@Spectre660

They don't have to be rich. The capacity to deny hard evidence if it conflicts with some attachment is widespread.

Noel

@NoelFuller

Quote:

They don't have to be rich. The capacity to deny hard evidence if it conflicts with some attachment is widespread. Noel

True. But only the rich can afford to do it over and over.

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

I am looking at PDF http://news.justia.com/cases/amigahyperion/370498/26/6.pdf.

Page 2. Definition of "Amiga OS4.0" I see the word "Developed".

Does this past tense mean that OS 4.0 is considered done in MAY 2004 by KMOS ?

I Look at page 6-7 and get a shock.

Article VII
7.01

page 7

"Nothing in this Agreement shall however operate to limit,extend or Modify any party's rights and/or obligations pursuant to the November 3,2001 agreement originally concluded between Amiga inc,Eyetech Group Ltd and Hyperion."

What does this mean ?

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

"Nothing in this Agreement shall however operate to limit,extend or Modify any party's rights and/or obligations pursuant to the November 3,2001 agreement originally concluded between Amiga inc,Eyetech Group Ltd and Hyperion." What does this mean ?

It means thats the number 1 agreement and all contracts come back to the conditions in this main 2001 agreement.

_________________
"The system no longer works " -- Young Anakin Skywalker

@Tigger

Quote:

First of if Itec has purchased the contract then they do no need AI(W) approval for the transfer

Why wouldn't Amiga Inc. be required to sign when Hyperion or Eyetech would be?

If Amiga Inc., didn't need to sign to transfer it to Itec, your saying Hyperion and Eytech could have just sold it to Microsoft or somebody with some real money of they had wanted?

_________________
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

@ChrisH

There are several tools/libraries in OS4 that simply didn't exist under 3.x , so you can bet they're a clean room implementation.

@Interesting

Quote:

It means thats the number 1 agreement and all contracts come back to the conditions in this main 2001 agreement.

looks as if KMOS consider Hyperion to hold the rights to OS4.0 at that point.
Will be interesting to see the first letter from AMIGA(D) demanding the source code from Hyperion.

KMOS did sign a Million dollar share sale agreement before this Hyperion contract which stated that KMOS had full ownership to OS4.0

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

KMOS did sign a Million dollar share sale agreement before this Hyperion contract which stated that KMOS had full ownership to OS4.0

And thats a joke . . 25K only gets Hyperions Code (if any), Binaries for 3rd party code and copy's of the contracts with 3rd party developers for its use. They don't get ownership of everything, UNLESS, they do a complete buyback/buyout.

Thats what I think the 2 million was for but Hyperion
a) was never offered that 2 million
b) wanted more (and AI wasn't going for it)
c) was not willing to sell in accordance with a full buyback

Food for thought: New Hardware

Eyetech and Hyperion are partners in the contract. Hyperion is the OS & Eyetech is the hardware end of this partnership. Hyperion cannot release OS4 for any hardware not designated in the contract without Eyetechs OK. Hyperion kept saying that they were waiting for AI to license new hardware for the OS.

Question: Does AI have the right to give a new harware contract to another party without Eyetechs permission ? ? ?

IMO - they can't, and thats why no contract for new hardware was put forward.
The only way they could do it, is to cancel Eyetechs end of the contract, BUT, that would give Hyperion a free hand at choosing the hardware vendors so long as they did not want to call their hardware Amiga - as that would require a contract from AI.

AI will not do that because Hyperion hasn't lived up to their end of the contract, The BuyIn.

What a mess . . .

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@Spectre660

Quote:

They don't have to be rich. The capacity to deny hard evidence if it conflicts with some attachment is widespread. True. But only the rich can afford to do it over and over.

Ignorance: the state of ignoring that which is known

Noel

@wolfe

was refering to Agreement between KMOS and Tapul S.A.

http://gutjahr.free.fr/temp/amiga_vs_hare/show_case_doc11-05.pdf

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

Part of the trouble is that Garry Hare seems to have kept some informtion/documentation from Penti and Co.

http://gutjahr.free.fr/temp/amiga_vs_hare/show_case_doc09-02.pdf

Page 3. ref The Artic Agreement.
This has the date of the unsigned version submitted with Bill McEwans declaration.The signed version submitted with Everon Carton's declaration is different and has a different date.

Maybe Garry is the bad guy.

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

@AmigaHeretic

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: @Tigger Quote: First of if Itec has purchased the contract then they do no need AI(W) approval for the transfer Why wouldn't Amiga Inc. be required to sign when Hyperion or Eyetech would be?

Because of the transfer from AI(W) to Itec made that a non-issue if they are the successor company in the contract. However Itec became that successor, thats AI(w) approval.

Quote:

If Amiga Inc., didn't need to sign to transfer it to Itec, your saying Hyperion and Eytech could have just sold it to Microsoft or somebody with some real money of they had wanted?

Noone at AI(W) is saying that they did not transfer the contract to Itec. Again you are having Hyperion sue for someone else, they can't do that. AI(w) says that Itec acquired the contract and OS as part of a first secured creditor issue. If thats true, then AI(W) has approved of the transfer by definition. As for the rest, Hyperions claim is basically that they did sell it to microsoft. They say Itec wasnt the successor, but they signed a contract with them anyways and took there money. Thats fraud on there part. There are penalites for fraud I dont think Hyperion and Ben really want to have to endure.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

In addition, I dont believe there is a kickstart that doesnt use any Amiga IP. Thats one of the AROS projects thats been pitched but it hasnt been completed (or maybe even started) at this point. What people on amiga.org are doing are taking 3.1 rom images, replacing the old libraries with new ones and burning new roms, these definitely contain Amiga IP, though its probably legal as long as you keep the rom you pulled the image from. -Tig

OT - sorry.

Well, there is a thread, I couldn't find it but I remember reading it about 6 months ago, where that is what happened - no Amiga libraries in KickStart. All replacements. The user was Motorollin, I believe. What was amazing is how they got rid of all the SetPatch stuff in the startup because things came up patched already and sped up the entire startup process. Even eliminated the warm reboot of 3.9.

@Lou

Quote:

Well, there is a thread, I couldn't find it but I remember reading it about 6 months ago, where that is what happened - no Amiga libraries in KickStart. All replacements.

Still OT..
But the replacements were just the updated devices + libraries from 3.9's ROM Update file.
And not all devs/libs in the Kickstart were updated in 3.5/3.9, so there's still a lot of the original 3.1 ROM that must be used to make a '3.9 ROM'
Or to put it another way, it's still Amiga Inc's+Haage and Partner's IP.

Last edited by Doobrey on 15-Jul-2007 at 06:26 PM.

_________________

@Tigger

Quote:

Noone at AI(W) is saying that they did not transfer the contract to Itec. If thats true, then AI(W) has approved of the transfer by definition.

Are AI allowed to transfer the 2001 contract to another company, I mean isn't that what part of the contract was suppose to protect Hyperion and Eyetech against? They spirit of the contract was that they would get it, not anyone else, if Amiga Inc, (W) went under. It appears Amiga Inc., scammed them and sold all it's assests off to Itec etc.

(yeah I know later Hyperion signed something with Itec but can we focus first on the point, was it even legal for AI to transfer the contract to Itec?)

_________________
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

@AmigaHeretic

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: @Tigger Quote: Noone at AI(W) is saying that they did not transfer the contract to Itec. If thats true, then AI(W) has approved of the transfer by definition. Are AI allowed to transfer the 2001 contract to another company, I mean isn't that what part of the contract was suppose to protect Hyperion and Eyetech against? They spirit of the contract was that they would get it, not anyone else, if Amiga Inc, (W) went under. It appears Amiga Inc., scammed them and sold all it's assests off to Itec etc.

First of all its legal for AI to sell anything, the transfer may or may not have to be approved by the AmigaOne partners as called out in the contract (if its truly a secured creditor situaion, then noone has to approve of it for instance). Secondly the bankruptcy/Insolvency clause even if it were invoked only gets them a continuing license not ownership of anything.

Quote:

(yeah I know later Hyperion signed something with Itec but can we focus first on the point, was it even legal for AI to transfer the contract to Itec?)

Understand that Hyperion at least (though I am guessing that both Eyetech and Hyperion) knew about the Itec deal before it was closed. The AI(w)-Itec deal happened on April 23rd, the Itec-Hyperion deal happened on April 24th, there is no way that AI(w) could sell the OS and work the Itec-Hyperion deal and get it worked out and everyone sign it less then 24 hours later. This entire topic isnt about the transfer but about the 2003 contract. Hyperions current defense appears to be, we did something illegal by selling the OS to Itec who wasnt approved as a successor but please dont punish us for that because we thought they were the successor. As someone said earlier, its the have the cake and eat it too defense and its not going to work. Either Itec was the successor, in which case Hyperion needs to give them the code or show why they dont have to OR Itec isnt the successor and Hyperion committed fraud and needs to be punished financially in civil court and there are possibly other more trying legal obligations that could effect them.
-Tig

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

@wolfe

Quote:

wolfe wrote: @Spectre660 Quote: KMOS did sign a Million dollar share sale agreement before this Hyperion contract which stated that KMOS had full ownership to OS4.0 And thats a joke . . 25K only gets Hyperions Code (if any), Binaries for 3rd party code and copy's of the contracts with 3rd party developers for its use. They don't get ownership of everything, UNLESS, they do a complete buyback/buyout.

Actually thanks to the documents provided by Hyperion we now know they get the code and ownership for Exec-SG, the font engine and Stephans reaction stuff, Richs code, plus there is probably alot of other things they get as part of the buyback.
-Tig

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

@Swoop

Quote:

I thought it was mentioned that the OS3 exec was either in 68k assembler, was just a binary, so they didn't actually see the original source.

If you're looking at assembly code, your're looking at the source. If you only have the binary and you're really, really good at machine language on the platform you're woking with, it's practically like looking at the source. If you aren't a ML guru, then there are utilities that will easily translate binary back to the assembly source. So I'd guess that Hyperion&company read the assem and/or binary well enough to say if it was useful or not. I don't think you can get around the clean room problem if you've "reversed" the binary well enough to read it. Tig and Umisef should be able to correct me on that if I'm wrong.

Plaz

@Thread

Some key facts from the filed documents:

(1) 24th April 2003 Hyperion sign an Agreement in which they say
Hyperion SHALL transfer ownership of OS4.0 to ITEC for RECEIPT of
USD 25,000.00 IN ACCORDANCE WITH the November 1,2001 agreement.

(2) Full US$25,000.00 was not paid by ITEC/Tachyon/McEwan before the sale from ITEC to KMOS on 7th October 2003. They seem to have paid $24,750.00($2250 on 8th April 2003 and $20,000 on 6th May 2006).No more payments were made until 19th September 2006(unconfirmed) and 21st November 2006.

(3)Ben Hermans in his email of 27th March 2004 to Garry Hare states that Hyperion did not know where and to whom to send the receipt to for the money paid.

(4)Receipt is issued to ITEC LLC for US$22,500.00 which should really have been $22,250.00, and backdated to 31 December 2003. No receipt is Issued for the $2,500 that Bill McEwan claims to have sent.

(5) Amiga Delaware lawyer in letter of 21 November 2006 demands OS 4.0 Source and Object code along with Hyperion's ASSIGNMENT of all title and Interest in OS 4.0.

Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-Jul-2007 at 03:35 AM.
Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-Jul-2007 at 03:28 AM.

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

@Spectre660

Ha ha ha!! Maybe they should have been busy keeping track of their payments of a measly $25,000 to buy their own OS instead of making deals to spend $10,000,000.00 to name a hockey stadium.

Oh, I hope what you say are true facts, then I also, hope all the contracts hold up just as Tigger thinks they will, and then Amiga & Itec lose it all just because they couldn't pay their bills on time!! That would be the best outcome I could think off!

_________________
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