed lets me deliver whenever I want? We have hard schedules, we have delivery dates, we make delivery dates, thats what software professionals do every day.

Quote:

In no way is the customer (AInc.) allowed to take ownership of a product they didn't develop (unless they duly purchase it). All the rights to the product belong to Hyperion until then. That is something that cannot be taken away from them. They might have to give up the Amiga brand, but that's about all that can happen.

They did duly purchase it and they own part of the IP contained in it even before the purchase.

Quote:

And if they truly have used some of the original AmigaOS source code, they would have to rewrite those parts.

No, anything tainted would have to be clean roomed before Hyperion could sell anything, thats a huge expense for virtually no gain and AI could still sue and maybe win the case, plus they couldnt call it Amiga, so what would be the point.

Quote:

But AInc. cannot rip it out of Hyperions hands, just like that. That's plain nonsense. The whole "oh, we gotta get that OS4 now, and pronto!" or "oh, let's sue them a little and we get it all" thinking isn't very smart.

Well they paid for it years ago and having got it yet, so it was probably time to sue about it.

Quote:

A lot of work was put into OS4, and none of it has been done by AInc. And that's the key point, methinks.

Its not a point at all. The buyback clause was implemented, AI should have the code from Hyperion. A real Key point is the Hyperion sold the code, so they should provide it to the buyer.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 22-Oct-2007 at 12:48 AM.
Last edited by Tigger on 22-Oct-2007 at 12:16 AM.

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

@Colin_Camper

Quote:

Colin_Camper wrote: I really can't understand how people are putting a negative spin on Bill McEwens answers.

Hmmmmmm - normally people not able to understand are lacking the necessary intelligence - but I take that's not what you tried to say, is it?

I for instance don't put "a negative spin on Bill McEwens answers" - I simply stopped believing anything that comes from his mouth years ago.

Why?
Just remember his famous "OS4 will be in the stores for sale right in time for the christmas business (2002)!"...

Quote:

Colin_Camper wrote: Does the following make the situation seem more bleak or more hopeful than where we were last week? The OS4/Hardware impass : Bill McE -' We are positively trying to secure (ideally) two hardware platforms.' The Hyperion/OS4/Amiga Inc contract impass : Bill McE - ' We are trying to reach a settlement and are on friendly terms.' Also Bill confirmed: Fully committed to classic Amiga OS as a desktop OS. Still has regard for the classic Amiga community...

Yessir.
The pope is sleeping in a marriage-bed and pigs can fly...


Quote:

Colin_Camper wrote: ...despite the vitreolic and sub human personal abuse from a few mentally sick individuals.

I guess you are talking about the AInc crew?

Quote:

Colin_Camper wrote: ... Come on people - let's hear some of the positive conclusions we can draw from all of this! ...

Hmmmmm - what "positive conclusions we can draw from" flying pigs - they save you the way to the supermarket, if you're planning a barbecue. Just shoot some of them...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Tigger

Quote:

I havent seen anywhere in the court documents where they say that, why dont you show the reference to all of us. In addition, I have at least 5 postings from the managing partner of Hyperion who talked all about using the AI source code and a message from one of the brothers who told Carl how cool his exec code was on this very site. SO its not really as hard as you think.

Sorry, I don't have time ATM to dig thoroughly thru the documents, but take a look at this:

Document #26 (Declaration by Evert Carton)

IMO, Evert Carton says in paragraphs 26 and 27, that AInc. didn't give Hyperion the source code to OS 3.5 and 3.9, because they didn't have it, and that it would've been required to develop OS 4.0.

So, I think that the OS 4.0 kernel was developed from scratch.

Do you have links to the postings that you're referring to? I think those would be interesting to read!

You might also want to look at Document #28, a declaration by HJF, containing his contract with Hyperion.

If I read it correctly, it says that Hyperion gets a binary license only.

A strange item from that contract is the 400 man hours section. So, Hyperion demanded that they work at least 20 x 20 hours per month, that'd be 10 hours per day and developer (both Friedens), at least. So, who wants to volunteer to develop software under such a contract?

Anyhow, IMO, neither contract (the one between AInc and Hyp, and the one between Hyp and the Friedens) contains a full description on what exactly will happen to the source code.

If I read the contract with the Friedens correctly, they own all of the source code.

So, what was it again that AInc can do to obtain ownership of that source code? Sue Hyperion?

The preliminary injunction by the way was rejected because of an error in procedure, IMO. See Document #38. Especially section III, and the following conclusion.

@herewegoagain

Quote:

herewegoagain wrote: @Wayne ... Quote: ... you will also see some company acquisitions, where we have purchased some other company assets. That is most encouraging to think that Amiga have it in their sight (and the ability) to purchase other companies assets.

Well, thing is he didn't say "AInc have purchased some other company assets" - what he said is "we have purchased some other company assets."

He could as well mean "Pentti and I have purchased some other company assets".

Maybe they're in need of some more "tax write-off projects" like AInc...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@herewegoagain

Quote:

herewegoagain wrote: @joerg ...I'll just quote EntilZha: Quote: About OS5: ...We have been contacted by Amiga some two months ago. They asked us if we would be willing to write the OS5 kernel for them... ...

Aha.
Just "two months ago" AInc contacted the Friedens "to write the OS5 kernel for them".

Didn't Bill say they (AInc) had been working on it during the last 18 months?
I'm not aware that it's possible to build the house (OS) before the fundament (kernel)
or - with other words:
to start at the roof when building a house...

So - just annother of his lies debunked...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)