#6 Quote:

in reference to these docs of April 9 mentioned prior Document 114 Amiga parties' reply to response to motion

The reply of the Amiga parties looks more focused and to the point based on their claim of a breach of the 2009 settlement agreement paragraph 2 (Non-Agression).

Quote:

The Amiga Parties agree and covenant that they will not institute any action, claim or proceeding anywhere in the world against Hyperion arising out of Hyperion’s use, marketing, licensing, or sublicensing of the Software or AmigaOS 4 or Hyperion’s use of the Licensed Marks in connection therewith (an “Amiga Prohibited Action”) unless the challenged activity constitutes a material breach of this Agreement;

and

Quote:

Hyperion agrees and covenants that it will not institute any action, claim or proceeding anywhere in the world ... (B) challenging ... (ii) ownership of the Licensed Marks [i.e., AMIGAOS, AMIGAONE, and the Boing Ball Mark] by any Amiga Party or any successor, or (iii) the use and/or ownership of any Amiga Mark (other than an Exclusive Licensed Mark) by any Amiga Party or any successor (a “Hyperion Prohibited Action”), unless the challenged activity constitutes a material breach of this Agreement...

This is the point I considered potentially valid and grounds for termination of the 2009 settlement agreement in their motion for a partial summary judgement. I did not find where Hyperion made a good defense of these actions, especially the registration of Amiga marks which were not licensed to them. Hyperion has tried to have everything dismissed based on technicalities and contract terms very favorable to them. Ben Hermans is an "Intellectual Property litigator" with significant experience in international and U.S. litigation. His knowledge of IP litigation "intricacies" and technicalities may prove valuable or may backfire as legal counsel for Hyperion in violation of the 2009 settlement agreement which should have been aware of the "intricacies" of the contracts. The Amiga parties have the more difficult job of nearly flawlessly proving their case and the 2009 settlement agreement was very much written in Hyperion's favor. It looks to me like the Amiga parties have a valid argument but that doesn't mean it will be enough to achieve their goal of terminating the 2009 settlement agreement. I am an investor and business man where some knowledge of law is helpful but *not* a lawyer.

Last edited by matthey on 12-Apr-2021 at 02:35 AM.