Poster | Thread |
Kronos
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 16:46:17
| | [ #441 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 8-Mar-2003 Posts: 2553
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Sneaky
The history of *nix is far far more complicated than the one of AOS.
Linux is a clean-room reimplemantion just like AROS (or MorphOS for that matter).
The free BSDs exist because at the time they spawned form the main UNIX-tree UNIX was distributed under a rather relaxed licence.
Bout that 25000$:
- Hyperion did sign a contract stating that the OS could be bought-back for that price
- Amino did trigger that clause, and Hyperion wrote an receipt for the said sum
- Hyperion never renogigated a new contract, despite extreme need of it
Their is no question wether Hyperion aggreed to sell the OS for that price, and they don't even argue that in court. They do concentrate on side-issues, like was the money really paid and in time, what has to be handed over and who had the right to trigger the clause.
_________________ - We don't need good ideas, we haven't run out on bad ones yet - blame Canada |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 16:46:48
| | [ #442 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote: @umisef
Quote:
ou'd probably get less sympathy if I paid you in 2003, and in 2007 you are still putting the finishing touches on the garage, with me still living in a trailer. |
Just like Tigger you don't get it Umisef. Back to RL-Mode: The 25.000$ 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.
|
The 25.000$ are NO PAYMENT!!!
makes no sense, as the rest of your rambling. Thats not a sentence, I'm not even sure what you are trying to say.
Hyperion signed the 2003 contract and agreed to sell the OS to Itec for $25K, Itec has now paid the $25K, Hyperion has not delivered the OS. Itec has now sued Hyperion in NY to get this contract fulfilled. Thats what this topic is discussing. What fact of the 2001 contract that applies to this contract and lawsuit do you think Bernd and I are lying about? -Tig_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 16:48:18
| | [ #443 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @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.
|
It is the fact, its a fact both Friedens and Ben have admitted too. And your SCO arguement doesnt hold water. -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Spectre660
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 17:36:01
| | [ #444 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 4-Jun-2005 Posts: 3918
From: Unknown | | |
|
| It has been alledged that on infomation and belief that some person or persons unknown have based their arguments on facts that have not been validated.
Last edited by Spectre660 on 19-Jul-2007 at 06:52 PM. Last edited by Spectre660 on 19-Jul-2007 at 05:36 PM.
_________________ Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Ketzer
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 19:43:18
| | [ #445 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 9-Mar-2003 Posts: 245
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @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.
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. |
Not only did they have access to the source, they specifically were contracted to create a part of Amiga OS4. I know you like Hyperion, but youre rewriting history just like Hyperion themselves is currently trying hard to.
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Ketzer
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 19:46:53
| | [ #446 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 9-Mar-2003 Posts: 245
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote:
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.
The payment was the COMPLETE acomplishable revenue of the OS4 sales.
|
Thats no argument, thats just plain wrong and insulting. You obviously live in Happy-Hyperion-Land. Try reading the 2001 contract without your prejudice. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pixie
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 20:47:22
| | [ #447 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal | | |
|
| @Ketzer
Quote:
Not only did they have access to the source, they specifically were contracted to create a part of Amiga OS4. I know you like Hyperion, but youre rewriting history just like Hyperion themselves is currently trying hard to. |
With more results then you or others would like to admit... just wait until the fat lady sings... you might even on the right side! Last edited by pixie on 19-Jul-2007 at 08:48 PM.
_________________ Indigo 3D Lounge, my second home. The Illusion of Choice | Am*ga |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Swoop
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 20:56:12
| | [ #448 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 20-Jun-2003 Posts: 2162
From: Long Riston, East Yorkshire | | |
|
| @Ketzer
Quote:
Ketzer wrote:
You dont get paid for something you weren't supposed to do. If you fail to understand that, discussion is moot. |
Hyperion weren't supposed to be paid for anything!!!!!
They were supposed to recoup the development cost from sales of OS4, a completely different situation to a normal software development contract.
Any development Hyperion did above and beyond the contract was to make the OS a more saleable product, which is their own revenue stream, not AInc's. _________________ 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." |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
jorkany
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 21:04:49
| | [ #449 ] |
|
|
|
Cult Member |
Joined: 1-May-2005 Posts: 920
From: Space Coast | | |
|
| @Swoop Quote:
Hyperion weren't supposed to be paid for anything!!!!!
They were supposed to recoup the development cost from sales of OS4, a completely different situation to a normal software development contract. |
Why didn't they do that then?
_________________ Here for the whimpering end |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Sneaky
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 21:30:15
| | [ #450 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 24-Apr-2007 Posts: 134
From: Franconia/Bavaria/Germany | | |
|
| @Derfs
Quote:
... new exec = Amiga IP argument ...
Quote:
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. |
|
To show once and for all, how weak this "if you look at it, what you do is AInc-IP" opinion is: Here on this board are serveral people who claimed for themselves several times in discussions that they "were on CATS and we knew this or that" or everybody saw the code of exec" "it was known, that it was assembler and not in C" "I'm a better coder than you because ..." and so on. So, if this argument about knowing about IP would hold, everything they coded after they saw the code of someone else, who claims for himself the Intelecual Property of that code, the code would belong to this someone and not them anymore. ay?
So don't read others code, because they could come and take your work, IF this would be the case. Thoughts are free, you know? That's why they call it Copyprotection and not "Don't let others do similar things protection". And as I said in my post before: IF they didn't copy, because it's simply technically not possible, then it's not AInc'S IP anymore ALONE. They can gain it again, of course, by buying it (in the US that is) or get the rights to it (EU/Germany) by buying, but in Germany (and as the Friedens are Germans that would apply IMHO) the one who has DONE it has the IP till eternity, as it is not sellable.
But that's not even something they argue about in front of court, as Bill McEwen has shown the acceptance of this fact already in this E-Mail mentioning the 2Mio$, so what are we argueing about anyway? |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
pixie
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 21:31:14
| | [ #451 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 10-Mar-2003 Posts: 3115
From: Figueira da Foz - Portugal | | |
|
| |
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 21:44:45
| | [ #452 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
But that's not even something they argue about in front of court, as Bill McEwen has shown the acceptance of this fact already in this E-Mail mentioning the 2Mio$, so what are we argueing about anyway?
|
As at least 3 of us keep explaining to you, Exec-SG contains Amigas IP, its IP is also owned by the Friedens brothers (which is what McEwen is saying). Neither company can sell it or give it away without the permission of the other. Thats why Hyperion needs the license provided by the Nov 2001 contract, thats why Itec needs the signover of rights as discussed in section 2.06 as part of the buyback so they can sell the OS to others. Its a basic software IP issue, Ketzer, Bernd and I deal with it probably on a daily basis, so its silly for someone whose comments show a lack of understanding of the principles to be arguing that we are all wrong. What in your background would make me believe that you understand this IP issue better then 3 senior programmers with a combined 40+ years of experience? -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Sneaky
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 21:54:53
| | [ #453 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 24-Apr-2007 Posts: 134
From: Franconia/Bavaria/Germany | | |
|
| @jorkany
Quote:
Quote:
by jorkany on 19-Jul-2007 23:04:49 @Swoop Quote:Hyperion weren't supposed to be paid for anything!!!!! They were supposed to recoup the development cost from sales of OS4, a completely different situation to a normal software development contract. |
Why didn't they do that then? |
Because noone buys a OS without a computer to run it on? Because they only had a licence to sell OS4 bundled with HW? Because the group of people using classic PPC acelerators was measured as to small to accomplish the recoup of investment?
@all There are thousands of possibilities. But all the guys (and gals?) on this forum have to do is "choose sides" and tell others that "they've cosen a side" and then put on those glasses and just don't see what's most likely, but find a way to understand it the other way. Why is that?!!? I haven't choosen a side. I read everything court related there was to read, I made my clues and based on that I did argue here. What do you gain from beeing MorphOS/AmigaInc(W/D)/Hyperion or contra? Nothing, because the real problem and the real world is MUCH more complex to understand and the info we've gained through the official court papers are not the complete case and surely whether the truth nor near the complete real story that happend. Nobody, I repeat NOBODY discussing here has the complete knowledge of all details. Some seem very fond of the fact, that they have nearly full knowledge of the things that got public the last few years, but that's not a complete picture! I'm not even sure the lawyers have this complete picture, on both sides.
So I find it very arrogant, if some people here don't accept, that the information publicly available, leaves room of interpretation and that others find diffrent interpretations more likely. If everything was so clear, there wouldn't be two businesspartners argueing about it in front of a court, don't you think? |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:01:50
| | [ #454 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote:
To show once and for all, how weak this "if you look at it, what you do is AInc-IP" opinion is: Here on this board are serveral people who claimed for themselves several times in discussions that they "were on CATS and we knew this or that" or everybody saw the code of exec" "it was known, that it was assembler and not in C" "I'm a better coder than you because ..." and so on.
|
First of all I think I am the only one on here who has "claimed" I was in CATS, JoannaK was a member, I remember her from BIX but I dont think she's been in this thread. But I never said everyone saw the code for exec or anything like that nor do I believe anyone else has said that. -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Sneaky
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:05:12
| | [ #455 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 24-Apr-2007 Posts: 134
From: Franconia/Bavaria/Germany | | |
|
| @Tigger
Quote:
... issue better then 3 senior programmers with a combined 40+ years of experience? |
Oh, this is such a giving up argument. It sound like three grumpy old men, who weren't allowed to stay in the game, sitting on the balkony laughing and cheering everytime someone on the playing field falls or struggles.
That's sad. I hope you find your happy place again, sometime.
And BTW, what you just said is right, and BTW2 exactly what I have written in my post, so why don't you tell it that way all the time, but keep stating, that ExecSG is AInc's IP? No, don't bother, no answer neccessary. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:08:36
| | [ #456 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote: If everything was so clear, there wouldn't be two businesspartners argueing about it in front of a court, don't you think? |
No, Hyperion either fights with Itec, or has no product to sell and owes over a million to its developers. In addition you just keep coming up with Amiga IP comments, that really has nothing to do with this thread. This thread is about the NY lawsuit between Hyperion and Itec. Even if all of us are competely wrong about the IP, it has nothing to do with this case because this is about Hyperion not delivering the OS to Itec. How is the ownership of Exec-SG involved in that? -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:12:53
| | [ #457 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote: @Tigger
And BTW, what you just said is right,
|
So you have been arguing with us for what reason exactly? And posting off topic?
Quote:
and BTW2 exactly what I have written in my post, so why don't you tell it that way all the time, but keep stating, that ExecSG is AInc's IP?
|
Because it is AI's IP, this may be a nuance of the English language you dont understand, but saying its AI's IP doesnt mean its there exclusively and not one of us has said it is. -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:19:27
| | [ #458 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @Sneaky
Quote:
Sneaky wrote:
No, don't bother, no answer neccessary. |
I also think the moderators should look at you account given its creation date as a potential shill for Hyperion which would be against the TOS of the site. -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Sneaky
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:26:06
| | [ #459 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 24-Apr-2007 Posts: 134
From: Franconia/Bavaria/Germany | | |
|
| @Tigger
My point was not centerd on CATS. If you think this thought about reading or seeing code of someone else to the end, everybody who reads code of someone else could be sued by this person afterwards. The "they've read it, so its AIncs IP"-Argument doesn't stop when beeing unrelated, when we follow your interpretation. So everything I saw could possibly be included in furture work, even if it is not technically derived from it. 68k->PPC There is no way to proove the opposite, so the only protection would be, to never read code again. As nobody protects himself this way, the argument is highly unikly to hold outside this theory.
You could argue then, that the AIncs IP is contained by the Look-and-Feel of the GUI or the responsiveness, that is gaind from certain underlying structures of the OS, that are responsible for that. If this argument would be valid the consequences of this would effect not only Hyperion, but also AROS an MorphOS, as they claim those features also for themselves. So I wouldn't prefer it either.
So from what do you think AInc's claim for IP arises?
What we all should learn from this mess: If you want something, better pay for it cash. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
stew
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 19-Jul-2007 22:56:12
| | [ #460 ] |
|
|
|
Regular Member |
Joined: 26-Sep-2003 Posts: 453
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Sneaky
I hate to burst your bubble. If you have looked at someone's code and are sued after producing a similar project, the burden of proof is on you. If you are planning a project then take your own advice and don't look at any similar project's code. If the Friedens wanted to write untainted code they should never have looked at AInc's. They made a big deal of using it when it was convenient. When it nolonger was they changed tune "it was useless to us". If it was indeed useless to them they made a sad mistake.
I hope you are not contracted by anyone to code for them. I would indeed feel sorry for them. Sneaky seems apt. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|