@Leo

Quote:

The OS should have been *opened* to any hardware since the begining... If the contract restricts the OS to certain partner this is completly stupid... ... But after all I guess that's what the Amiga has always been about... Personnal interests... And that's why it's no more despite the fact it was for some time better than everything else...

Totally agree. What a different place it would be and what a pile of money AI could have made if they hadn't tried to restrict hardware. Then all we would spend our time discussing is wether AOS runs better on this hardware or that.

Plaz

@Dandy

Quote:

How serious am I supposed to take people that can't distinguish between "suing his employer" and "asking the involved parties for a clear statement of ownership/copyright which is legally binding"?

I have never had to go to court to get my finance co. to give me a clear statement of ownership. How can we take someone serious that does not understand that this is totaly not necessary. Hyperion can give that binding statement without being included in the suit, so for some reason Hyperion is being sued by former developers.

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @Kronos Quote: Kronos wrote: @Lou The pre-releases (atleast the early ones) didn't even come close in matching what was outlined in the contract, therefore they can't be "the release" starting the deadlines. Hyperion decided NOT to call them (proper) releases, and NOT to inform AInc that they thought the deadline has started, either because they didn't consider it ready, or because they didn't want fullfill other obligations tied to OS4 being "released". The whole "OS4 was released in 2004" is just a rather flimpsy atempt at rewriting history, and it's gonna need more then one stupid judge to make it work. Document #26, attachment #4, page 14 of 15

Yep, as proof of Kronos claims*, the announcement you linked to says "Developer Pre-Release". Hyperion wasn't contracted to do a developer version nor a pre-release. The "pre" part in "pre-release" is a clear indication that's it's NOT a proper release.

* = I can't believe I'm standing up for one of Kronos claims.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@stew

Quote:

stew wrote: @Dandy Quote: How serious am I supposed to take people that can't distinguish between "suing his employer" and "asking the involved parties for a clear statement of ownership/copyright which is legally binding"? I have never had to go to court to get my finance co. to give me a clear statement of ownership. How can we take someone serious that does not understand that this is totaly not necessary. Hyperion can give that binding statement without being included in the suit, so for some reason Hyperion is being sued by former developers.

How many times did the company you work for get involved in a lawsuit over the ownership to your work? C'mon, this isn't exactly a part of their every day routine either. I'm more inclined to interpret this as they are not so sure that Hyperion is going to win anymore and therefore tries to have as little ownership assigned to Hyperion as possible for damage control and leverage for negotiating future AmigaOS developments.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@samface

Quote:

samface wrote: * = I can't believe I'm standing up for one of Kronos claims.

Ask me how I feel about it

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

@Leo

Quote:

The OS should have been *opened* to any hardware since the begining... If the contract restricts the OS to certain partner this is completly stupid... .

Yes, very true BUT all parties agreed to it and signed the contract. Now we are crying over spilt milk. What's done is done, and all parties involved are to blame for this fiasco . . .

We really need new leadership all the way around . . .

_________________
Avatar babe - Monica Bellucci.

@Leo

Quote:

Leo wrote: Quote: There's been other speculation that if Hyperion gets to keep their license, that they would be able to partner with a new A1 maker. I'm sure that if KMOS were to loose, Hyperion making A1 boards would be part of the next lawsuit that KMOS would file. I'm sorry, but what's that nonsense ?! The OS should have been *opened* to any hardware since the begining... If the contract restricts the OS to certain partner this is completly stupid...

The thing is, the rights granted from the license agreement was not assigned to Hyperion to begin with, it was assigned to Hyperion and Eyetech collectively, refered to as "the AmigaOne partners". It was Hyperions own managing partner who drafted the contract, it was Hyperion themselves who decided to team up with Eyetech to make the next generation Amiga computers. So, the contract wasn't just restricted to the AmigaOne, it was done so on Hyperion's own initiative. Amiga Inc. had no right to disregard Eyetech's contractual rights and simply grant Hyperion the right to develop for any hardware they like, yet they were the ones Hyperion and everyone seemed to blame.

Quote:

But after all I guess that's what the Amiga has always been about... Personnal interests... And that's why it's no more despite the fact it was for some time better than everything else...

Yes, personal interests are a significant factor here, I'm just no so sure we agree on the implications nor what the personal interests were.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Kronos

Quote:

Kronos wrote: @samface Quote: samface wrote: * = I can't believe I'm standing up for one of Kronos claims. Ask me how I feel about it

How DO you feel about it? :P

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Dandy

Quote:

Quote: Go read Annex I and Annex II of the 2001 contract, Olaf is listed all through it. Yes - when it comes to his work on the 3.1 sources and the CVS - but I was asking if he really did actively work on OS4.0 and meant by that if he was coding natively for it - that's what I understand a "Developer" is for.

Annex I says he's going to be responsible for the TCP/IP and the Fastfile system rewrite, you search for Olaf and OS 4.0 and you find 100's of hits. Or we could look at this interview

Interview with Olaf on 4.0

Quote:

Can you provide a link to those mails?

Document 35 Exhibit L

Quote:

Quote: Tigger wrote: Olaf said he would have been better off flipping burgers then working on OS4, As hei did not work on OS4 (AFAIK), this statement seems to be correct...

Again you would rather keep a false belief (even after being told its a false belief) then spend 30 seconds on Google, that seems to be a constant trend with you.


Quote:

Quote: Tigger wrote: ... As for what Rogue said, I cant take seriously anyone who issuing his employer to maintain rights on there software and then tell us its business as usual. How often have you sued you employer as part of business as usual? How serious am I supposed to take people that can't distinguish between "suing his employer" and "asking the involved parties for a clear statement of ownership/copyright which is legally binding"?

By filing a lawsuit (as they have done) they have sued Hyperion by definition, its hard to take someone seriously that doesnt understand the basic definitions. In addition, if all they wanted was a clear statement from Hyperion, they could have just asked Hyperion to sign such a document, since that didnt occur, there must be a disagreement about what they want, thats the only reason to go to court over it.
-Tig

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

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: Totally agree. What a different place it would be and what a pile of money AI could have made if they hadn't tried to restrict hardware. Then all we would spend our time discussing is wether AOS runs better on this hardware or that.

First of all its Eyetech that restricted the hardware, so blaming AI for it is silly.
-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 its Eyetech that restricted the hardware, so blaming AI for it is silly. -Tig

Then since the demise of Eyetech, what has hindered the port of AOS to any other hardware? AI claims to own and be responsible for all things AOS, so I blame them as the responsible party. Innocent victim they are not.

Plaz

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: Then since the demise of Eyetech, what has hindered the port of AOS to any other hardware?

Since Hyperion's obligation to develop for the classic Amiga hardware wasn't honored until November last year, I guess that's what they've been busy doing. Now that they are finally done developing support for the hardware they had an obligation to develop for, the natural thing to do would of course be to expand the hardware options further and this seems to be the ambition for all parties involved, Amiga Inc. as well as Hyperion. However, the issues of who is going to do it and under which licensing terms will have to be sorted out first.

Quote:

AI claims to own and be responsible for all things AOS, so I blame them as the responsible party. Innocent victim they are not.

Mind you, Hyperion is claiming to own and be responsible for all things AmigaOS too.

_________________
Sammy Nordström, A.K.A. "Samface"

MINDRELEASE.net - The Non-Commercial Network of Digital Arts.

Samworks D & C - Professional Web Development (in Swedish)

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: @Tigger Quote: First of all its Eyetech that restricted the hardware, so blaming AI for it is silly. -Tig Then since the demise of Eyetech, what has hindered the port of AOS to any other hardware? AI claims to own and be responsible for all things AOS, so I blame them as the responsible party. Innocent victim they are not.

Since Eyetechs demise was after April 23, 2003, I would have to say what has hindered a port to other hardware the most is that the owner of the OS doesnt have the source code because it hasnt been delivered to them.
-Tig

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

@samface

Quote:

Mind you, Hyperion is claiming to own and be responsible for all things AmigaOS too

Good point. But they have to prove it first. So in my mind by default it's still Kmos/AI.

Plaz

@Tigger

Quote:

the most is that the owner of the OS doesnt have the source code because it hasnt been delivered to them.

I still say that's their own fault. They read and signed a joke of a contract while not securing regular access to the source code as it was being written. CVS access even. I'm not passing judgement on either side as far as the out come of the lawsuit is concerned. It's far too much of a mess and I know zip about the law involved. However I can spot a badly run business 10,000 miles away.

Plaz

@Plaz

Quote:

Plaz wrote: However I can spot a badly run business 10,000 miles away.

You say that, and yet your a fan of Evert, doesnt make sense to me.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

Quote:

You say that, and yet your a fan of Evert, doesnt make sense to me.

Please don't stoop to such naive comments. Calling me a fan of either side based on any thing I've ever posted on AW.net is like me saying you're fanboy of Bill Gates based on your postings.

Amiga Inc made bad decisions and bad deals. Hyperion is trying to take advantage of their mistakes while making some of their own, and it might backfire on them. And Eyetech.... they're just not around for me to kick I guess.

I have been voicing more critisism of AI than Hyperion as AOS was their's and their's to lose and abuse. It should have never come to this state. Now that it has, Hyperion is making a play to grab the goods. No big suprise. Is Hyperion's attempt to claim AOS a cleaver move or a unscruplious act? I'll let the business and law wizards decide that. For my part, I just say that AI allowed this mess to exsist and fester in the first place. AI brought Hyperion in, now they have to clean up the mess.

Plaz

@Plaz

Quote:

Is Hyperion's attempt to claim AOS a cleaver move or a unscruplious act?

Who says the two are mutually exclusive? I submit that more often than not, unscrupulous acts are clever moves from a business perspective :)

(Oh, and was that Freudian?)

@umisef

Quote:

umisef wrote: @Plaz Quote: Is Hyperion's attempt to claim AOS a cleaver move or a unscruplious act? Who says the two are mutually exclusive? I submit that more often than not, unscrupulous acts are clever moves from a business perspective :) (Oh, and was that Freudian?)

Well, the most clever move so far, for me, is Bill Kinsel's using the perpetual license clause as proof that Hyperion owns the copyrights.

_________________
Tony T.

People who generalize are always wrong.


1989 - 500 / 1991 - 3000 / 1997 - Genesis Flyer 1200T / 2003 - A1XE

@syrtran

Quote:

Well, the most clever move so far, for me, is Bill Kinsel's using the perpetual license clause as proof that Hyperion owns the copyrights.

If it comes off, more power to him. However, it strikes me as a tad obvious :)

What I really appreciated was his "Itec Contract" reuse, where he made a case as to why the Amiga-Itec contract (referred to as "Itec Contract") should be ruled fraudulent and reversed, and then went on to say that consequently Itec had no claims whatsoever over AmigaOS, because those purely resulted from the "Itec Contract" (now suddenly referring to the Itec-Hyperion contract). That one looked as if it was actually carefully set up over a couple of submissions, and the punchline was nice and subtle...