@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @stew Quote: stew wrote: I think you missed it here Tigger: You misread what I wrote. I think the owner of the house, owns the pool, in fact I know the owner of the house owns the pool, in fact I would likely get lots of additions to the house over that particular mixup if it happened at my house. Pixie thinks the builder of House and Pool gets to swim in the pool and the owner doesnt or something like that, I was disagreeing with him. -Tig I knew you understood, I should have put a smiley after "you missed it here". It is Pixie that truly misses it. Why people support Hyperion in this I do not know. Where is the moral outrage? They are acting as bad or worse than AInc. To me they deserve to go down, it is just a shame they will take some good people down with them. Some people saw the ip ownership struggle coming along time ago. The majority of those feel Hyperion is in the wrong. I have to agree. "Besides, if you paid 5 million dollars for something, would you accept other people running off with your IP without putting up a fight? " Ben Hermans

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: ... No, Itec didnt break the law, Itec signed a contract in good faith, and paid money in good faith, ...

Are you serious?
"in good faith"???


They are actively involved in AInc(W)'s fraudulent game to get rid of debts and you dare to call it "in good faith"???

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @Ketzer Quote: There is absolutely nothing one can do about it, no matter what features I add on my own, they automatically belong to the owner of the IP. I wont be discussing magic with you...

You keep paying me and I keep not delivering sounds more like magic to me. How did they get AInc to keep sending them money?

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @Tigger Quote: Tigger wrote: ... No, Itec didnt break the law, Itec signed a contract in good faith, and paid money in good faith, ... Are you serious? "in good faith"??? They are actively involved in AInc(W)'s fraudulent game to get rid of debts and you dare to call it "in good faith"???

Prove It ! ! !

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@wolfe

Quote:

Prove It ! ! !

I bet he's not the same kind of defense Hyperions has and as such he don't have too ... :-p

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

@umisef

Isn't it strange that Bill McEwen *acknowledges* that ExecNG belongs to the Friedens and don't dispute it?

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

@pixie

Quote:

pixie wrote: @umisef Isn't it strange that Bill McEwen *acknowledges* that ExecNG belongs to the Friedens and don't dispute it?

Not really? Its Hyperions fault that they drafted and signed ridiculous contracts with their subcontractors (no time scale, no best efforts, no rights secured, ...). However Hyperion can be forced to remedy their faults, e.g. buy the source from the Friedens. The Friedens themselves cant do anything else with the code, cause its contract work based on Amiga's IP.

@Ketzer

Cause its contract work based on Amiga's IP.

If it was den ExecSG does not belong to the Friedens, ExecSG is new component and there for does not belong to Amiga Inc or Hyperion until Friedens are compensated for there work by Hyperion, Hyperion / Friedens can do what ever they like whit it, for example mix up whit components from AROS.

That’s how Coral and Novell distributes there software whit Linux.

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: Hyperion / Friedens can do what ever they like whit it, for example mix up whit components from AROS.

Hyperion can offcourse to nothing with it. they were contracted for writing/porting AmigaOS and them adding stuff to an Amiga-clone would open a whol different can of worms (criminal charges even).

The Friedens might be able to something with it, but they were inderectly contracted for AOS-work, the did get the code so any court would put the burden of proof onto their shoulders.


Making sure that the other side can't proove the use of AOS-sources may be possible, proofing that there never was such an use is impossible.

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

@pixie

Quote:

Isn't it strange that Bill McEwen *acknowledges* that ExecNG belongs to the Friedens and don't dispute it?

No, McBill acknowledges that the contract between Hyperion and the Friedens does not (at this point in time) transfer the rights in THE FRIEDEN'S IP (this is the important part) to Hyperion, and thus by inference not to Amiga. This is only obvious, because Amiga has no contractual relationship with the Friedens, so there simply is nothing giving them those rights.

ExecNG (or actually ExecSG :) is not solely the Friedens' IP, though. It is derived from Amiga's IP. Thus, as far as ExecSG is concerned, Amiga and the Friedens are joint IP owners. Neither side can use it without the other's approval. That's a far cry from "belongs to the Friedens"...


In the house analogy, it would be the you, the contractor, subcontracting the lounge room and the garage to a third party, on a "delivery on payment" basis, only to then fail to pay. I, the customer, would then find myself without rights to the garage or lounge room; On the other hand, the subcontractor is also not allowed to park his car in the garage, or have a party in the lounge room, without me approving.

Of course, we'd both end up suing the hell out of the original contractor --- me for failing to deliver the house I contracted for (and for causing disputed property to be located on my plot, blocking me from using it for the things I bought it for), and the subcontractor for failing to pay up, and for putting the boat anchor of an expensive yet unusable, unsellable, uncashable piece of building around his neck.

@Kronos

Well if I sell you a watch and you give it back to me, then I will sell it to some one else, if Amiga Inc start arguing that this was not what Hyperion where contracted to do, we don’t won’t it, then ExecSG becomes excluded in some way, then way not sell it to some one else?

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

@NutsAboutAmiga

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: Well if I sell you a watch and you give it back to me, then I will sell it to some one else, if Amiga Inc start arguing that this was not what Hyperion where contracted to do, we don’t won’t it, then ExecSG becomes excluded in some way, then way not sell it to some one else?

Cause .. it .. is .. based .. on .. Amiga's .. IP.

@stew

Quote:

stew wrote: @Tigger "Besides, if you paid 5 million dollars for something, would you accept other people running off with your IP without putting up a fight? " Ben Hermans

-Tig

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

@Manu

Quote:

Manu wrote: Maybe a Project Manager would have been of good use, Amiga Inc ? Maybe we could have avoided this mess then ? ..but then again I guess no one at Amiga Inc had a clue anyway what needed to be done so it would have been a wasted effort.

Well when you hire a poor tech writer as your CTO, your technology is liable to suffer.
-Tig

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

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @Tigger Are you serious? "in good faith"??? They are actively involved in AInc(W)'s fraudulent game to get rid of debts and you dare to call it "in good faith"???

First of all this thread is about the lawsuit in New York between Itec and Hyperion, very little of what AI(w) did is involved.

What we know Itec did.

1) Bought Amiga rights from Gateway for Amino (and made themselves first secured creditor) (totally legal)

2) Exercised there first secured creditor rights (totally legal, and AI(w) is a solvent company worth alot of money when they are done, so not sure why you think this is fraudulent).

3) Signed a contract with Hyperion for delivery of OS 4.0.

4) Paid Hyperion for the delivery (possibly not enough)

5) Sold the OS to KMOS for almost 8M shares of KMOS.

6) Paid Hyperion more money when they said in court that they had not been paid sufficient amounts and tried to get the OS from them to give to KMOS.

7) Sued Hyperion in NY court for delivery of the OS.

Where is this fraudulent item that Itec has done, and if this isnt about Itec, then its not on topic.
-Tig

Last edited by Tigger on 19-Jul-2007 at 09:43 PM.

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

@umisef

Quote:

ou'd probably get less sympathy if I paid you in 2003, and in 2007 you are still putting the finishing touches on the garage, with me still living in a trailer.

Just like Tigger you don't get it Umisef. Back to RL-Mode:
The 25.000$ are NO PAYMENT!!!
You and Tigger repeateadly lying about this fact of the original 2001 Contract is the most anoying thing in your rages against anybody not totally agreeing to your views.

Your analogy is no better than the one you are complaining about.

The payment was the COMPLETE acomplishable revenue of the OS4 sales.

Try it with this little changes:
You found a builder who builds your home for free and you allow him to rent it to people for the first 5 years to regain his cost. After that you just have to pay additionally 25.000$ and the house is yours.
But the construction site you said you would provide completely free and allready connected to water, energy, etc. is part of a forrest and all the trees are still living there quietly as the builder and his crew arrives. As you are no lumberjack and don't know any either, the builder hires a lumberjack crew to cut down the trees.
This takes some time. After that, of course, the builder has to connect the building site to the water and energylines of the city nearby.
More time goes by. In the meantime families usually have two or more cars, so the singleport garage you have planned is not suitable anymore and would cut down the achievable rent for the home. So the builder decides to change the plan to add a two port garage and a additional carport. Also the garden will is planned by him and will be ready whemn construction is finished. He shows you the plans and you are pleased with his work.
The hinderings of the beginning did cost about 2.5 years, as the connection to water and energy had to avoid certain areas to get to the next connectionpoint.
Now the construction is nearly finished after 3.5 years.
Then you get to the construction site and say something like: "What a nice home i will have next year! You know, the spare rooms will be for rent, and with the income I have from it, I can open my own fishing-shop." ...

complete the story yourself, if you wish. But THATS an analogy, which displays the real problems those two companies have atm.

my 2ct.

@Ketzer

Quote:

by Ketzer on 19-Jul-2007 17:04:28 Cause .. it .. is .. based .. on .. Amiga's .. IP.

This argument floats around ALOT,
BUT it's not the fact.

IF it was the fact, THEN there would be absolutly NO UNIX deriverates as NetBSD, Linux in any flavor etc. AS they all behave alike System V or other UNIX Systems which were NO OpenSource but normal OSs which you had to pay for!

So its as simples that: If execSG has been totally rewritten and NO Code from original exec was INCLUDED, THEN its not Amiga(Whatever)s IP. Not even in the US. (see SCO vs. IBM)

And BTW, noone nowhere in the world could take 68k Assembler and paste it somwhere else on a diffrent CPU and could run it.
It's like men giving birth.
It's simply not possible.
And kids, don't get into cars of people promising something like that.

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: 7) Sued Itec in NY court for delivery of the OS.

that should be sued hyperion in NY before anyone else gets confused and starts quoting it

_________________

@Sneaky

Quote:

Sneaky wrote: @Ketzer Quote: by Ketzer on 19-Jul-2007 17:04:28 Cause .. it .. is .. based .. on .. Amiga's .. IP. This argument floats around ALOT, BUT it's not the fact. IF it was the fact, THEN there would be absolutly NO UNIX deriverates as NetBSD, Linux in any flavor etc. AS they all behave alike System V or other UNIX Systems which were NO OpenSource but normal OSs which you had to pay for! So its as simples that: If execSG has been totally rewritten and NO Code from original exec was INCLUDED, THEN its not Amiga(Whatever)s IP. Not even in the US. (see SCO vs. IBM) And BTW, noone nowhere in the world could take 68k Assembler and paste it somwhere else on a diffrent CPU and could run it. It's like men giving birth. It's simply not possible. And kids, don't get into cars of people promising something like that.

the problem is, is that other people believe it is Amigas IP as the source for exec was looked at previous to exec SG being written. it has already been explained this is the difference between AROS exec and exec SG, and why one can be seen as being Amigas IP, and one is not. even if no code was used / included from os3 exec, then as it was not clean room implemented, there is a case for it not being free from amiga incs IP.

_________________

@Sneaky

Quote:

rent it to people for the first 5 years to regain his cost

hyperion could sell whatever they wanted of os4, with no limitation on time. the only limitation was that is had to be for AmigaOne computers.

if hyperion were annoyed that they had to cut down these trees and link up power and water themselves, you would have thought they would have brought it up in the first few years. as they didnt its safe to assume they were ok with doing this extra work. you cant just complain 5 years later.

_________________