@JackAttack

Amiga OS4 - who owns the IP?

Even if this doesn't go well for A.Inc. - Hyperion Cannot sell the OS. (legally).

The most Hyperion is going to get out of this is possibly an increased buy out. And thats if they can prove A.Inc. didn't provide the recources in accordance with the contract, or A.Inc. violated the agreement some other way. If that cannot be proven then they are up a creek.

But, no matter how well it goes for Hyperion, OS4 belongs to A.Inc. . . As sad as that is.

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@Sneaky

Quote:

So I can assure you, the principle of giving someone in court the chance to understand what is said or written is an absolute MUST in international cases.

True and even *if* the defendant understands and speaks English very well, juridical documents that are not written in the official language(s) of the defendants' home country can naturally introduce a bias.
Belgium is a party to the Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extra Judicial Documents in Civil and Commercial Matters (1965).
All of us interested armchair lawyers might want to look here for a copy of the agreement.

"If the document is to be served under the first paragraph above, the Central Authority may require the document to be written in, or translated into, the official language or one of the official languages of the State addressed."

Also note that this is just *one* argument that might lead to a denial of the expedited discovery. The complexity of the case ("6 year relationship"), where a lot of evidence needs to be compiled, might be another one.

@takemehomegrandma

We miss you THGM, whererever you are.. your blood had changed from blue to red, world will never be the same...

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

@pixie

Quote:

We miss you THGM,

It's not about taking home grandma (THGM), but about being taken home BY her (TMHG).. ;)

@JackAttack

Quote:

Do they really think Hyperion is completely ignorant and incapable?

Well based on the contract that they signed and agreed with - yeah they probably do.


Edit: Just had a quick scan through the post as I'm busy but based on what I've read, I'm guessing most of you haven't spent much time in a courtroom.

This is how it works.

Your legal team will use every trick in the book - regardless of how petty or misleading. Why? Two reasons. First it takes the other teams lawyers time to go through everything (which means they might miss something important) and secondly because they know the other team will get a huge chunk of your case dismissed before it ever reaches a jury - the more you submit, the more you get through.

It's a standard game all lawyers play with each other. You have to remember this is the lawyers playing silly buggers, not the clients. Any anger or frustration you feel during this trial, direct your anger at the lawyers. Clients don't advise lawyers on evidence, it's the other way round.

Just thought I outta clear that up.

Last edited by SpaceDruid on 10-May-2007 at 09:27 AM.

_________________
"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

@wolfe

Quote:

Amiga OS4 - who owns the IP?

I can't see this lawsuit solving anything, and that might not be what AI want anyway. The most likely outcome, when the arguments on both sides partially cancel each other out, is striking a deal. Neither party will be in a position enabling them to move forward with their plans.

There has been so much development into OS4 in excess of the original contract. That work builds on Amiga's IP. That does not mean AI own it, just that it can't be used without the consent of AI.

Unless Hyperion has been exceedingly arrogant and uncooperative, I think the best solution would have been to compensate the OS4 developers for their efforts and move on. Money does not seem to an issue at the moment. What does AI want? Who knows, I don't think it's likely they're born-again Amigans, Bill McEwen never was one in the first place. If you've seen any of the early interviews you'll know what I mean.

_________________
You know when you've been JackAttacked!

@takemehomegrandma

Those definitions are old and could have changed just not making it to the old contract. The SE/XE boards could have been agreed upon in an email we haven't seen yet or just by some oral agreement.

If Amiga Inc didn't have an agreement with Hyperion/Eyetech about these boards (not from Escena) they should have objected to them being sold instead of speaking positively about them in public.

Amiga clearly accepted the fact these boards where sold and marketed as AmigaOne-SE and AmigaOne-XE. Suggesting very much that a written or oral contract have been made with Mr. Redhouse from Eyetech.

_________________

@SpaceDruid

Quote:

You have to remember this is the lawyers playing silly buggers, not the clients.

In my experience lawyers are just like weapons, they can be used in several ways and for different purposes. The hand still pulls the trigger. Just because there are lawyers involved does not make all this trickery happen. Most impotantly, it can damage you case and is resorted to when your arguments are weak.

If you are not controlling your legal team you'll soon run into trouble with bad contracts, broken deals, souered relationships and lawsuits. Sounds like some people we know?

_________________
You know when you've been JackAttacked!

@Thread

Reason for speed on one side or delay on the other side
If this legal action fails then Clause 2.08 of the Original agreement may be ticking still. (Moss Pdf page 14).
Due to explode in June 2007 if OS4.0 was "released" December 2006.

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

@JackAttack

Quote:

JackAttack wrote: The cheap trick going for the expedited discovery could only cause them to lose initiative and, in a jury trial, face. Especially since they have not managed to do it correctly according to international law. Do they really think Hyperion is completely ignorant and incapable? I think it will be harder for them to argue a morally just cause. The moral aspect too seems more and more important to AI, as this attempt indicates they are aware their claims are weak.

After looking at the contract, I would say yes to your question. Where has AInc shifted their emphasis to the moral ground? Have they come out with a new statement after the court filing?

@JackAttack

Quote:

I can't see this lawsuit solving anything, and that might not be what AI want anyway. The most likely outcome, when the arguments on both sides partially cancel each other out, is striking a deal. Neither party will be in a position enabling them to move forward with their plans. There has been so much development into OS4 in excess of the original contract. That work builds on Amiga's IP. That does not mean AI own it, just that it can't be used without the consent of AI.

The contract between the two parties stated that Hyperion was allowed to market OS4 once it was released, thus recouping development costs etc, and presumablly a profit. The contract also gave hyperion the license to develop the OS through all iterations from OS4.0 to OS4.99 etc.
The delays in the OS were outside Hyperions control, licenses, hardware etc.
During that time they continued to develop their own product OS4.
In many cases it was developed further than the original specs, but using this 'limbo' time the extra development meant a more complete and saleable product.
All along Hyperion have refered anyone to AInc for a license, thsy have allways stated that the OS is regictered to Amiga Inc, and developed by them under license. As a company developing a marketable software product Hyperion's actions are sensible.

AInc have recinded the original agreement, with a version of events which contradicts the communitys version of ewvents. Their evidence includes unsigned contracts, Bill & Fleecy's impressions, rather than contractual facts.

Considering AInc's experience's when the BBRV trial was going on, they haven't learnt anything from the way Gary Hare used the forum's and internet to provide evidence for his court case, and in my opinion AInc's own statements contradict their own court submissions.

I think AInc is trying to stop Hyperion marketing a very polished OS, because they didn't read/understand the contract they signed.

I actually don't see any evidence of AInc having any funds, the Kent Centre is an announcement of intention, the new hardware is also an announcement of an intention. Until there is evidence of money actually being spent, I will be of the opinion that AInc are in need of funds, and this court case is all about who should earn money from the sale of OS4.

_________________
Peter Swallow.
A1XEG3-800 [IBM 750FX PowerPC], running OS4.1FE, using ac97 onboard sound.

"There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't."

@ikir

Quote:

ikir wrote: @CodeSmith Quote: CodeSmith wrote: @takemehomegrandma What? you're saying it's not true? interesting how you've been a critic of Amiga Inc for years, and when they sue Hyperion, you're suddenly on their side. Come on man, be honest. Eh eh because Hyperion is enemy numer 1

Well if they are found in court to owe AInc OS4, remove the smiley. If they have gone out and made a deal with ACube in violation I will not support them or ACube! If AInc is found to be trying to short change Hyperion then the reverse is true. I think the future for one is certainly in doubt.

Hmm.. When exactly was McBill's get legal Amiwest speech

_________________
Power Mac G4 "Quicksilver 2002"
800Mhz, 1.5GB RAM, Radeon 8500
MorphOS 2.7 (Registered)
$225 total spent!

@CodeSmith

Quote:

What? you're saying it's not true? interesting how you've been a critic of Amiga Inc for years, and when they sue Hyperion, you're suddenly on their side. Come on man, be honest.

I'm as honest as anyone can be, and I'm *not* picking any side. To me it does not matter the slightest who wins (I'm not particulary fond of any of the two combatants) but it will be an interesting journey until this is settled. I'm here for the popcorn!

@CodeSmith

Quote:

What? you're saying it's not true? interesting how you've been a critic of Amiga Inc for years, and when they sue Hyperion, you're suddenly on their side. Come on man, be honest.

Let me take the roll of devil's advocate here. Weren't a very large number of users here only interested in AmigaOS because it was thought to be the legal, official OS? Is it not true many disliked MorphOS simply because it was (improperly) called "illegal" and was not the official OS?

Soo.. After many years of brand loyalty some people here are siding with Hyperion despite the fact this lawsuit looks like a slam dunk and OS4 is truly an illegal product? Why again do they still to this day dislike MorphOS?

Legality and business ethics are often 2 different things, don't get me wrong. But you must admit the case against Hyperion looks air tight from a legal standpoint.

Again, devil's advocate. nothing more, nothing less.

_________________
Power Mac G4 "Quicksilver 2002"
800Mhz, 1.5GB RAM, Radeon 8500
MorphOS 2.7 (Registered)
$225 total spent!

@Swoop

An all inclusive: yes! That's the way I see it, too.

@ikir

Quote:

Eh eh because Hyperion is enemy numer 1

Wrong, I don't see Hyperion as some "enemy", not at all. That is a way too strong word. I'm in no way involved with Hyperion, so I am neither friend, nor enemy.

But I must say I watch with at least *some* amusement at what happens to them now. I mean, how ironic isn't it that, after all the years of persistent FUD campaigns online about "MorphOS being illegal" (which always was completely untrue), Hyperion can now end up in a situation where "Hyperion's OS4 is illegal" (which then can considered as completely true).

A school example of "karma is real" and "aggression comes back to you"!

@JackAttack

Quote:

Bringing that old superceeded contract into the lawsuit could be percieved as "making stuff up", as it simply and obviously is not true and just a rather easily refutable trick to confuse the court. Small wonder AI is going for a jury trial. Their whole case is built on distortions, if not direct lies.

That "old contract" as you put it is the very foundation for the whole "Amiga One Partners" cooperation, including the whole OS4 development. It is that contract that defines what shall be done, what shall not be done, who will do what, etc. It's the only document there is, and legally it is still just as valid today as it was the day it was signed.

Claiming that the OS4 design goals would be closer to what MorphOS is than what was specified in the contract, would be making things up.

Claiming that the development time would be 5 years instead of 5 months as specified in the contract, would be making things up.

Claiming that there is no buy-back clause when it's clearly outlined in the contract, would be making things up.

Claiming that Amiga Inc does not have any rights to components from third party contractors when the contract both say that number of contractors must be a minimum (which Hyperion blatantly ignored), Hyperion shall secure Amiga Inc's rights to source code where possible and binaries otherwise, as well as Hyperion must protect Amiga Inc from any claims of IP and copyright infringements from third party (and others), would be making things up.

However, quoting a text from the contract that is both written and signed by all involved parties, is not making things up.

Eyetech and Hyperion decided to ignore the contract years ago and do something else than what was agreed upon, but that does *not* make the contract "old and superseded". In fact, the reason to why Hyperion now finds themselves in this situation, is because they have ignored the contract. The problem here is not the contract (no matter its age), the problem is Hyperions actions after it was signed. It's their past decisions that now comes back to haunt them...

@takemehomegrandma

Some car analogy:

Amiga Inc signed a contract to have an engine tuned and gave Hyperion the blueprints for the engine. Hyperion not only tuned the eninge, but rebuilt it completely and built an entire car around it. Amiga Inc likes the car and want to have the entire car including all blueprints.

Some people think this is fair, some people, like myself, think it's insane. The only sensible claim from Amiga Inc would be the tuned engine including blueprints. If they want anything else (i.e. things not part of the original contract) they need to license them separately.

Just my 2 cents...

Last edited by AmiDog on 10-May-2007 at 01:16 PM.

@takemehomegrandma

Are you being paid by AmigaInc now?
You know nothing about what other contracts there could have been made that superceed the old one.

The fact that Bill have never officially talked against the A1 board from Eyetech seems to indicate some level of agreement whether written on paper or not. There is no way he could say he was not aware of the ongoing sales or the fact that it was Teron(?) based and not from Escena.

I'm not so sure who's going to win this one, but the losers will be the OS4/Amiga community, thats for sure.

_________________