@Geennaam

Quote:

And how does this help AmigaInc?

In one respect Amiga Inc looks like they want to eliminate any questions about who owns and controls the IP. Winning the court case to yank Hyperion's license and/or driving them bankrupt would go far to make their point. As you say though, they may loose access to OS4 sources at the same time. Do they care about that any more, do they hope to beat the sources out of Hyperion with the threat of bankrupcy, are guys in India already writting OS5?

With the Itec case, they seem to be trying to beat Hyperion down and still get OS4. But I'll have to leave these deeper topics and analysis to others on the thread. It's too much for me spin in my head when I'm not being paid like a lawyer to keep up.

Plaz

@_Steve_

Quote:

_Steve_ wrote: @Thread You have to love page 31 of docket52a: Seller: Itec LLC Pentti Kouri Managing Partner Purchaser: KMOS Inc. Pentti Kouri President Acknowledged and agreed to by Monrepos LLC: Pentti Kouri Managing Partner

Yep it appeared before in the Amiga Delaware exhibits as well. Still as funny now as it was then IMHO!

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

On a side note, how does Amiga invoke Itec being first creditors for not needing Eyetech approval if Amiga #1 never got into bankruptcy? Insolvency alone doesn't allow the kind of repercussions one get from bankruptcy

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

@pixie

Your right.

I think I understand what you’re saying now, because it in breach of the original contract, Eyetech loses there right as an AmigaOne partner (If no AmigaOne partner alone has exclusive right), if the second contract is valid , but I do think Eyetech needs to bring this on the table not Hyperion.

Last edited by NutsAboutAmiga on 11-Jul-2007 at 08:19 PM.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @Geennaam 1) Hyperion needs to get in contact whit Eyetech and from an alliance, to protect the right to use AmigaOS, they need Eyetech to agree to use the AmigaOS brand whit standalone version of AmigaOS4, because Hyperion do not have an explicit right to the AmigaOS name. 2) Hyperion most prove that Amiga Inc / Itec own Hyperion money for past work, and that the transferee is invalid. 3) Hyperion most prove that Amiga Inc (w) where insolvent at the time.

1) Why would it be in Eyetech's power to decide how Hyperion may use Amiga's trademarks? Either Hyp win their case or they dont.

2a) Amiga cant possibly owe Hyp money, cause all contracts are "pay first, then work", thus Amiga cant accrue any debt.

2b) Yes, this seems to be their only chance. However Itec -> KMOS is almost irrelevant now, because of lawsuit 2. And if the Amiga lawyer is correct, then the Amiga W -> Itec transfer isnt voidable even if it were done without permission.

3) Well, in theory, yes. How do you suppose you prove someone was insolvent 4 years ago? What new information could have possibly made Hyp suddenly think Amiga W was insolvent? Bill admitted that Amiga was unable to pay at some time, true, yet he also named assests, thus Amiga wasnt actually insolvent. Morever the term insolvent isnt actually defined in the contract and neither in law.

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: On a side note, how does Amiga invoke Itec being first creditors for not needing Eyetech approval if Amiga #1 never got into bankruptcy? Insolvency alone doesn't allow the kind of repercussions one get from bankruptcy

Cause such an security transfer is possible whenever the first secured creditor choses to invoke it. Even to the degree that the company loosing the asset may cease to function.

@NutsAboutAmiga

I agree that if Eyetech loses rights, only Eyetech itself, not Hyperion, may sue .. both of Itec and Hyperion. On the other hand, Eyetech's rights were'nt really harmed, since software is solely Hyp's part of the deal.

@Ketzer

Quote:

On the other hand, Eyetech's rights were'nt really harmed, since software is solely Hyp's part of the deal.

But the software does belong to Eyetech too.

Article I defines who the Amiga One Partners are:

"Amiga One Partners" means Eytech and Hyperion collectively;


and then section 2.01 says what they own:

2.01 Appointment. Amiga hereby grants the Amiga One Partners a right and license to use and modify the Software and an exclusive right and license to market and distribute OS 4 as a standalone version ...etc.. Amiga furthermore grants the Amiga One Partners a right and license to use the Amiga trademarks in conjunction with the Amiga One. etc...


Just as it gives Hyperion rights to use the name in conjuction with hardware. Not just Eyetech.

_________________
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

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: Hyperion??? When did they take "ownership"?? I think they are missing a signature on the contact? If Amiga Inc, didn't own the code any more then it now belongs to the "Amiga One Partners" and I doubt that Hyperion could just sell it with out Eytech's signature. They could try and they could certainly sign a contract, but that doesn't make it valid. I think the 2003 contract is totally invalid just because of that one point.

But if its not valid, then Hyperion committed fraud against Eyetech and Itec, and both companies can sue them about it. Eyetech because they were attempting to take away there rights with the contract, and Itec because they sold them something that they legally couldnt sell. Thats what I have been saying for weeks now. Either its a legal transfer or Hyperion gets sued for Fraud, which would be big penalties. Thats why Hyperion really isnt arguing that the Itec transfer is illegal, because there are huge penalties for that.
-Tig

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

Amiga Inc. created the first violation by not providing the source code to 3.5 and 3.9.
Eyetech created the second violation by not providing the Escenda-based AmigaOne board.

The contract should have been re-written at either point.

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote: Amiga Inc. created the first violation by not providing the source code to 3.5 and 3.9. Eyetech created the second violation by not providing the Escenda-based AmigaOne board. The contract should have been re-written at either point.

Hyperion shouldnt have signed the contract with Itec without addressing those issues, once they did that, there ability to recover money for those violations became hard if not impossible.
-Tig

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

@umisef
The documents are available on Justia now so you can save some bandwidth.

_________________
ExecSG Team Lead

you signed a contract whose terms are not abuses, you have to respect the contract.
If both sides have not respected the contract, what next ?
Plus, Hyperion should have accepted the 2M$ from Ainc cause now, Ainc is going to sue them till death.

@fairlanefastback

I'm supposing you've taken a good look at Pentti Kouri's connections starting with Hakia. They seem to go all over the world, via associated directors, the connections being both commercial and academic, but who are the other two directors of Amiga Inc?

Noel

@Ketzer

Quote:

Cause such an security transfer is possible whenever the first secured creditor choses to invoke it. Even to the degree that the company loosing the asset may cease to function.

Right when did it happen? Given the fact that Amiga already had an pendent case of debt against them, perhaps it has to happen at 'day light', so to speak... and if it was indeed so where were the docments explicitly saying it? Perhaps Amiga had forgotten to add to the process...

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

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @Ketzer Quote: Cause such an security transfer is possible whenever the first secured creditor choses to invoke it. Even to the degree that the company loosing the asset may cease to function. Right when did it happen? Given the fact that Amiga already had an pendent case of debt against them, perhaps it has to happen at 'day light', so to speak... and if it was indeed so where were the docments explicitly saying it? Perhaps Amiga had forgotten to add to the process...

It happened April 23, 2003, according to everyone who has talked about it.
-Tig

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

@NoelFuller

Quote:

NoelFuller wrote: @fairlanefastback I'm supposing you've taken a good look at Pentti Kouri's connections starting with Hakia. They seem to go all over the world, via associated directors, the connections being both commercial and academic, but who are the other two directors of Amiga Inc? Noel

We don't really know if they even exist for starters. Let alone who they are if there really are other board members. To me it seemed more likely to be a stalling device for Kent and the media. But who knows. Some good guesses if the positions do indeed exist would be Ryszard Krauze since his investment through Prokom yielded him a board seat on Hakia, why not Amiga for which they invested in similarily around the same time? It would fit the "guy traveling in Europe" scenario decently. The other guess, if I were to guess, would be John Grzymala, the Seceratary of Itec, accountant at least at one time to Amiga we think, involved with the other Pennti firm Tachyon, and also a Board member and CFO at Hakia. He seems to take care of much of the financial paperwork for some of Pentti's firms.

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

@fairlanefastback

Thanks. I thought I was just not getting there on Google. Maybe that Hakia search engine will be useful after all.

Noel

@all

_________________
After a decade away from the scene, I am back!

@Amilord

Quote:

Amilord wrote: you signed a contract whose terms are not abuses, you have to respect the contract. If both sides have not respected the contract, what next ? Plus, Hyperion should have accepted the 2M$ from Ainc cause now, Ainc is going to sue them till death.

All these numbers thrown around are so odd. There are so few interested users. $10 million to name an arena, $2 million to buy Hyperion. Hyperion claiming they spent $1.1 million or whatever on the OS. All for what? None of us are getting any younger here. And most users who write in regard to potential prices of things seem to balk if they are too much above PC/Mac prices.

So many games seem to be going on and we talk talk talk about the details of how the game is being played by two foolish sides. Instead I wish we could band together to just call them idiots and let them know we aren't going to buy jacks**t unless they start behaving.

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