Looks like Amiga is using Ben Herman's own "[legal] war on two fronts" tactic against Hyperion... I can't see anything good coming out (for the Amiga community and market, that is) of this barring a settlement that would please both parties and allow for future co-operation.

@wolfe

Quote:

@Spectre66 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?

Two lawsuits filed with initial documents presented and still no documenation re the Amiga (W)/ITEC LLC transfer of assets ? Fishy Fishy.?
After the lack of such was the main reason why AMiga (D) lost round 2 (The Injunction) ?
(They also lost round 1. motion for expedited Discovery).
If ITEC are Joined in the Washington suit then there will be only one action.
(This will be round 3 and I am sure that Hyperion will lead 3-0 at this stage).

Edit:

By adding ITEC LLC as a counterclaim defendant Hyperion can ask for all the documents related to the AMIGA (W)/ITEC LLC dealings during discovery.
This was a big mistake by AMIGA (D) and CO to get ITEC LLC Involved.

Last edited by Spectre660 on 12-Jul-2007 at 11:41 AM.

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

@Spectre660

Quote:

Spectre660 wrote: By adding ITEC LLC as a counterclaim defendant Hyperion can ask for all the documents related to the AMIGA (W)/ITEC LLC dealings during discovery. This was a big mistake by AMIGA (D) and CO to get ITEC LLC Involved.

That's my thinking as well.
The New York suit is wasted effort on Kouri's part.

@Spectre660

You cant be serious about documentation missing for the Amiga W to Itec transfer. Even if no documentation did exist, a testimony from the people who made the deal would be enough, since Hyperion cant possibly have a single shred of evidence to prove the opposite. Plus, there will exist prove that Itec was/is a first secured creditor, this has been told many times over in the last years. Amiga W's money didnt come from nowhere, you know?

@Ketzer

Quote:

@Spectre660

Quote:

You cant be serious about documentation missing for the Amiga W to Itec transfer. Even if no documentation did exist, a testimony from the people who made the deal would be enough, since Hyperion cant possibly have a single shred of evidence to prove the opposite. Plus, there will exist prove that Itec was/is a first secured creditor, this has been told many times over in the last years. Amiga W's money didnt come from nowhere, you know?

as I have said before the lack documentation on this has lost them one motion already.

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

@Ketzer

The contrary can be also true...

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

@Ketzer

Quote:

Ketzer wrote: @Spectre660 You cant be serious about documentation missing for the Amiga W to Itec transfer. Even if no documentation did exist, a testimony from the people who made the deal would be enough, since Hyperion cant possibly have a single shred of evidence to prove the opposite. Plus, there will exist prove that Itec was/is a first secured creditor, this has been told many times over in the last years. Amiga W's money didnt come from nowhere, you know?

1. There is no evidence to suggest that Amiga W's money came from Itec.
2. Even if it did, in 99% of cases venture capital is delivered as cash in return for shares, not as a loan.
2. Even if it was a loan, and Itec did exist in 1999, how did Itec survive the Kouri Capital bankruptcy?
3. Is today's Itec the same Itec that existed in 1999 (if it did exist, and it did lend money, and it did survive the KC bankrupcty)?

The complete lack of documentation together with the Kouri bankruptcy makes Itec being a creditor unlikely in the extreme.

@Tigger

Quote:

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.

My point (my view) is Hyperion "can't" have sold it to Itec as it didn't belong to them in the first place. The rights were owned by the "Amiga One Partners" not Hyperion.

In other words Hyperion, on there own, never owned the rights to anything at anytime, only the "Amiga One Partners" did. So if Hyperion never owned the rights to anything OS 4 related, on their own at any time, how could they possible sell something, on there own, that they don't own?

Now I'm not saying they DIDN'T TRY to sell something, that is obvious

But they tried to sell something that wasn't theirs or at least not "fully" theirs. The rights belong to the "Amiga One Partners" so Hyperion tried to sell somethings illegally possibly, but Itec also tried to buy something illegally possibly as well.

If anything, if Itec did get a hold of the sorce code etc for $25,000 through Hyperion, then Eyetech could Sue Itec for recieving stolen property in my view of things.

_________________
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

@elatour who said Quote:

he 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.

I don't recall ever reading that, but if true it would be dynamite.

But that was probably the Friedens way of saying that the latest version of OS4 contains virtually no OS3 code left. I don't see that's anything to be surprised about - they have been gradually rewriting the 68k components with PPC equivalents for many years now:

You might as well ask whether an antique chair from the 1800s is still the same chair, if gradually over the years every part (each leg, each arm, the seat, the back, etc) has been replaced with newly crafted (but matching) parts. Most people would say yes, even though a new one made from scratch (with equal care) would be called a fake.

I am sure that (at the very least) they still looked at the original 68k code, before trying to write PPC replacements. And this process happened very gradually, so any line you drew (between OS3 & OS4) would be entirely meaningless.

_________________
Author of the PortablE programming language.
It is pitch black. You are likely to be eaten by a grue...

Quote:

NutsAboutAmiga wrote: @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.

I'm not sure why people think Eyetech is losing anything here. The contract is clear that by paying 25K to Hyperion, AI(w) gets the software. Not sure why Itec paying the money vs AI(w) paying the money causes Eyetech to lose anything here. Itec paid the money, that would be the usual legal dispute in a transfer here, and since Itec has been willing to carry out all payments in the contract, it should be a non-issue.

Quote:

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.

Since Hyperion is the only one that broke the law, its the only one Eyetech can sue, and as part of there settlement they could get Hyperions part of the rights, in fact that would be a likely settlement for such a case.

Quote:

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.

No, because Itec isnt a signee of the original contract. The pitch from Hyperion is that Itec isnt the rightful owner of the contract, so it would be no different then Hyperion selling me the OS for 25K. In that case, the only company that is carrying out an illegal act with the Itec-Hyperion contract is Hyperion. Understand I dont believe thats true, but Hyperion is claiming the transfer of the contract was not approved by the AmigaOne Partners, if that is true the only company that broke US law is Hyperion.

Quote:

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.

Hyperion has lots to gain, they took over 40K from McEwen, Itec, Tachyon and KMOS and have been falsely(sic) telling everyone that KMOS is the successor of AI(W) for years, thats a felony fraud in the US, and Evert as a US citizen would likely be deported to the US to stand trial for that. Thats why I think its a poor strategy on Hyperions part to go with Itec - AI(w) deal didnt happen defense. If the contract doesnt happen and the transfer doesnt occur, then AI(w) is back in the game and Hyperion still has all the same issues.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

No, because Itec isnt a signee of the original contract. The pitch from Hyperion is that Itec isnt the rightful owner of the contract, so it would be no different then Hyperion selling me the OS for 25K. In that case, the only company that is carrying out an illegal act with the Itec-Hyperion contract is Hyperion. Understand I dont believe thats true, but Hyperion is claiming the transfer of the contract was not approved by the AmigaOne Partners, if that is true the only company that broke US law is Hyperion.

The original contract is just to ambigous I think.

But, IF Hyperion wasn't the original owner of the rights to OS 4.0 and it WAS the "Amiga One Partners" (ie Eyetech and Hyperion) and Hyperion was trying to pull some faud (maybe not even intentionally) by excluding Eyetech and selling something that wasn't "fully' theirs, then Both Hyperion and Itec broke the law.

It is illegal to recieve stolen property in the U.S., even if you honestly have no idea that it is not owned by the person selling it. You (Itec) certainly don't don't get to keep the property and may very likely never get your money back. But, again, it's all so vague I think I'll stop speculating now

Last edited by AmigaHeretic on 12-Jul-2007 at 02:44 PM.
Last edited by AmigaHeretic on 12-Jul-2007 at 02:44 PM.

_________________
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:

Spectre660 wrote: What you are forgetting is that ITEC are/were the owner of KMOS/Amiga Delaware.

I'm not forgetting anything, Hyperion is trying to not complete a contract with Itec because its subsidiary (which was founded to take control of OS 4) may have had some questionable dealings. Hyperion isnt US law enforcement. They dont get to break the law because they think the other guys may be breaking the law.

Quote:

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.

The case law is pretty strong on them not being joined to the counterclaim. The insider efforts have nothing to do with the Itec contract, only with the subsequent transfer to KMOS by AI(w) and even that has nothing to do with Hyperions case. You guys keep going on about KMOS breaking the law now, where exactly were you 3 years ago, when it could have actually made a difference, oh yeah I remember, you had your fingers in your ears like Ben told you too yelling I'm not listening to FUD at the top of your lungs. Now the KMOS stuff can help Ben so you are listening to it and think its a bad thing now. None of it has anything to do with Hyperion not giving Itec the source, object and executable code after being paid 25K. Why does anything KMOS do have anything to do with that?
-Tig

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

Quote:

AmigaHeretic wrote: But, IF Hyperion wasn't the original owner of the rights to OS 4.0 and it WAS the "Amiga One Partners" (ie Eyetech and Hyperion) and Hyperion was trying to pull some faud (maybe not even intentionally) by excluding Eyetech and selling something that wasn't "fully' theirs, then Both Hyperion and Itec broke the law.

No, Itec didnt break the law, Itec signed a contract in good faith, and paid money in good faith, they received nothing, so they broke no law. Hyperion signed a contract
which they now imply was illegally taking Eyetechs rights away (if true they broke the law not Itec, because Itec received nothing).

Quote:

It is illegal to recieve stolen property in the U.S., even if you honestly have no idea that it is not owned by the person selling it. You (Itec) certainly don't don't get to keep the property and may very likely never get your money back. But, again, it's all so vague I think I'll stop speculating now

First of all Itec didnt receive anything, so your receipt of stolen property theory is thrown out, secondly the party (Hyperion) who has defrauded Itec would owe them there money, plus penalties, plus possibly jail time for its officers. In court, they would find that Hyperion owed all the money back. If I offer to sell you a car, you agree to buy it and give me all (or even part) of the money and then I later say I dont have a car to sell you or it would be illegal to sell you the car, I dont get to keep your money, and you havent broken any laws, I on other hand can get sued for your money back, plus penalites, and could get tried for fraud etc, depending on the circumstances.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

First of all Itec didnt receive anything, so your receipt of stolen property theory is thrown out, secondly the party (Hyperion) who has defrauded Itec would owe them there money, plus penalties, plus possibly jail time for its officers. In court, they would find that Hyperion owed all the money back. If I offer to sell you a car, you agree to buy it and give me all (or even part) of the money and then I later say I dont have a car to sell you or it would be illegal to sell you the car, I dont get to keep your money, and you havent broken any laws, I on other hand can get sued for your money back, plus penalites, and could get tried for fraud etc, depending on the circumstances. -Tig

For sure, I was meaning to refer to what I was saying earlier, and that all a hypothetical "IF" the transaction went through. As in IF Hyperion sold the source code and rights or whatever to Itec, then Eyetech might be able to sue on the stolen property basis, saying, "Hey that's my property I never signed away my rights to it... blah blah...." and then Itec could be in trouble because they possible didn't research who "ALL" owned what.


Like if you buy a car. You typically look at the title and if there is more than one person on the title you need to get both people signatures to buy the car not just one signature or you can get screwed big time. Wife trying to sell husbands car real cheap because she's mad at him or something and he never signs only she does.

_________________
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

Quote:

The case law is pretty strong on them not being joined to the counterclaim. The insider efforts have nothing to do with the Itec contract, only with the subsequent transfer to KMOS by AI(w) and even that has nothing to do with Hyperions case. You guys keep going on about KMOS breaking the law now, where exactly were you 3 years ago, when it could have actually made a difference, oh yeah I remember, you had your fingers in your ears like Ben told you too yelling I'm not listening to FUD at the top of your lungs. Now the KMOS stuff can help Ben so you are listening to it and think its a bad thing now. None of it has anything to do with Hyperion not giving Itec the source, object and executable code after being paid 25K. Why does anything KMOS do have anything to do with that? -Tig

The whole argument is based on the every transfer from Amiga (W) onwards being tainted. not just ITEC/KMOS.
pleae "dont you guys me" as I am quoting from Hyperion's Counterclaims in pdf NO 39.
They have outlined their case and filed it.
Again the lack of documentation is enough for Hyperion's Lawyer to Give Amiga Inc a hard time .

As for the case not to Join ITEC we shall see (Bet this will be 0-3 Amiga)

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

ECONOMIC MODEL EXPLAINED WITH COWS

SOCIALISM
You have 2 cows.
You give one to your neighbour.

COMMUNISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and gives you some milk.

FASCISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and sells you some milk.

NAZISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both and shoots you.

BUREAUCRATISM
You have 2 cows.
The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.

TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell one and buy a bull.
Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows.
You sell them and retire on the income.

SURREALISM
You have two giraffes.
The government requires you to take harmonica lessons

AN AMERICAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows.
Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.

ENRON VENTURE CAPITALISM
You have two cows.
You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows.

The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island Company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.

The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more.
You sell one cow to buy a new president of the United States, leaving you with nine cows.
No balance sheet provided with the release.
The public then buys your bull.

THE ANDERSEN MODEL
You have two cows.
You shred them.

A FRENCH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.

A JAPANESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You redesign them so they are one-tenth the size of an ordinary cow and produce twenty times the milk.
You then create a clever cow cartoon image called 'Cowkimon' and market it worldwide.

A GERMAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You re-engineer them so they live for 100 years, eat once a month, and milk themselves.

AN ITALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.
You decide to have lunch.

A RUSSIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You count them and learn you have five cows.
You count them again and learn you have 42 cows.
You count them again and learn you have 2 cows.
You stop counting cows and open another bottle of vodka.

A SWISS CORPORATION
You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.
You charge the owners for storing them.

A CHINESE CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You have 300 people milking them.
You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity.
You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.

AN INDIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
You worship them.

A BRITISH CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Both are mad.

AN IRAQI CORPORATION
Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.
You tell them that you have none.
No-one believes you, so they bomb the **** out of you and invade your country.
You still have no cows, but at least now you are part of a democracy.

A NEW ZEALAND CORPORATION
You have two cows.
The one on the left looks very attractive.

AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION
You have two cows.
Business seems pretty good.
You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.


Not THAT sounds like the best plan.

_________________
******************************************
I dont suffer from Insanity - I enjoy it

******************************************

@The_Editor

_________________
~
Everything you say will be misquoted and used against you..
~

@Tigger

Quote:

I on other hand can get sued for your money back, plus penalites

Once the contract is void, you easy recover 25K, once you can start selling the OS as ODM product for PowerUp cards, ACube + Efika or what ever, it just a question of time really.

Quote:

and could get tried for fraud etc, depending on the circumstances.

Do you think the option of going bankrupt is better?
(never recover the costs of developing the OS for 7 years)

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

@The_Editor



got to post this on, don't worry, I'll credit you for it

Btw, how does Amiga venture capitalism go?

Sue the cow?

Last edited by tomazkid on 12-Jul-2007 at 04:12 PM.

_________________
Site admins are people too..pooff!

@tomazkid

Quote:

Btw, how does Amiga venture capitalism go?

Mmmmmmh now thats a hard one !

- outsource the grass-chewing to a goat

- the goat than asks the cat to do the actual chewing, promising they will get their share of the cow-milk

- cats don't chew grass for real, so it outsources to some mice promising them some cheese later on

- all this doesn't work really well and the cow starts starving

- to cure this the cow is moved to several different farms (all without grass offcourse since that isn't part of the cows job anymore).

- the cow now sues the cat.

- cat declares that it was never contracted by the cow, that it never received the grass .... well and it's all to late since it allready ate the mice 3 years ago.

- later on it is dicovered that the cow was really a bull in drag.

Last edited by Kronos on 12-Jul-2007 at 04:38 PM.

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