Poster | Thread |
fairlanefastback
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 11-Jul-2007 23:05:40
| | [ #61 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 22-Jun-2005 Posts: 4886
From: MA, USA | | |
|
| @NoelFuller
Quote:
NoelFuller wrote: @fairlanefastback
Thanks. I thought I was just not getting there on Google. Maybe that Hakia search engine will be useful after all.
Noel |
We should ask hatschi to sniff more info out. If its on the net he seems to be able to find it. :)_________________ Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0 Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS) EFIKA owner Amiga 1200 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Colin_Camper
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 11-Jul-2007 23:14:28
| | [ #62 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 6-Jul-2003 Posts: 1188
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @_Steve_
I guess Pentti Kouri never dreamed that getting involved in Amino / Amiga, Inc / Itec / KMOS would unleash the 'community', acting like a flash light, exposing his sordid affairs like a ####roach infestation.
We have ensured that every move he makes is only a 'google' away - a point not lost on the 'Kent reporter'.
He must hate it. With the demise of TAO the only source of income through DE is going to wither. I would guess he is desperate to sell Scamiga, Inc but the community has ensured that it is worthless. What goes round comes round. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
fairlanefastback
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 11-Jul-2007 23:48:47
| | [ #63 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 22-Jun-2005 Posts: 4886
From: MA, USA | | |
|
| @Colin_Camper
Quote:
Colin_Camper wrote: @_Steve_
I guess Pentti Kouri never dreamed that getting involved in Amino / Amiga, Inc / Itec / KMOS would unleash the 'community', acting like a flash light, exposing his sordid affairs like a ####roach infestation.
We have ensured that every move he makes is only a 'google' away - a point not lost on the 'Kent reporter'.
He must hate it. With the demise of TAO the only source of income through DE is going to wither. I would guess he is desperate to sell Scamiga, Inc but the community has ensured that it is worthless. What goes round comes round. |
I have a different guess. I think Amiga is meant to be a "bank account" for his other firms, and perhaps some sort of write-off. Totally conjecture and from the gut so it could be totally wrong. But certain things strike me when looking at the situation. Does not Amiga seem to operate to take losses rather than to earn profits? Yes its totally against the point of your average business, but we know that Amiga is merely one of a web of businesses he is involved in, Itec (it still lives?), KMOS, Monrepos, Tachyon, Hakia, Amiga. And they stay closely linked at times, Tachyon funds the Amiga buyback/buyin clause partially, Monrepos approves another contract between two of the others with Pentti having to sign one document three times as the representative of all three involved parties (I find that whacky). We also know that Pentti is an economist, I'm guessing he looks at the bottom financial line at a higher level than merely Amiga itself. So I think he doesn't want to sell Amiga at all. Yes I doubt he likes the light that is shining on his every move with it. But my conjecture, again only my conjecture is that he likes it just fine sitting doing almost nothing. I think Hakia is the payday company, the one that he hopes to truly make big money on. Now that said, why you would want your name surrounding very odd activities at all is very strange. And as much as people doubt what Amiga is doing there are plenty of others who eat up the latest Bill McEwen Q&A that comes up. And the Kent debacle pretty clearly shows there are some people who still don't do even simple Google checks. What amazes me about the Kent thing is, even if they come up with the $2.5 mil, should you even take it? I hope they are pressing to make sure all is on the up and up with Amiga in general for their own sakes, and maybe one day that will help us to know more of the truth, and have to spend less time guessing at the possibilites.
_________________ Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0 Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS) EFIKA owner Amiga 1200 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Spectre660
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 0:41:49
| | [ #64 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 4-Jun-2005 Posts: 3918
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Tigger
Quote:
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
|
Again you come with this slanted spin ?
Some homework, Sir Tig. Read the following again.
PDF N0 39. Page 12 Lines 1-7_________________ Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
umisef
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 1:06:35
| | [ #65 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 19-Jun-2005 Posts: 1714
From: Melbourne, Australia | | |
|
| @Swoop
Quote:
Doesn't Itec sueing Hyperion for the same things AInc(W) are, just support Hyperions motion to add Itec as a party to the AInc(W) case? |
Except
(a) They are not suing for the same thing. Itec is suing for delivery of their contractual rights to OS4 according to the April 2003 contract and the June 2007 payment, whereas Amiga(D) is suing for trademark violations and delivery of their contractual rights according to the November 2001 contract and the May 2003 payments. And
(b) Hyperion asked to add Itec to the countersuit. The one that alleges that any and all transfers are invalid, and fraudulent, and that Hyperion should just get everything, anyway. But with invalid transfers, Itec becomes an unrelated third party with a separate contract....
Heck, if Hyperion were to win their countersuit (purely hypothetical), they might have had certain, far-reaching rights to OS4 in March 2003 --- which they then might find they sold, perfectly legally, in April 2003, to Itec (effective upon payment, i.e. June 2007).
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
AmigaHeretic
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 2:07:22
| | [ #66 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 7-Mar-2003 Posts: 1697
From: Oregon | | |
|
| @Tigger
Quote:
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 |
Yeah, but if Hyperion did try to commit fraud that doesn't "take away" their ownership ( or joint ownership with Eyetech) of the rights given to them for the OS. They might have a penalty, but it would probably be very very minor, and the OS would still be there's.
Besides, they could always say they were under the impression Itec was also getting a similar contract signed with Eyetech and there would be no way to prove that._________________ 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 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
fairlanefastback
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 2:23:06
| | [ #67 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 22-Jun-2005 Posts: 4886
From: MA, USA | | |
|
| Quote:
clean hands doctrine n. a rule of law that a person coming to court with a lawsuit or petition for a court order must be free from unfair conduct (have "clean hands" or not have done anything wrong) in regard to the subject matter of his/her claim. His/her activities not involved in the legal action can be abominable because they are considered irrelevant. As an affirmative defense (positive response) a defendant might claim the plaintiff (party suing him/her) has a "lack of clean hands" or "violates the clean hands doctrine" because the plaintiff has misled the defendant or has done something wrong regarding the matter under consideration. Example: A former partner sues on a claim that he was owed money on a consulting contract with the partnership when he left, but the defense states that the plaintiff (party suing) has tried to get customers from the partnership by spreading untrue stories about the remaining partner's business practices.
bad faith 1) n. intentional dishonest act by not fulfilling legal or contractual obligations, misleading another, entering into an agreement without the intention or means to fulfill it, or violating basic standards of honesty in dealing with others. Most states recognize what is called "implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing" which is breached by acts of bad faith, for which a lawsuit may be brought (filed) for the breach (just as one might sue for breach of contract). The question of bad faith may be raised as a defense to a suit on a contract. 2) adj. when there is bad faith then a transaction is called a "bad faith" contract or "bad faith" offer.
|
God forbid anyone give a cr*p about stuff like this, right?
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 12-Jul-2007 at 02:23 AM.
_________________ Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0 Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS) EFIKA owner Amiga 1200 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 2:34:18
| | [ #68 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| @fairlanefastback
Quote:
fairlanefastback wrote:
God forbid anyone give a cr*p about stuff like this, right?
|
We've been carrying on about Hyperions bad faith negotiations with Itec since this all started, glad you decided to catch up. -TigLast edited by Tigger on 12-Jul-2007 at 02:34 AM.
_________________ 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 12-Jul-2007 2:37:59
| | [ #69 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 4-Jun-2005 Posts: 3918
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @umisef
Quote:
Heck, if Hyperion were to win their countersuit (purely hypothetical), they might have had certain, far-reaching rights to OS4 in March 2003 --- which they then might find they sold, perfectly legally, in April 2003, to Itec (effective upon payment, i.e. June 2007). |
They argue that the transfer from Amiga W to Itec LLc was done fraudently,thus it should be declared void,thus If Amiga W no longer exists then rghts should belong now to Hyperion,who could not have sold to Itec because they did not have the rights to buy-in,as the rights belonged to Amiga W at the time of the Itec contract because the transfer to Itec was not done properly.
The law does sometimes consider things in this way. In one earlier thread I did mention that if something is done after an action that has been declared null and void it is as if those later actions were never done. I have seen the impact of this in legal action dealing with constitutional rights. _________________ Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
fairlanefastback
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:00:39
| | [ #70 ] |
|
|
|
Team Member |
Joined: 22-Jun-2005 Posts: 4886
From: MA, USA | | |
|
| @Tigger
Quote:
Tigger wrote: @fairlanefastback
Quote:
fairlanefastback wrote:
God forbid anyone give a cr*p about stuff like this, right?
|
We've been carrying on about Hyperions bad faith negotiations with Itec since this all started, glad you decided to catch up. -Tig |
Yes carrying on is what you have been doing. There is little doubt about that. Since you claim no opposition here, why the fuss? _________________ Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0 Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS) EFIKA owner Amiga 1200 |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
wolfe
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:23:40
| | [ #71 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 18-Aug-2003 Posts: 1283
From: Under The Moon - Howling in the Blue Grass | | |
|
| @Spectre660
They will have to prove AI.W to ITEC fraudulent. An uphill battle to be sure. Do they have the funds to sustain a 2 state action? _________________ Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:41:53
| | [ #72 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| Quote:
AmigaHeretic wrote:
Yeah, but if Hyperion did try to commit fraud that doesn't "take away" their ownership ( or joint ownership with Eyetech) of the rights given to them for the OS. They might have a penalty, but it would probably be very very minor, and the OS would still be there's.
|
Why would the OS be theres? They sold it to Itec in the contract we are talking about. So either they commited fraud when the signed the contract with Itec (because they cant sell it) or the have sold the OS when the money transferred hands.
Quote:
Besides, they could always say they were under the impression Itec was also getting a similar contract signed with Eyetech and there would be no way to prove that. |
So you believe Hyperions excuse should be, we signed an illegal contract because we thought Eyetech would sign one as well, and once they both were signed then neither one of them would be illegal anymore? Really think they should use that as an excuse. -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 12-Jul-2007 3:52:45
| | [ #73 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| Quote:
Spectre660 wrote:
They argue that the transfer from Amiga W to Itec LLc was done fraudently,thus it should be declared void,thus If Amiga W no longer exists then rghts should belong now to Hyperion,who could not have sold to Itec because they did not have the rights to buy-in,as the rights belonged to Amiga W at the time of the Itec contract because the transfer to Itec was not done properly.
|
As we discussed earlier the only remedies available for the judge in the case of the transfer to a secured creditor violating the terms of the contract doesnt help Hyperion.
He can: 1) Invalidate the contract (Hyperions OS now cant be sold) 2) Force Itec to carry out the contract with Hyperion (they are trying to get Hyperion to let them do that) 3) Force Itec to pay any fees associated with the contract (Itec has tried to do this as well)
None of this helps Hyperion.
Quote:
The law does sometimes consider things in this way. In one earlier thread I did mention that if something is done after an action that has been declared null and void it is as if those later actions were never done. I have seen the impact of this in legal action dealing with constitutional rights. |
But understand that can't happen in this case unless Itec isnt a first secured creditor and we should be pretty sure from the statements both during the case as before that they are, even if they were found not to be. And the transfer were not allowed, that would just resurrect AI(W) with the contract in hand, which doesnt help Hyperion at all, in fact its even harder for them to do anything then. -Tig
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
elatour
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:53:23
| | [ #74 ] |
|
|
|
Cult Member |
Joined: 18-Jan-2005 Posts: 936
From: Toronto, Canada | | |
|
| @stew Quote:
The whole mess makes me sick. I can't understand anyone supporting either side in this. |
I couldn't agree more with your views on this. You're bang on with all of the things you pointed out in the rest of your post.Last edited by elatour on 12-Jul-2007 at 04:07 AM.
_________________ When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids... |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Tigger
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:53:28
| | [ #75 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 2-May-2003 Posts: 2097
From: Rocket City, USA | | |
|
| Removed Double Post Last edited by Tigger on 12-Jul-2007 at 03:55 AM.
_________________ We played the first thing that came to our heads, it just happened to be the best song in the world. |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
elatour
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 3:56:57
| | [ #76 ] |
|
|
|
Cult Member |
Joined: 18-Jan-2005 Posts: 936
From: Toronto, Canada | | |
|
| @ikir
Quote:
You have misunderstood everything. OS4 is based on 3.x sources, even part of 3.9. But Amiga provided ONLY 3.1 sources and Hyperion got themselves 3.5, 3.9 coders work on OS4, and something has been rewritten from start because they didn't get source. IT IS AMIGA FAULT but OS4 is based on original Amiga 3.x code. Hyperion is only a victim, get the fact before state this because other users can read your lines as truth. |
Not quite. The Friedens did in fact state on this site on more than one occasion that Hyperion did not base any of their work on 3.x sources since they were useless to them, at least according to them._________________ When swimming with sharks, make sure to bring lots of band-aids... |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
adiaux
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 7:23:21
| | [ #77 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 1-Jun-2006 Posts: 1249
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @AmigaHeretic
Quote:
But the software does belong to Eyetech too. |
As you quoted yourself, the license is for "use and modify" and "market and distribute".
"Belong" is not a correct description. Just wanted to nitpick a little on your wordings, that's all!
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
adiaux
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 7:23:59
| | [ #78 ] |
|
|
|
Super Member |
Joined: 1-Jun-2006 Posts: 1249
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @elatour
Quote:
elatour wrote: @ikir
Quote:
You have misunderstood everything. OS4 is based on 3.x sources, even part of 3.9. But Amiga provided ONLY 3.1 sources and Hyperion got themselves 3.5, 3.9 coders work on OS4, and something has been rewritten from start because they didn't get source. IT IS AMIGA FAULT but OS4 is based on original Amiga 3.x code. Hyperion is only a victim, get the fact before state this because other users can read your lines as truth. |
Not quite. The Friedens did in fact state on this site on more than one occasion that Hyperion did not base any of their work on 3.x sources since they were useless to them, at least according to them. |
Indeed. Yet Olaf Barthel's involvement and contributions should be pretty undeniable...?
|
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
NutsAboutAmiga
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 9:52:23
| | [ #79 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 9-Jun-2004 Posts: 12795
From: Norway | | |
|
| @Tigger
Well they can argue that they did not think the agreement where in violation of first agreement at the time, because it the 2en contract where about transferee of Hyperion assist, but failed to see how this where conflicting whit the obligations to Eyetech, when Hyperion lost there rights so will Eyetech, because Hyperion and Eyetch is so called AmigaOne partners, and bound to that first contract.
There is no point in Eyetech suing Hyperion for frauds because if Hyperion went bankrupt that will infect weaken Eyetech poison in the agreement as AmigaOne partner because it most consist of Eyetech and Hyperion collectively.
Because Hyperion and ITec signed the agreement they collectively committing fraud ageist Eyetech, if the right to the agreement is only valid if Hyperion and Eyetech works together, Then Hyperion has noting to gain in violating the agreement, but ITec and AmigaInc might have.
Because Hyperion have no interest or any thing to gain, and because they did not commit fraud on purpose, they penalty be where small compared to if they did it purpose.
2en contract be invalid because Eyetech is not part of it.
_________________ http://lifeofliveforit.blogspot.no/ Facebook::LiveForIt Software for AmigaOS |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|
Spectre660
| |
Re: Itec steps forward in the Big Apple Posted on 12-Jul-2007 10:11:49
| | [ #80 ] |
|
|
|
Elite Member |
Joined: 4-Jun-2005 Posts: 3918
From: Unknown | | |
|
| @Tigger
Quote:
But understand that can't happen in this case unless Itec isnt a first secured creditor and we should be pretty sure from the statements both during the case as before that they are, even if they were found not to be. And the transfer were not allowed, that would just resurrect AI(W) with the contract in hand, which doesnt help Hyperion at all, in fact its even harder for them to do anything then.
-Tig
|
What you are forgetting is that ITEC are/were the owner of KMOS/Amiga Delaware. .
So they WILL be Joined in the counterclaim. All will have to face the scrutiny of the Insider efforts to cheat creditors. Which is what the counterclaim has turned the lawsuit into. The New York ITEC suit is only an attempt to keep ITEC's dirty linen out of the Washington case.Nothing else. _________________ Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card |
|
Status: Offline |
|
|