@COBRA
Quote:

Again, you assume that the $25k was paid in full, which we have seen no proof of. But in case they did pay the $25k, do you have proof that Hyperion did not deliver the work in the form of object codes?

What difference would that make? The lawsuit is about Hyperion using the Amiga trademark without permission. Sure, it sounds like AInc. is claiming Hyperion didn't turn over the product, but so what if they had? That still wouldn't give them the rights to distribute under the Amiga name - in fact if they had turned over the goods that would be even more ammo for Ainc.

Quote:

LOL, so if "AI said" then it must be so? What an objective view

We all know Ainc. is filthy with lies, but the itemized receipt is from Hyperion, not Ainc. Seems if all that was fabricated that Hyperion would counter at least some of what Ainc. has claimed, yet they have not.

_________________
Here for the whimpering end

@jorkany

Well, apparently there's going to be "Fireworks next week. Poor tigger." (said Zornik earlier today on IRC) so I'm guessing there will be a big document-dump in the lap of the judge coming from Hyperion then. From a bit of reading between the lines, I gather that there are certain provided documents from AI that ain't the real documents and/or some of those documents have been superseded by others.

I look forward to next week. Muahahaha!

_________________
"I love peacenicks, they're so easy to conquer." --Ivan J Ironfist, the Dictator

@NomadOfNorad

It would be interesting to see any relevant documents from the Gary Hare reign at KMOS.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: @Jorge Any chance of Gary Hare being a witness for either side ?

Why not ask him?

http://www.fielding.edu/psy/psy_faculty/g_hare.asp

Oh and just an FYI, a lot of people get his name wrong, its Garry, not Gary.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 16-May-2007 at 01:01 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@fairlanefastback

PhD, Organization Behavior and Development

maybe he is the one who can shed some light on the behavior of Hyperion and Amiga inc

also

International Conflict Resolution

Maybe he can settle the dispute

maybe not

In one instance, due diligence issues regarding Amiga and KMOS overlap. I believe all employees should be paid for the work they do. Amiga has two well publicized labour judgements against them and I hope they are cleared soon.

Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-May-2007 at 01:19 AM.
Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-May-2007 at 01:09 AM.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@NomadOfNorad

Looking forward to those (no offense to Tigger ) With a bit of luck this mess can get resolved quickly, while there is still something left to save.

@COBRA

Quote:

COBRA wrote: @Tigger Again, you assume that the $25k was paid in full, which we have seen no proof of. But in case they did pay the $25k, do you have proof that Hyperion did not deliver the work in the form of object codes?

AI at this point needs to prove nothing in reguards to the buyback. Proof will only be required if Hyperion insist's they were not paid. Your assumtion is that AI has to prove it. Wrong. The buy back contract has been signed. That is their proof . . . .

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

Quote:

NomadOfNorad wrote: @jorkany Well, apparently there's going to be "Fireworks next week. Poor tigger." (said Zornik earlier today on IRC) so I'm guessing there will be a big document-dump in the lap of the judge coming from Hyperion then. From a bit of reading between the lines, I gather that there are certain provided documents from AI that ain't the real documents and/or some of those documents have been superseded by others. I look forward to next week. Muahahaha!

Gee that sounds exactly like the Thendic/AI predictions of a few years ago. Of course then nothing happened and Thendic won the case really easy. Or the great predictions about what was really going on with the auction of AIs furniture. AI hasnt provided any fake documentation to a federal court, thats automatic jail time. People implying that are silly.
-Tig

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

Quote:

Rob said: Quote: Hyperion has shipped nothing to AI Well maybe not the source or object code for the desktop versions, but they must have at least shipped the Arctic binaries.

Actually I've been told they didnt, I'm actually not sure that is the second device Garry has, I think it more likely it was the settop box that Hyperion had a customer for.

Quote:

In providing at least the binaries for the Arctic reference platform, Hyperion gave the KMOS something very substantial to show IBM. Of this matters little since the buyback clause was executed, which is the main contention here.

The issue with Arctic reference is that if the document is signed (we havent seen that yet), then the friedens are on the hook here, which may not be a good place to be.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 16-May-2007 at 04:34 AM.

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

Quote:

COBRA wrote: Again, you assume that the $25k was paid in full, which we have seen no proof of. But in case they did pay the $25k, do you have proof that Hyperion did not deliver the work in the form of object codes?

In the deposition, AI has said they paid the 25K, unless Hyperion in a deposition says that is untrue, the court by law in the US has to take that as a fact agreed upon by both sides. As for proof Hyperion did not deliver the code, first of all again the deposition says the did not, in addition, Ben Hermans has said that they had not.

Quote:

Quote: AI has said multiple times in there deposition that they have paid the amount (plus additional money). LOL, so if "AI said" then it must be so? What an objective view

The court will treat it as a matter of fact, unless Hyperion says it is not true, that US law, period.

Quote:

Until we have seen proof that something was really done as claimed, your assumptions are nothing more but thin air I'm afraid.

Unless and until Hyperion says that AI did not pay them, I will treat it as if they did BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THE FEDERAL COURT IS REQUIRED TO DO.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

2.08 Contingency. In the event Amiga decides to halt development of the Classic Amiga OS for the Target Hardware, the Amiga One Partners are granted an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide right and license to develop, use, modify and market the Software and OS 4 under the "Amiga OS" trademark and at their sole expense.

Isn't selling the OS the same as "halt development"?

Even if it isn't, 2.08 goes on saying that unless Amiga releases a "substantially new version" within six months after OS 4.0 was completed by Hyperion, the development is considered halted.

So... The two most important questions are:

1.) Is selling an OS the same as halting its development? I think yes, as if you no longer own the product, how can you keep developing it?

2.) When was OS 4.0 complete according to the feature list? Years ago? Half a year ago? Not yet? Remember, we are talking completed here, not released.

Conclusion: It seems likely that Hyperion, according to 2.08, has an exclusive right to market and sell the product under the "Amiga OS" trademark.

@AmiDog

Quote:

2.) When was OS 4.0 complete according to the feature list? Years ago? Half a year ago? Not yet? Remember, we are talking completed here, not released.

After Feb 2003. ? Did the buyback date indicate feature list was done at that time ? final thing being integration of the 68k emulation ? .

but repeating myself by July 2005 Hyperion seem to feel that it is "DONE"

The language in the following 22 July 2005 Hyperion press release is interesting.
notice they refer to "Registered OS 4.0 "Users". hmm

http://www.hyperion-entertainment.biz:8080/news/2005-07-22

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Jeffshepherd
Quote:

@T_Power Which countries laws are you talking about though?

I am referring to the laws in "South Africa", where I live.
I would expect international and USA law would be similar, but According to Tigger who is an USA citizen, this is not so.


@Tigger
Quote:

Its common and legal in the US for all parties to sign the bottom of each page of the contract to cover each and any changes on it. As you can see, the signatures are there on each page. Page 1 is completely legal in the US despite your claims to the contrary, I personally have had to initial 4 or 500 pages of SOWs to cover the changes during negotiations. Sorry but this is a legal and binding document. -Tig

If what you say is true of USA law, then all legal documents in the USA are wide open to abuse and tampering.

Cheers,
Tim

Does anyone know if any damages awarded in a US court can be collected from a European company with no assets in the US?. or could the European company just walk away from this like Amiga INC #1 did and emerge as a different company ?.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

Quote:

Even if it isn't, 2.08 goes on saying that unless Amiga releases a "substantially new version" within six months after OS 4.0 was completed by Hyperion, the development is considered halted.

Can AmigaDE / Amiga Anywhere, or any later release of it be considered a "substantially new version of AmigaOS"? That's certainly what Amiga Inc. has been marketing it as, especially in the past. It definitely is substantially different, and it also is "Amiga"

@Spectre660

FriedOS ?

With Frying Pan pre installed ?

Sorry.. I'll get me coat

_________________
******************************************
I dont suffer from Insanity - I enjoy it

******************************************

@AmiDog

Right till "final update" Hyperion allways stressed that OS4 was NOT released, afterwards they claimed it had been realeased years ago. Rather obvious atempt of history-rewriting

Your conclusion seems like:

- Hyperion (not) release prerelease 1
- AInc (Itec) pays for the buyback-clause
- Hyperion does not hand over sources as they should
- years later Hyperion claim the OS theirs goes AInc didn't continue developing it


Hmmm, ok Hyperion are the experts when it comes to "stupid german judges", but that judge won't be from Germany and even if I'll still doubt you would find one THAT stupid

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Spectre660

And realease an OS unsellable in the US ? That could be brought down in minutes by filling a suit in an european court ?


Seems we'll never gonna run out of "clever" ideas

_________________
- We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet
- blame Canada

@Kronos

Never said anything about releasing/selling an OS. asked about walking away from a legal award handed down in the US. How would it be enforced in an EU country ? how does this work is what I am trying to find out .

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

Quote:

AmiDog wrote: @Tigger Quote: 2.08 Contingency. In the event Amiga decides to halt development of the Classic Amiga OS for the Target Hardware, the Amiga One Partners are granted an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide right and license to develop, use, modify and market the Software and OS 4 under the "Amiga OS" trademark and at their sole expense. Isn't selling the OS the same as "halt development"?

No, not at all.

Quote:

Even if it isn't, 2.08 goes on saying that unless Amiga releases a "substantially new version" within six months after OS 4.0 was completed by Hyperion, the development is considered halted.

Until and unless Hyperion delivers the code, that 6 months doesnt start, in addition, since the license is now cancelled, section 2.08 doesnt really matter.

Quote:

1.) Is selling an OS the same as halting its development? I think yes, as if you no longer own the product, how can you keep developing it?

As I said above, not at all, especially since the entire sell the rights to Itec and sell the OS back to AI was all negotiated at the same time.

Quote:

2.) When was OS 4.0 complete according to the feature list? Years ago? Half a year ago? Not yet? Remember, we are talking completed here, not released.

It wasnt completed when the buyback clause was exercised, after that there isnt alot to talk about.

Quote:

Conclusion: It seems likely that Hyperion, according to 2.08, has an exclusive right to market and sell the product under the "Amiga OS" trademark.

That would be an incorrect conclusion.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 16-May-2007 at 03:28 PM.

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