@OlafS25

Quote:

hmm that were private discussions, not "official". On other occasions you are insisting on "official" so be consequent there

No, I wrote here only about usage - exactly as you in case of magazines.

Quote:

And PPC was never a plan of Commodore

Right, Amiga Technologies thing.

@TRIPOS

Quote:

I don't know if they have the sources

I'm sure they do. I wasn't joking.

These are years I was absent, so I count on reliability of information passed TO me on said topic.

2 sets of sources basically. The set everyone could access during 96/97 and the Olaf (cleaned up) set of sources.

I'm not claiming Cloanto or anyone else would have that 2nd set beyond Hyperion.

#6

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

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @TRIPOS it seems I am getting old ok so "Amiga OS" was used before the end of Commodore. I do not know and cannot remember.

But only in discussion and in magazines etc. Commodore did never (in its life time) release "Amiga OS", that happened after the Commodore bankruptcy.

Simplified, it was basically "Workbench" under Commodore, "Amiga OS" under Amiga Tech/Int/Inc, and now it's back to "Workbench" again under Cloanto.

(And Hyperion are using "AmigaOS" for their fork for AmigaOne/PowerUP)

@TRIPOS

Quote:

And the Amiga Inc Hyperion agreement explicitly stipulates that Hyperion DOES NOT(!!!) own the source 3.1 source code, which is kind of funny!

Exclusive licence...

Quote:

The 3.1 sources are Cloanto's sources!

First, there is no proof it is so. Second, Hyperion´s licence to OS3 sources is EXCLUSIVE. Third, if (still hypothetical) transfer of ownership of OS3 souces was realised after 2009 Settlement Agreement, Cloanto would be bound by it (sources would be then of no use).

@pavlor

I suggest you reread what cgutjahr wrote about that.

He seemed quite certain Cloanto could build their own OS using their version of the 3.1 sources if they wished.

He'll have to repeat his contention, as his post about this is in the no longer accessible amiga section of moobunny. Heh.

@cgutjahr

I'm mentioning this from memory, so feel free to correct me.

Bah. Apparently I quoted this post on amiga.org, so this is the basic text:

Quote:

Should you ever want to create your own official "NG" distribution, you can now go to Cloanto for the required 3.1 license and a license to the "Workbench" name, and then try to license the individual OS4 components from their respective developers.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 03-May-2015 at 03:37 PM.

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

@pavlor

there is so much legal mess around all this that nothing would surprise me

@number6

Quote:

He seemed quite certain Cloanto could build their own OS using their version of the 3.1 sources if they wished.

He seemed quite certain of many things - some valid, some not. Is there any proof/confirmation of Cloanto´s legal ownership of OS sources?

Edit: That quote doesn´t explain my question.

Last edited by pavlor on 03-May-2015 at 03:39 PM.

@pavlor

the report about it:
http://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2015-02-00027-EN.html

@number6

Quote:

He seemed quite certain Cloanto could build their own OS using their version of the 3.1 sources if they wished.

I wonder what they would (legally) be allowed to call their OS at that point in time.

_________________
Dammy

@pavlor

Quote:

Is there any proof/confirmation of Cloanto´s legal ownership of OS sources?

If you noted my earlier post, I called the press release intentionally vague.

There was also a post by cgutjahr here about "fear", which tends to support the notion that clarity here is not desired atm.

Source

#6

Last edited by number6 on 03-May-2015 at 03:47 PM.

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

@damocles

they own "Workbench" so they could call it that

@number6

Quote:

number6 wrote: @TRIPOS Quote: I don't know if they have the sources I'm sure they do. I wasn't joking. These are years I was absent, so I count on reliability of information passed TO me on said topic. 2 sets of sources basically. The set everyone could access during 96/97 and the Olaf (cleaned up) set of sources. I'm not claiming Cloanto or anyone else would have that 2nd set beyond Hyperion. #6

And it is the "Olaf (cleaned up) set of sources" that OS4 is based upon (except the major parts "rewritten from scratch" , like Exec, DOS).

@Pavlor

This is what I meant in Post #117, the 3.1 sources Hyperion based OS4 on, is not the source code that will compile the real binaries found on the real Workbench 3.1 disks (and ROM). And it's not me who is obsessed with "teh reeel!!1!" original source code here, it's you. I'm just telling you how it is.

And while they are not the original sources technically speaking, they are derivative work from a copyright perspective, meaning that Hyperion doesn't own those either. They had a license from Amiga Inc to use those 3.1 sources for OS4, but they never owned them. The original sources should now be owned by Cloanto, and if no agreement between Olaf/Cloanto exist, these sources will have a shared copyright between those parties, hence both parties must agree upon how they are allowed to be used.

@TRIPOS

to clarify: it is another Olaf not me

interesting... that would mean the heritage (except "Amiga" in name) is based on post-Commodore time

@TRIPOS

Quote:

And it is the "Olaf (cleaned up) set of sources" that OS4 is based upon

Same for 3.5 and 3.9.

Quote:

is not the source code that will compile the real binaries found on the real Workbench 3.1 disks (and ROM).

I still don´t get it. It is derived from the very same souce code... and as I wrote above, even 3.5/3.9 are based on this source code.

Quote:

had a license from Amiga Inc to use those 3.1 sources for OS4, but they never owned them.

Right.

Quote:

The original sources should now be owned by Cloanto

Source for such claim?

Quote:

The original sources should now be owned by Cloanto, and if no agreement between Olaf/Cloanto exist, these sources will have a shared copyright between those parties, hence both parties must agree upon how they are allowed to be used.

I hope law is not your source of income.

@pavlor

Quote:

Second, Hyperion´s licence to OS3 sources is EXCLUSIVE

You missed the important part: "Without prejudice to any existing Licensing Agreements listed on Exhibit 1". Guess who's listed in Exhibit 1?

Quote:

Quote: The 3.1 sources are Cloanto's sources! First, there is no proof it is so.

That depends on what you count as "proof". Kickstart versions after 2.04 are not listed in the database of the United States Copyright office, I'll give you that. So we can only be sure Cloanto owns Kickstart up to version 2.04.

But Cloanto is distributing modified copies of 3.1 on floppy disks, CompactFlash and as downloadable disk image packs. Amiga Forever contains "3.X" a 3.1 distribution updated with as many 3.9 modules as Cloanto could license. That's strong evidence, as far as I'm concerned.

And in case you forgot: Ben Hermans didn't publicly oppose their claims, while he wasn't shy to do so in the past (i.e. during the CUSA days or when Mr. Dohnert went nuts).

@number6:

Quote:

I suggest you reread what cgutjahr wrote about that. He seemed quite certain Cloanto could build their own OS using their version of the 3.1 sources if they wished.

I am, but this assumption is not based on any additional non-public info, just on what we know and on Mike Battilanas description of what he owns. And, as I outlined above, Cloanto did already "build their own OS", albeit on a much smaller scale then Hyperion.

Hyperion has some rights regarding 3.1 aswell, obviously and is the only party that can use the "AmigaOS" mark, so it's likely there'd be some yelling and some issues to be solved should Cloanto ever decide to compete with Hyperion. Which, as I already stated, is quite an unlikely scenario anyway, IMHO.

@pavlor

3.5 and 3.9 were after Commodore or not?

@OlafS25

Quote:

interesting... that would mean the heritage (except "Amiga" in name) is based on post-Commodore time

Basicaly, Olaf Barthell salvaged original sources from tapes and converted/cleaned them for use in modern compilers. These sources were then used for both 3.5/3.9 and 4.x projects.

@takemehomegrandma:

Quote:

And while they are not the original sources technically speaking

Olsen adopted them so they could be compiled with modern compilers. So, yes - they are still the very same sources.

Quote:

And it's not me who is obsessed with "teh reeel!!1!" original source code here

You? Obsessed? What a ridiculous notion.

@cgutjahr

Quote:

Without prejudice to any existing Licensing Agreements listed on Exhibit 1"

Nothing about source code...

Quote:

. So we can only be sure Cloanto owns Kickstart up to version 2.04.

Nothing about source code...

Quote:

Amiga Forever contains "3.X" a 3.1 distribution updated with as many 3.9 modules as Cloanto could license.

Again, nothing about 3.1 source code.

Quote:

Ben Hermans didn't publicly oppose their claims

Why he should? (Yes I know he is evil etc. )


To sum it up: You have no proof Cloanto actualy owns OS sources and uses them for developement.

@cgutjahr

Quote:

And in case you forgot: Ben Hermans didn't publicly oppose their claims

In case you missed posts yesterday:

Just seemed strange to me

And there is a thread about AmigaRoundTable and mcb as well:

Source

Perhaps my comment about what things could be discussed needs to be made more forthright?

#6

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