@WolfToTheMoon
There is far more than just trademarks though, AmigaOS is licensed to Hyperion both as a trademark and as a technology.
The technology cannot be licensed nor reproduced as whole or in part, this includes the gui environment called Workbench (a part) which not only cannot be licensed/sold "as is", but similar products cannot be made if these are a reimplementation from scratch of that environment, even if such similar reimplementation is called something else (ie: WolfBench).
Thus if you build a gui environment for your OS and you want to call it Workbench (trademark) you better make sure it doesn't resemble the other gui environment in question even slightly (in both look and features).

Which is not what I heard...

Last edited by DAX on 09-Feb-2011 at 01:59 PM.
Last edited by DAX on 09-Feb-2011 at 01:56 PM.

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@WolfToTheMoon

Quote:

They can license anything to C=USA that is not exclusively licensed to Hyperion or some other company.

...as long as it is theirs to license and that's what the case is about.

An analogy was used about selling your neighbor's car in relation to selling the Amiga OS to some *cough* VC when they (from the standpoint of the court) did not own the product in question.

It's a lot of reading to be sure, but reading the court paperwork on Amiga Inc. vs Cloanto sure offers some clues.

Of course another possible way to determine what AI has the right to license would be a call to Pluritas, since they are selling the AMIGA trademarks and associated intellectual property.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 09-Feb-2011 at 02:22 PM.

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@BigBentheAussie (and Arko)

Ford also makes the Thunderbird. Commonly called a T-Bird.
A name they either licensed or asked permission to use.
( Don't recall which it was )
So today there are two Thunderbirds ON THE ROAD, and there is no
confusion. If you park them side by side, motor vehicle 'people'
will appreciate them both for what they are.

They will refer to one as a T-Bird, and the other by it's
formal name, Thunderbird.

They look, feel, handle, and drive very differently.

Ford makes the T-Bird.
Triumph, makes the Thunderbird.

Both respected names, but not stuck on the same product.
Just as with Mustang.
Not so with WB, when CUSA gets their way.

How does that go??? What's yours is mine. What's mine is my own.

I wonder how much Workbench advertising will appear on this site.

Oh, not real paid for adverts, no-no, just threads extolling 'how
wonderful it is now that the necessary improvements, made by a
company that truly cares about Amiga', (not like those other guys
who are just in it to screw the faithful). 'It's so good, in fact,
that we bumped it up to Workbench 5.'


Interesting times ahead.

@DAX

Well If I am blind, then you tell me what is this then?

Taken from the link under...
http://techpubs.sgi.com/library/tpl/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?coll=0650&db=relnotes&fname=/usr/relnotes/dwb



" 1. Introduction


This document describes release 4.1.3 of the Documenter's
[/quote]Workbench (DWB) option for IRISr workstations.

DWB is a software package for producing formatted documents.
It contains text-formatting utilities such as nroff, troff,
and pic. It can be coupled with drivers for various
typesetters and near-typeset-quality printers.

Note: Packaged with these release notes is a separate sheet
that contains the Software License Agreement. This
software is provided to you solely under the terms
and conditions of the Software License Agreement.
Please take a few moments to review the Agreement."

Just to note that there are many computer workbenches in the world out there,
and that Workbench is definitely not something that Hyperion has exclusive rights on only...





[quote]
DAX wrote:
@eXec
you mean a physical (ie:wooden) workbench or the fact that from 1.0 ro 4.1 there were many iterations of WB?

In the first case, of course those workbenches would have nothing to do with an operating system, a different thing is the "exterior" (GUI environment) part of an OS which goes along with an Amiga branded computer, which also happens to be similar in look and behavior to a namesake AmigaInc. IP (Workbench) which is part of AmigaOS.

To make things clearer:

AmigaOS innards are Exec+AmigaDos, CommodoreOS innards are Gnome/Linux.

The exterior part (gui environment) for both is called "Workbench".

Workbench in CommodoreOS, plays the same part as in AmigaOS, it can only represent the Gui environment of the latter (since the innards are Gnome/Linux based, so what else can it represent?).

_________________
____
...administration is for serious people only....

@DAX

And a bit more of pure facts that you might be wrong:

http://www-01.ibm.com/software/integration/wbimodeler/workbench/
http://www.cmcrossroads.com/forums?func=view&id=4188&catid=1
http://fixunix.com/vxworks/49177-create-vxworks-image-project-fails-workbench-2-4-a.html
http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/147686
http://www.cfd-online.com/Forums/cfx/25236-ansys-workbench-uncertified-linux-distros.html

So.... Obvious from here and many other available workbench "mutations" as
various os distributions over os addons and expansions , something`s wrong with Workbench.. or someone sold the licenses under the desk...

Last edited by eXec on 09-Feb-2011 at 04:28 PM.

_________________
____
...administration is for serious people only....

@DAX

Quote:

It's not about who has the trademark

If it's not about the trademark, what are you complaining about?

_________________
Dammy

@eXec
Of the examples you linked only one might pertain the issue here (the Linux distro) as the other have nothing to do with GUI environments. As I said you can call workbench anything that it's not a gui environment.

Now considering the Linux distro I can see a godzillion differences but I'll limit myself to just two:

1)they have nothing to do with Amiga.

2)they aren't even a commercial endevour.

For the two reasons above they attracted no interest whatsoever (basically they are totally ignored by Hyperion or anyone else) , however pay attention, both MOS and Aros gui environments are called something else, as they ARE related and do attract attention.

If you make a commercial computer system, you call it Amiga and call your GUI environment the very same as your competitor you are guaranteed that you will NOT be ignored.

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@damocles
Market confusion. Call it something else.

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@DAX

Quote:

Market confusion. Call it something else.

Who is going to be confused over the name Workbench? You have A-EON AmigaOnes vs C=USA C64x, Vic, and Amigas yet the term workbench is going to be confusing? I don't think so. I will also point out that the name, "Workbench" has been around since the beginning of the Amiga, hardly associated with the later versions.

_________________
Dammy

@damocles
err...let me ask you a question, what about that "5", where are the other 4 versions...(?)

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@DAX

Quote:

err...let me ask you a question, what about that "5", where are the other 4 versions...(?)

You have me convinced, C=USA should be using WB4 for the C64x and Vic since Amiga had 1, 2, 3 series already which C=USA has access to those object files. Get the petition going to change WB5 to WB4 and I'll sign it. Fair enough?

_________________
Dammy

@damocles
Even worse possibly as it is used in AmigaOS 4.x. Actually we refer to different Amiga Workbenches together with the version of the OS they came with, Workbench 3 should be the one that came out with OS3, Workbench 4 is the one used in OS4.
The fact is, the Workbench GUI environment IS the GUI environment of AmigaOS (all versions), so the use of such a name for the GUI environment of a computer line named "Amiga", will grate the ears of interested parties.
Speaking about interested parties though, I believe it's time to let them think about it, they will be heard if anything appears, as for now I don't think they will make much of a fuss about vaporware (we do, but hey, we are popcorn lovers afterall! ).

Wake me up again when something "real" materialize

_________________
SamFlex Complete 800Mhz System + AmigaOS 4.1 Update 4
Amiga 2000 DKB 2MB ChipRam GVP G-Force040 Picasso 2 OS3.9 BB2
AmigaCD 32

@DAX

Following Ford Thunderbird ("T-Bird") and Triumph Thunderbird example,

You have a GVP G-Force accelerator (68K processor) while NVIDIA has GeForce accelerator (CUDA processor).

PS; 'NVIDIA G-Force' returns NVIDIA GeForce in the Google's search results.

Last edited by Hammer on 10-Feb-2011 at 01:56 AM.
Last edited by Hammer on 10-Feb-2011 at 01:54 AM.

_________________
Ryzen 9 7900X, DDR5-6000 64 GB RAM, GeForce RTX 4080 16 GB
Amiga 1200 (Rev 1D1, KS 3.2, PiStorm32lite/RPi 4B 4GB/Emu68)
Amiga 500 (Rev 6A, KS 3.2, PiStorm/RPi 3a/Emu68)

@eXec

Quote:

http://www.linux.com/archive/feature/147686

Thanks for the link—I've never seen that before. It looks more like OS X than Workbench, but it's interesting, if not very original.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@bison

I don't think that's CUSA's workbench... it seems to be a regular Linux distro specialized for people who write code: "The highlight and focus of the distro are its development apps."

@damocles

Quote:

since Amiga had 1, 2, 3 series already which C=USA has access to those object files.

Interesting. Is that part of licence from Amiga.Inc?

I ask because according to the Settlement Agreement between Amiga.Inc and Hyperion it isn´t possible to market/sell/licence Workbench (as user interface).

However, WB disks can be still used to run some games (assuming WB interface is not accessible to the end user).

@pavlor

Quote:

Interesting. Is that part of licence from Amiga.Inc? I ask because according to the Settlement Agreement between Amiga.Inc and Hyperion it isn´t possible to market/sell/licence Workbench (as user interface). However, WB disks can be still used to run some games (assuming WB interface is not accessible to the end user).

Leo:
"We have access to ALL of Amiga Inc's IP. Maybe even AA if we asked, "

Source:
http://www.commodore-amiga.org/forum/6-workbench-5-software-development-/1586-yet-more-questions?lang=en#1608

_________________
There are very interesting in all languages.
http://www.kensonpro.com
Program, codes for websites, hifi, measuring instruments and more. The site is of more than 1200 pages and nearly 3Gb .

@CodeSmith

Quote:

I don't think that's CUSA's workbench...

No, it's nothing to do with CUSA, but I was surprised because I follow Linux fairly closely, and I had never heard of it before.

It looks like it was renamed to "Excelixis", and has since disappeared.

http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=952766

Last edited by bison on 10-Feb-2011 at 06:15 PM.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@linnar

Quote:

linnar wrote: Leo: "We have access to ALL of Amiga Inc's IP. Maybe even AA if we asked, "

I don't usually let this be known but................I have access to ALL the patents down at
the U.S. Patent Office. I would be happy to sell/license them to cusa,, for the right price.

@linnar

Quote:

We have access to ALL of Amiga Inc's IP. Maybe even AA if we asked,

I find the portion "maybe even AA if we asked" odd.
That indicates an inside knowledge that something regarding AA could be discussed.

Yet Pluritas stated the intent of Amiga Inc. quite clearly.
From 2 avenues:
(1)VC
(2)Sale of the more specifically mentioned parts of the IP

Amiga Inc. intended to continue with their enabling technology.

I can only assume that either:
(1)The statement made by C=USA is trying to show a possible degree of control over the AI IP not in evidence, or
(2)Something has changed regarding what AI is willing to sell

Correct me if I'm wrong.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*