@Tigger

In all fairness, Ben didn't have to tell anyone anything. Hyperion is a private company, and as such they're free to keep all their business transactions secret. Remember at the time Genesi and MorphOS were still their rivals, so they probably didn't want them to find out. Sucks for the rest of us, but that's how business works.

@Tigger

Quote:

Please, everyone that knows me knows I dont like AI basically at all.

You seem to like Hyperion even less though, looking at your childish comments about them, slagging them off in every way you can, e.g. calling Ben Hermans names (like "Benji"), etc. It's hard not to notice your highly negative emotions towards Hyperion.

Quote:

Hyperion sigend up to do the OS in 4 months, sometime after 4 years cancelling the contract isnt unreasonable

They did not sign up to do "the OS" in 4 months, they agreed to do their best efforts to have an initial release ready by that time. The hardware was not ready in time and also Amiga failed to provide Hyperion with the 3.5/3.9 sources as agreed in the contract, despite this Hyperion managed to do the work that was shipped to customers on printed CD in 2004, and several updates have been made available to customers between 2004 to 2006. If you, despite this still argue that Hyperion did not do their best to deliver, then it makes it even more clear how much you dislike them since you selectively filter out and ignore all the facts except those which make them look bad.

Quote:

I'm just real familiar with courts and trademarks

With all the respect, if you're familiar with courts you should know better than to make a judgement even before both sides have presented their case and enough evidence is gathered. All you're doing right now is slagging off a company you strongly dislike, pick certain pieces of information which makes their case look bad and ignore everything else.

I just have to laugh at how passionate some of you are at trying to prove you're right vs XXXXX or XXXXX. The bottom line here is we're all just spectators, watching an event unfold that may or may not work in our favor. I can't change the court's decision, you can't, hell, all of us combined can't change a thing. The best thing this thread should do is just update with current court findings and status for all of us to read. Just my 2 cents though.

Ed

_________________
Amiga 1200 - ACA 1233 68030 128MB Ram
8GB CF With tons of Classics

AmigaOne X5000

Raspberry PI 400 - PiMiga 1.5
"That which doesn't kill you, only makes you stronger" - Someone important, but I forgot who

@CodeSmith

Quote:

In all fairness, Ben didn't have to tell anyone anything. Hyperion is a private company, and as such they're free to keep all their business transactions secret. Remember at the time Genesi and MorphOS were still their rivals, so they probably didn't want them to find out. Sucks for the rest of us, but that's how business works.

So that means they lied about both operating systems? (AmigaOS4 and MorphOS)

Well, can't say I'm surprised...

@COBRA

Quote:

They did not sign up to do "the OS" in 4 months, they agreed to do their best efforts to have an initial release ready by that time. The hardware was not ready in time and also Amiga failed to provide Hyperion with the 3.5/3.9 sources as agreed in the contract, despite this Hyperion managed to do the work that was shipped to customers on printed CD in 2004, and several updates have been made available to customers between 2004 to 2006.

Re 3.9 Sources:

The copyright notice at the back of the OS3.9 CD indicates that both Amiga Inc AND HAGGE&PARTNER are joint holders. I wonder what effect this had on the inability to supply the 3.9 sources.

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

@CodeSmith

Quote:

CodeSmith wrote: @Tigger In all fairness, Ben didn't have to tell anyone anything. Hyperion is a private company, and as such they're free to keep all their business transactions secret. Remember at the time Genesi and MorphOS were still their rivals, so they probably didn't want them to find out. Sucks for the rest of us, but that's how business works.

They are absolutely free to keep there business transactions secret. However lying to your customers about events to cover up business trasactions is frowned upon for a private company and criminal in a publically traded company. Doing something that would be criminal for an officer of a publically traded company to a huge group of your customers is not really what we should look for from an ethical group of people. But ethics and Amiga havent gone together pretty much since Fleecy entered the picture.
-Tig

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

Quote:

COBRA wrote: @Tigger Quote: Please, everyone that knows me knows I dont like AI basically at all. You seem to like Hyperion even less though, looking at your childish comments about them, slagging them off in every way you can, e.g. calling Ben Hermans names (like "Benji"), etc. It's hard not to notice your highly negative emotions towards Hyperion.

Actually my only issue with the Friedens is they didnt understand OSs enough to do this job and they should have listened to the criticism and not just soaked in the cheering. Ben's and my fights go back to before Amiwest, when he kept telling us about the ironclad bankruptcy proof contract he had written. Given that and is lawyering efforts in the contracts we've seen and helping AI against Thendic shouldnt have impressed anyone.
So far he and Hyperion are saying they have no case on there website.

Quote:

Quote: Hyperion sigend up to do the OS in 4 months, sometime after 4 years cancelling the contract isnt unreasonable If you, despite this still argue that Hyperion did not do their best to deliver, then it makes it even more clear how much you dislike them since you selectively filter out and ignore all the facts except those which make them look bad.

In Feb of 2002, Ben announced they were over 50% done, thats 3 months into the project, over a year later AI buys the OS from them, and we still dont have the first delivery.

Quote:

With all the respect, if you're familiar with courts you should know better than to make a judgement even before both sides have presented their case and enough evidence is gathered. All you're doing right now is slagging off a company you strongly dislike, pick certain pieces of information which makes their case look bad and ignore everything else.

I'm not ignoring anything, there isnt alot Hyperion is going to be able to do. The simple facts are

1) Did they sell the OS and not deliver the code? Yes

2) Did they deliver the OS on a schedule over 10X longer then they signed up for? Yes

3) Did Hyperion violate the license after it was cancelled? Yes

There are slam dunk cases, especially in the Amiga community. AI has lost 10 (at least) straight, and anyone who was paying attention knew they were going to lose all of them. This one is much the same, and has been coming for quite awhile, its just that AI isnt going to lose this. When McEwen in his 20 questions said he had bought back the OS, it was amazing how many called him a liar, probably the majority, the interesting thing as I pointed out then was that Hyperion didnt call him a liar. Rogue did one of his, I dont speak for Hyperion lines and weaseled on a response, but Hyperion who responds to just silly things on the web, didnt have word about McEwens claim that he had exercised the buyback option.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

1) Did they sell the OS and not deliver the code?

Do AI claim that Hyperion delivered nothing? NO
Does the contract say Amiga acknowledge that they may not get all the sources but only binaries? YES
Does the contract say Hyperion must deliver sources of certain parts? NO
Do we know for sure if Amiga did really pay the buyback in full within 6 months of the OS4 release? NO

Quote:

Did they deliver the OS on a schedule over 10X longer then they signed up for?

Did AI provide Hyperion with all necessary source code and documentation for them to fulfill their contractual obligations, as agreed in the contract? NO
Was the hardware ready on time? NO
Did Hyperion deliver a working OS in 2004 to customers worldwide? YES

Quote:

3) Did Hyperion violate the license after it was cancelled?

Yes, unless Hyperion prove that they did not breach the contract, or they did fix the breach(es) within 30 days of receiving the notice, thus my suggestion to wait for them to present their case...

Also, AI later contracting Hyperion in 2005 to port OS4 to the Arctic reference board proves that AI was satisfied with Hyperion's work at that stage (you wouldn't do another deal with a company if you were not satisfied with them), and Fleecy kept acknowledging publically in several Q&A's throghout 2003 and 2004 that Hyperion was working on the OS and he talked about upcoming features, etc., well after the buyback contract was signed. Thus AI acknowledged that the buyback does not mean Hyperion shall stop development and just walk away with the $25k.

@COBRA

Quote:

COBRA wrote: @Tigger Quote: 1) Did they sell the OS and not deliver the code? Do AI claim that Hyperion delivered nothing? NO

Actually yes they do. So the rest of this arguement is silly, but I'll respond to it.

Quote:

Does the contract say Amiga acknowledge that they may not get all the sources but only binaries? YES Does the contract say Hyperion must deliver sources of certain parts? NO

Agreed, but that has nothing to do with Hyperion delivering nothing. We arent arguing here about did Hyperion deliver enough, did what Hyperion deliver actually build the OS they are delivering, etc, we are talking about Hyperion not delivering anything as a result of the buyback.

Quote:

Do we know for sure if Amiga did really pay the buyback in full within 6 months of the OS4 release? NO

AI and there lawyers say yes. If Hyperions case is that they didnt, AI just has to hand them a check because its not 6 months since the release of OS 4.0.

Quote:

Did AI provide Hyperion with all necessary source code and documentation for them to fulfill their contractual obligations, as agreed in the contract? NO

Ben has said multiple times that the lack of 3.5 & 3.9 did not impede their progress, now you want it to be the reason they took 10X longer then they said.

Quote:

Was the hardware ready on time? NO

Hardware was available the day that they signed the contract, everyone understood that the code would have to be written on PPC cards in A4000s and A1200s, its even talked about in the contract.

Quote:

Did Hyperion deliver a working OS in 2004 to customers worldwide? YES

Was that over a year late and after the buyback clause had been exercised?

Quote:

Also, AI later contracting Hyperion in 2005 to port OS4 to the Arctic reference board proves that AI was satisfied with Hyperion's work at that stage (you wouldn't do another deal with a company if you were not satisfied with them), and Fleecy kept acknowledging publically in several Q&A's throghout 2003 and 2004 that Hyperion was working on the OS and he talked about upcoming features, etc., well after the buyback contract was signed.

First of all the Arctic contract was in 2004, secondly the Arctic contract is all about getting the Friedens to sign a contract, and for every Fleecy Q&A, I can give you one from Benji saying other wrong things. The issue here is that AI bought the OS back, and to date have received none of it according to the contract.
-Tig

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

So have any of you guys managed to convince the judge yet?

_________________

@ChrisH

Absolutely. Its just going to take him a few weeks to write it up.
-Tig

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

@Jupp3

Businessmen LIE!?! I'm shocked, SHOCKED I tell ya!

In other news, the tooth fairy doesn't actually exist and Santa Claus is just a fat guy in a fake beard.

@Tigger
Quote:

Quote: COBRA wrote: @Tigger Quote:1) Did they sell the OS and not deliver the code? Do AI claim that Hyperion delivered nothing? NO Actually yes they do. So the rest of this arguement is silly, but I'll respond to it.

So, no one at Amiga Inc. actually owned an AmigaOne and hence got an AmigaOS4 CD like the rest of us that got all the AOS4 binaries on CD?

_________________
A3000D (16mhz, 2MB Chip, 4MB Fast, SCSI (300+MB), SuperGen Genlock, Kick 3.1)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back in my day, we didn't have water. We only had Oxygen & Hydrogen, & we'd just shove 'em together

@CodeSmith

There is nothing fake about my beard!

I am fat though. No getting out of that one. You'd be fat too if you had to eat all those carrots the kids leave for me.

_________________
"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:

Actually yes they do.

No they do not say they have not received any source code and/or object code. They state that Hyperion did not deliver "the source code of OS4." Then they argue that they did not know that the Friedens are contractors and not employees, even though they are listed as contractors in Annex II of the contract and also in the Arctic contract in 2004 on the first page it is clearly written the Friedens are contractors. AI want the source code to OS4 including those parts which are developed by contractors, which they are not entitled to as per the contract. They do not say they have not received any source code, they may have received some parts (if ownership of some parts are from Hyperion), we just don't know. So again claiming Hyperion sent nothing is just speculation on your part (which may turn out to be true or false).

It is also irrelevant whatever Ben commented about progress of the OS, since it is quite normal in software development that unexpected drawbacks are encountered (here Amiga failing to provide all the source code agreed on, hardware being late and stability problems of initial prototypes, etc.). If the judge has to decide whether Hyperion did the best efforts to complete the OS in time, experts will be called in who will examine the work that had to be done, the number of developers, and compare this with existing OS'es. Considering how long it took Microsoft to deliver Vista, with 1000's of developers and an incredible amount of money at hand, I'm sure the experts will agree that Hyperion delivering OS4 in such short time with just a dozen or so developers is a small miracle even.

Quote:

First of all the Arctic contract was in 2004

The point is, it was signed long after the buyback and around the time of the first pre-release. If Amiga thought that Hyperion did not fulfill their contractual obligations at the time, they would not have entered into another deal with Hyperion (and pay money for it even).

Last edited by COBRA on 21-May-2007 at 05:30 PM.

Isn't it about time we all stopped trying to solve this case. Things aren't black and white, we don't know all the facts and besides, if arguing was going to solve this alone, it would have done it already.

The truth is screwed up.

I think both sides are at fault for various reasons everyone has already argued, but who am I to judge. I don't know law (althrough I'm starting to learn it through just following Amiga's progress the last few years).

The only constructive thing for us to do is to follow the proceedings and wait for the outcome to be delivered.

Personally, I want a result that gives me a new Amiga running a new version of Amiga OS, I think we are owed that, but alas there is no breached contract for this. Damn, I was hoping to put my new Amiga law ed to some use

@COBRA

I wonder if the fact that Amiga Inc weren't actually funding the development of OS4 will count in Hyperion's favour.

As Amiga Inc throw in the Arctic agreement, were they satisfied with Hyperion's performance in getting OS4 running on that platform.

@chiriz.net

Speculation is one the things that has kept these forums going during the dry times between software releases and announcements.

@Tigger


Quote:

Actually my only issue with the Friedens is they didnt understand OSs enough to do this job and they should have listened to the criticism and not just soaked in the cheering. Ben's and my fights go back to before Amiwest, when he kept telling us about the ironclad bankruptcy proof contract he had written. Given that and is lawyering efforts in the contracts we've seen and helping AI against Thendic shouldnt have impressed anyone.

Do you mean the proverbial "US" or are you representing AInc. I think if you are involved in this matter in any kind of real way you should disclose this in your post. Your "disclosed" closeness to Ben you mention at AmiWest doesn't make you the most objective person to be making the comments that you are making and posting.

A long time ago I saw part of the source code of Intuition (27.3) I was probably 18 or 19 years old at the time. I realized at the time not even being someone who could port an OS (but really good at K&R C at the time) that anyone ever updating this OS would not have a walk in the park because it was such a mess.. Things take time. Your comments on scheduled times for delivery of such items are way too rigid in the software industry. If you really believe the "on-schedule" delivery thing is realistic, you obviously haven't worked in the software industry very long and won't stay in there very long. Software development times are fluid things, even with bigger companies.

Things always take longer than they are supposed to. I think it's unreasonable to assume someone is stealing an OS just because source code delivery didn't happen right away to the licensor. Especially since a key component of all that and follow up was hardware availability for the OS, which pretty much has been unavailable.

You comment that:

" 1) Did they sell the OS and not deliver the code? Yes "

How do we know that the licensing company didn't break their contract by not having hardware available (remember the 1 OS Per motherboard sold thing thing). If hardware wasn't available with the OS to be sold then the licensor possibly broke their contract with the OS supplier already.

"2) Did they deliver the OS on a schedule over 10X longer then they signed up for? Yes"

OH WHATEVER, no one familiar with software law here is gonna take that seriously, there is much court precendence on this issue over the years that this is just BLOWING SMOKE.. Many many companies over the years have been late with delivery on things. I doubt this will even stand up.. Haven't spent much time in the software industry have you? I think the terms "REAL SOON NOW" was coined by an Amiga developer in the late 1980s..

"3) Did Hyperion violate the license after it was cancelled? Yes"

Think of what you just said violate a LICENSE AFTER it was CANCELLED.. There is no License to violate after someone has canceled it.. Was the license canceled?

My question is not if "HYPERION" violated the terms of their license, but was the license NULL and VOID before because the LICENSOR themselves had already violated the original TERMS themselves because the following things happened..

1) The original license said the OS won't be sold without an A1 motherboard.
2) Since there was no longer hardware available by that time frame, wasn't the licensor in violation of the original agreement.

If it was me, then I wouldn't deliver source either if it was obvious there was no way to continue to have sales of the product. What would the licensor due with it anyway, except try to sell it for use that was "outside" the original agreement.

I would contend the licensor is probably complaining about the developer doing something they were unlicensed to do, but with intent themselves to do with it that was beyond their original agreement in the first place.

This seems like yet another move that may while turning out to be "legal" doesn't not have the best interests of the product, community, or themselves at heart. The basis for this is "someone" wants the OS back, even though three different "Amiga" businesses later it probably wasn't the original people the agreement was even made with.

Please explain this further Tigger and please disclose to the folks why you use "US" so much and it sounds like you work for the licensor or are "part" of that company.

If that is the case than I wonder if there are any TOS problems here with these posts..

Can you enlighten us?

@chiriz.net

Quote:

Isn't it about time we all stopped trying to solve this case. Things aren't black and white, we don't know all the facts and besides, if arguing was going to solve this alone, it would have done it already.

First formulating hypotheses and then seeing if reality agrees: it's fun and a good exercise. And remember, these activities have spawned The Timeline, which I find really interesting. Was Tigger the one who produced it?