Hyperion claims they only received $24,750 towards the buyback in 2003 (which may be correct), HOWEVER they sent receipts totalling $25,000.
Hyperion claims there is no such thing as the "buyback". They issued an invoice for $22,500 USD described in the invoice as "Payment pursuant to article 3.01 of the November 3, 2001 agreement between Amiga, Eyetech and Hyperion". There are legal dependencies in that article. This is located in document 4, page 61 here:
Hyperion refers to it as a "buy-in", but neither term is in the contract and each side uses their individual term choice for spin. The judge so far has used Hyperion's term of buy-in.
What other reciepts are you claiming Hyperion issued to total $25,000?
This has been gone over a number of times. Is there something new that came out that changes the facts to match what you are saying vs. what we have had for quite some time now?
_________________ Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0 Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS) EFIKA owner Amiga 1200
Q: what proof do you have that the software was completed in 2004, did you make payments according to the documents YOU SUBMITTED as evidence which you were supposed to do upon completion.
A: NO.
Q: Did you inform AI that you were done? A: NO.
Q: Did you inform the community you were done or your current customers? A: NO
Thats about how long the done in 2004 questioning is going to be, and then its all over.
The contract between S. Rupprecht and Hyperion talks about payment upon release, not completion. And as the contract with AI includes only the option for AI to take everything back in-house, one may argue that it was AI's responsibility to find out themselves as of when the clock is ticking.
AI was occupied with their DE when signing the contract with Hyperion, that's probably why this is so loosely defined. As Hyperion and Eyetech may also act as the distributors of AOS, there is no technical need to notify anyone at AI.
Who knows, maybe Hyperion will still submit an end-of-2004 email from Carton answering McEwen's question "is it done now?" with a "yes"...
Last edited by dirigent on 21-Jun-2007 at 05:55 PM.
Joined: 26-Apr-2004 Posts: 1809
From: Auckland, New Zealand
@Tigger
Quote:
Q: what proof do you have that the software was completed in 2004
Simple: compare the feature list of the release in 2004 with the feature list outlined in the contract, and there you go. Noone can argue that it was not completed. Everything else you stated is irrelevant.
Quote:
we know that AI+Itec+KMOS+AI have paid over 40K so far to Hyperion and still dont have anything.
Maybe I missed some piece of information, but even if AI paid $25k in full and Hyperion gave a receipt of $25k to them acknowledging that they received the amount, AI still owed them $5k for other work thus according to the contract $5k of that $25k would pay for that outstanding amount, and AI would have paid only $20k for the buy-in which is $5k short. At the end of 2006 when AI paid additional amounts, they owed a lot of money to Hyperion for the arctic work. We don't know the exact amount, but according to the arctic contract $40k sounds about right.
17 crawler(s) on-line.
81 guest(s) on-line.
0 member(s) on-line.
fairlanefastback 
