@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: @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.

1) true
2) possibly true.
3) the letter is to Garry and Kouri and is interesting because he says he can issue the receipt to Itec or KMOS, yet now, they didnt agree to do business with KMOS.
4) We havent seen such a receipt, though it may or may not exist
5) Thats what the 2001 contract calls out in section 2.06 verbatim.

-Tig

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

@AmigaHeretic

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: 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!

Except unless we believe the OS was done in December 2004 story, then they did pay on time.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

Except unless we believe the OS was done in December 2004 story, then they did pay on time. -Tig

??? Well, it was a hypothetical comment based on was Spectre660 was saying.

How could they "have paid on time" no matter when the OS was done "IF" they never even came up with the full amount? That doesn't even make sense. I'm sure my credit card company won't charge me a late charge if I make part of my monthly payment! Yeah right!

Last edited by AmigaHeretic on 16-Jul-2007 at 07:44 AM.
Last edited by AmigaHeretic on 16-Jul-2007 at 07:40 AM.

_________________
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

@Tigger

Does it not matter at all that the 2001 contract was for a totally different kind of
OS4 than later appeared for a totally new hardware platform (not a classic upgrade
anymore)?

It seems clear enough to me that Amiga Inc (any flavour) accepted that the
development took a while longer because of this. Why else wait until 2007 to sue
Hyperion? If there was a problem they could have sued in 2002-2003 already?

This seems to me to that both parties accepted a new development end time
orally. But Hyperion stupidly (IMHO) didn't make a new contract for the buyout/in,
or whatever, amount. $25 000 is a joke really for all the amount of time put into this
project.

_________________
/Harry

[SOLD] µA1-C - 750GX 800MHz - 512MB - Antec Aria case

Avatar by HNL_DK!

@Tigger

Quote:

Except unless we believe the OS was done in December 2004 story, then they did pay on time. -Tig

Important thing about the lawyers leter from November 2006:

It could indicate that Amiga (D) consider Amiga OS 4.0 complete by this time
due to its content. It is implied in the contract that the Source code is handed over when the OS is done if payment is made within 6 Months.

When did Amiga (D) consider it done ?
The previous release was update #4 .Release date Febuary 2006

Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-Jul-2007 at 12:42 PM.
Last edited by Spectre660 on 16-Jul-2007 at 12:01 PM.

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

@Tigger

Quote:

Except unless we believe the OS was done in December 2004 story, then they did pay on time. -Tig

When was a "full" $25,000.00 paid by ?
When was OS4.0 "Done" ?

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

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: @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

Right. For that matter, I could re-assemble Exec (68k) and port it to PPC.
This is my point from before of why ExecSG is owned by the Friedens. They looked, called it junk and did a complete re-write AND enhanced it. If push comes to shove, they can submit to ITEC/KMOS a direct port to {insert whomever wants to claim to be Amiga Inc. here} and they will have a 12-17 year old kernal ported to PPC for the over-priced sum of $25000. No memory protection, no advanced memory allocation. Have fun claiming to be a modern OS without those features.

{insert whomever wants to claim to be Amiga Inc. here} will not have their cake AND eat it too. Even if they win - they lose. The Friedens can then sell enhancements to PPC-AROS, or TeamMorphOS or start their own OS company.

@Lou

Nice theory, but ......

- the 25000$ was not just for ExecSG, it was for the whole OS

- sure Amino can't just demand ExecSG from the Friedens, but that doesn't mean they would be free to anything with it

Cos:

- The Friedens were contacted (direct or indirect) to rewrite/port AOS to PPC.

- They did get the sources (officially even)

- Their product is somewhat compatible with OS3.x

Burden of proove would be on their shoulders, and it might be quite difficult to proove that there never was a single line of orginal code inside ExecSG.

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

@thread

Another day, another court document...

Document (53) filed by Hyperion/Kinsel is available on PACER now:

"HYPERION’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO JOIN ITEC, LLC AS A COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT" (9 pages)

@hatschi

this will be intressting :)

_________________
I was a ZX Spectrum owner....

@Spectre660
Quote:

When was a "full" $25,000.00 paid by ? When was OS4.0 "Done" ?

$ 25,000.

When was an official notice from Hyperion sent to other contract members notifying them that the OS was done and they have met their contractual commitment? It hasn't. So any time frame for money to change hands "technically" is not up, or even started. If I hire / contract you to for a project it is up to YOU to notify me of its completion.

When was OS 4 "Done". It isn't yet. Hyperion hasn't notified anyone it was finished, except they did notify the world of "Final" late last year.

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@hatschi

Quote:

"HYPERION’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO JOIN ITEC, LLC AS A COUNTERCLAIM DEFENDANT" (9 pages)

Wow, that's a nice one. Who can spot the sleight of hand? It's beautifully done, I gotta say :)

@wolfeRe

having worked in software development for nearly 20 years, I would just say that many people have differing ideas of what the following means:

ALPHA

ALPHA QUALITY

BETA

BETA 2 Release

Gamma Release

Release Candidate 0

RC0

RC1

RC2

RC3

GOLD

GOLD MASTER

Final

Release

Release Quality

BUG-FREE

These terms are rarely ever defined with everyone considering it means the same thing within contract law. Most companies who write licensing and contracts today have to define tems like these down to the letter because one persons view on this is rarely another, including different states, laws, federal laws, and international law.

The reality is no one can really say in a situation like this that "final" or whatever works. People in the software industry have been known for years to say well this isn't "done" to avoid paying money and because of the vaguery involved with terms get away with it.

So I really don't hold with that argument at all that folks are making here.. Just because you didn't agree doesn't mean something isn't done. They should have started out with agreed upon definitions of this stuff in writing. Any smart company does this who has any clue about development. They did this stuff back in the old Commodore days, but not now? It really just shows bad communication and lack of leadership, or the fact that this kinda thing was done "on-purpose" knowing that they could use this later as an issue..

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: ??? Well, it was a hypothetical comment based on was Spectre660 was saying. How could they "have paid on time" no matter when the OS was done "IF" they never even came up with the full amount? That doesn't even make sense. I'm sure my credit card company won't charge me a late charge if I make part of my monthly payment! Yeah right!

This is the payments we know about :

1) McEwen wires $2500
2) Tachyon wires $2250 which was supposed to be $2500
3) Itec wires $20,000

KMOS asks for the code, Hyperion says they owe $7200 more so
4) KMOS wires $7200

KMOS asks for the code again, Hyperion says they owe $8850 more so
5) KMOS wires $8850

Hyperion claims in court that money from Tachyon, McEwen, KMOS doesnt count towards the 25K, that was for other things (despite KMOS having also paid lots of money for the Arctic contract as well).

6) Itec sends a check for $25,000 to Hyperion that Hyperion doesnt cash before 6 months from the Hyperion "It's done" claim.

So the money has been paid, the money was paid too late is the current claim, but its interesting that Hyperion has its lawyers asking for the money, and then 8 months after it was paid say that money was way too late, in fact it was a year too late when asked you to send it to us according to our new timeline, thats why its not going to work, if you ask someone to pay a bill and they promptly pay it, saying they were a year too late and there is nothing they can do isnt going to work in a courtroom.
-Tig

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: @Tigger Quote: Except unless we believe the OS was done in December 2004 story, then they did pay on time. -Tig When was a "full" $25,000.00 paid by ? When was OS4.0 "Done" ?

In reverse order, the only time they publically claimed it was done was December 26, 2006, so I would say then, though I'm not sure I'd go into a court and stake my reputation that code there meets what is called out in Annex I, its superior in several aspects, its also inferior in several aspects. As for when the full $25K was paid, I think we can safely say the $7200 payment in September of 2006 definitely completed it, the following $8850 in early December pushed it even further and of course the $25K check before 6 months had elapsed from December 2006 should remove all doubt.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

KMOS asks for the code, Hyperion says they owe $7200 more so 4) KMOS wires $7200 KMOS asks for the code again, Hyperion says they owe $8850 more so 5) KMOS wires $8850

Tig
these dates are crucial to the Arguments.

It was Amiga (D) not KMOS.

date from the documentation
19 Sep 2006 and 21Nov 2006

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

@umisef

Quote:

Wow, that's a nice one. Who can spot the sleight of hand? It's beautifully done, I gotta say :)

Have not seen the PDF yet but HYperion's lawyer give me the impression that these are the kinds of things that he does for a living.

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: @Tigger Important thing about the lawyers leter from November 2006: It could indicate that Amiga (D) consider Amiga OS 4.0 complete by this time due to its content. It is implied in the contract that the Source code is handed over when the OS is done if payment is made within 6 Months.

What in this do you consider AI saying the OS is done, in fact they say in the letter the OS is not yet complete as point a & b (second page). And I find it interesting that Ben is asking for $8850 for the buy(in/out/around) in an Oct 10, 2006 letter when they currently claim in court that AI's opportunity to carry out this function was over in June of 2005.
-Tig

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: @Tigger Tig these dates are crucial to the Arguments. It was Amiga (D) not KMOS.

Amiga(D) is KMOS.

Quote:

date from the documentation 19 Sep 2006 and 21Nov 2006

And the dates really arent crucial. Unless Gregory S. Shatan of Reed Smith LLP is delusional on Oct 10, 2006 Ben Hermans sent a letter on behalf of Hyperion requesting $8850 to complete the buyback. Either that was a fraudulent offer, or the time had not expired (which is different then the current claim). AI(D) (ie KMOS) sent the money and still didnt get the code.
-Tig

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

@Samwel

Quote:

Samwel wrote: @Tigger Does it not matter at all that the 2001 contract was for a totally different kind of OS4 than later appeared for a totally new hardware platform (not a classic upgrade anymore)?

No, in fact that probably works againt Hyperion and not for them.

Quote:

It seems clear enough to me that Amiga Inc (any flavour) accepted that the development took a while longer because of this. Why else wait until 2007 to sue Hyperion? If there was a problem they could have sued in 2002-2003 already?

Because they need the OS for something now and Hyperion poached Acube, so they sued them. It didnt make any sense to sue them until after they had paid for the OS, because they couldnt get anything.

Quote:

This seems to me to that both parties accepted a new development end time orally. But Hyperion stupidly (IMHO) didn't make a new contract for the buyout/in, or whatever, amount. $25 000 is a joke really for all the amount of time put into this project.

$25K was a joke amount if they had finished it on time, thats the point. Its a throwaway amount, Hyperion (like H&P before them) thought they could pay for the OS by selling copies of it to the Amiga community. Like H&P they found out that you cant pay for OS development with a few 1000 unit sales.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 16-Jul-2007 at 04:29 PM.

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