@DonnieA2

Quote:

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.

Oh-oh, someone has not been following previous discussions very well..

@DonnieA2

I think you'll find that Tigger's "us" is a collective reference to all those who disagreed with Hyperion over how to overcome the various problems involved with realizing OS4.

I don't think Tigger is involved in any Amiga business these days and I doubt he'd get involved with Amiga Inc.

Last edited by Rob on 21-May-2007 at 07:40 PM.

@all

The 10 Days are up - so get a life . . .

Hyperion will loose . . .

A.I. will loose . . . .

Hyperion will win . . .

A.I. will win . . . .

Well, we the Amiga community are the ones loosing . . .

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@DonnieA2

Quote:

DonnieA2 wrote: @Tigger 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.

Us is the group of people who were arguing and explaining to Ben, that US bankruptcy laws were written especially to keep things like article 2.07 from actually working. At that point we hadnt seen the contract just had Ben explain how if AI went bankrupt he would get to keep making OS 4.0. So would rather get information about Ben from those who have known him for years and seen him in action or those who don't, and as I answered before I surely dont have anything to do with AI.

Quote:

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.

I've worked in the software industry for over 19 years. You can watch projects I've worked on fly overhead, spin in orbit or even use a bunch of them on your Amiga. No company that delivers a software project with a 4 month schedule over 4 years late is doing competant software development.

Quote:

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.

Which I havent said at all, that would be libel and I'm clever then that. What I have said is that Hyperion didnt deliver anything to AI after the buyback was executed, I got that from the court docs.

Quote:

" 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.

Because Hyperion didn put anything about that in the terms of the bill of sale he signed on April 24, 2003. So the court won't care about problems Hyperion says were issues at that time, because they said give us 25K and we'll give you the source, object and executables according to the terms of the original contract (Nov 2001), Itec gives them money and then AI gets nothing. Again the hardware wasnt AI's responsibility, and in 2003 when the OS was sold, there was plenty of hardware.

Quote:

"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..

Where on earth do you get this. Actually have a court case where the court said, "oh its software you dont have deliver on the timetable in your contract" if you do, thats great I'll use that next time I'm negotiating with Boeing or Lockheed. Again, with how long have I been in the software industry question, over 19 years professionally.

Quote:

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..

You can ask your own question, but that shouldnt be on a post to me. Hyperion carried out actions in March which would have been illegal to do even if the the license were still in place, it wasnt which makes it an even bigger problem.

Quote:

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.

Hardware is the responsibility of Hyperions partner Eyetech not AI, and there was plenty of hardware available in April of 2003 when AI bought back the OS and asked for it to be delivered. Blaming hardware shortage that occurred over 2 years later for not delivering to the contract is silly dont you think?

Quote:

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.

Then you shouldnt have sold the original contract, or not signed the bill of sale and taken the money. You can't do all of that, and then say, I'm not going to deliver anything because I dont like how this is going to work out for me.

Quote:

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.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here.

Quote:

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.

Lets see its McEwen, Fleecy, Randy and Kouri, so its pretty much the same people, that shouldnt fill us with any confidence, but when Hyperion was announced as the people writing the OS, that didnt fill any of us with confidence either, and that turned out to be pretty accurate given how long it took.

Quote:

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?

I dont work for AI, I doubt they can afford me, they cant guarantee my pay and frankly over 7 years after they bought the OS, I'm much more interested working with Newtek, Nova Design or DiscreetFX then with an AI company that has trouble paying there bills.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 22-May-2007 at 12:52 PM.

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

Quote:

dirigent wrote: 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?

Yes, over 2 years ago, though someone has recently begun adding new facts into it. It was part of showing the entire AI-Itec-Kmos-AI handover was to keep the OS from being part of any court settlements and I hoped it would help the creditors get there money from McEwen and company, now however people think I work for AI, which is pretty funny given my past history on the subject.
-Tig

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

@Thread.

Quote:

I've worked in the software industry for over 19 years. You can watch projects I've worked on fly overhead, spin in orbit or even use a bunch of them on your Amiga. No company that delivers a software project with a 4 month schedule over 4 years late is doing competant software development.

Psst. He's talking about rocket science. Figuring out that Hyperion have failed misserably to live up to the contract isn't.

_________________
"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

New documents on justia.com (May 21st) :

Hyperion's response by William Kinsel (Hyperion's lawyer), declarations from Evert Carton, Hans-Jorg Frieden and Thomas Frieden.
Very interesting reading ! :popcorn:

http://news.justia.com/cases/amigahyperion/370498/

Edit: Reworded and tried to add a popcorn smiley, but failed.

Last edited by AmigaPhil on 22-May-2007 at 06:46 PM.

@AmigaPhil

Thank you for that. I'm busy reading through it at the moment, as no doubt many others are.

...yes...
...the plot thickens...
...suddenly, momentum swings the other way...

@Lou

I'm just wading through it now with my keen (read: unskilled/uneducated/pig ignorant) eye.

If the contract 2001 were still valid in April 2003, then it seems that Amiga Inc would've broken it by becoming insolvent and attempting to transfer rights without Hyperion & Eyetech's approval. That looks fairly clear to me. I suppose there's a question over whether the contract had been broken by Hyperion before Amiga Inc's insolvency.

But I'm glad to see Hyperion have a case here. As you may have gathered, I don't like Amiga Inc one tiny bit, and I agree with the statement that:

"Hyperion contends that both the written documentation and the objective manifestations of the parties were to the effect that Amiga Washington was largely abandoning Amiga OS to the Amiga One partners through the substantial licensing agreement"

This revisionist history with the OS at the core of Amiga's strategy, it just doesn't wash with me.

Chris

Looks like everyone's busy reading?

From memory, likely missing some of the points:
1. transfer to Itec (and thus AInc Delaware) invalid, no signatures/OK from EyeTech.
2. contract requirements met ~ second update/July 2004, buyback not done within 6 months, nor to full amount. Amounts owed for mesa port to DE, others?
3. AI never produced 3.{5,9} source.
4. Prior examples with H&P, AI never owned source there, either.
5. Prior examples with H&P, use of contractors.
6. Hyperion spent 1.1 MILLION USD on dev.
7. Friedens were always contractors.
8. Hyperion had to _buy_ the modified 3.1 source from Olaf.
9. AInc WA was insolvent by McEwens own words.

In summary, Hyperion claims they own AmigaOS4 and all rights.

Last edited by wegster on 22-May-2007 at 08:13 PM.

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

@wegster

On 2), they also said something about it being "buy-in" rather than "buy-back"....

Chris

@clebin

It was always pretty clear to me that Amiga Inc were abandoning (classic) Amiga OS, they came in and said that the future was going to be based on Tao's technology. I, and I expect many others were about as enthusiastic about this as we were about Gateway's Linux plan.

Third parties stepped forward and offered to do the work at their own cost and obviously Amiga Inc thought, well it can't hurt us if they put their own money into something we don't consider to be viable.

It is only now that they realize that it is a more valuable product than Amiga DE that they want it back in their limited portfolio.

@wegster

Thanks about summary.

@wegster

Will Amiga ever get one straight... The way they handled Bolton Peck says all about the way they do business

Last edited by pixie on 22-May-2007 at 08:40 PM.

_________________
Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home.
The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga

@all

As I read what Hyperion is presenting and claiming they are making a big point of the insolvency of Amiga #1 (Washington). From that insolvency there is a clause where they get all rights according to them.

They say that they did not know of this insolvency at the time.

Even if that insolvency did not happen they still claim a to have a license regardless based on other clauses.

They claim that they are presenting the true and complete contract and that Amiga did not in their papers. Main point here appears to be they say Amiga purposely left out the part where the Friedens are specifically named as contractors.

They claim the Artic agreement submitted by Amiga is not the one they agreed to and submit a different copy of it.

They show an email from Bill saying ExecSG is not something he will pursue in court and that he recognized it belongs to the Friendens.

They submitted exhibits from the Thendic and Bolten Peck cases. Further to illustrate insolvency it seems.

There is an interesting footnote in a document by their lawyer on the submitted paper:
Quote:

"It should be pointed out that Itec was no innocent third party in that transaction, but instead was being used by Mr. Pentti Kouri, the majority shareholder in Amiga Washington, to conduct what by all appearances was a fradulent conveyance."

They talk about the transfers to be a device to move the assets but shed the debts and leave the debts sitting with Amiga #1 (Washington).

There is also some interesting stuff in the declarations about Amiga wanting to make DE the future desktop OS, and wanting to abandon the OS 4.0 line for that. That supposedly they thought they'd be able to work with Tao to make their Intent product, in a form marketed as DE to do that.

They also say that the full $25,000 was not paid and that other paid monies were for other debts and that they never got the $2500 from Bill. And that it was a "buy-in" not a "buy-out".

Anyway thats what I got from a quick read as I read it.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 22-May-2007 at 08:52 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 22-May-2007 at 08:51 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 22-May-2007 at 08:50 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 22-May-2007 at 08:49 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 22-May-2007 at 08:48 PM.

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

@Rob

Yeah, that's a pretty good summary of what I feel...


On the 'buy-in':

"Note that this is not a "buy out" provision because the Amiga One Partners would still retain their license their license under the agreement"

"reserved the option to make a token payment of $25,000 to reacquire rights to the newly-developed software so that it could resume development of subsequent version of Amiga OS 4.0... However even if "ownership" had been transferred to Amiga under that provision, Hyperion would still have retained a license to use that intellectual property"

Chris

@clebin

This is getting interesting.

Amiga Inc should give up and sell there trademarks to Hyperion.

_________________
http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/
Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @clebin This is getting interesting. Amiga Inc should give up and sell there trademarks to Hyperion.

Other interesting points made were supposedly that Amiga did not provide the code they said they could, greatly slowing down development and that then Hyperion had to make seperate contracts with other entities to get what they could.

Also that Amiga OS was not understood well by Fleecy or Bill or anyone at Amiga since they were concentrating on DE and that the "Ask Fleecy" stuff on the web was actually always forwarded to Hyperion for them to write the answers for him.

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

One thing is clear: it`s going to take forever for a third party to unravel so let`s hope they`re allowed to market in the meantime.

_________________
Fraggle

- insert profound text here -