@kolla

If cloanto hadn't registered it guess who propably would have... And with their track record, you really think it would have stayed like it has been...

@kolla

I'm not declaring who should or shouldn't have the right to register the checkmark, I'm just saying given recent history, somebody was bound to register it. And given the competition, Battilana sounds like the least evil choice - at least he hasn't threatened any print magazines recently...

Quote:

Countless people and companies have sold items with the checkmark on it - from A1200.net cases’ stickers, replacement PCBs, emulator packages (not just Cloanto), keyboards, cases for raspberry pi and various fpga boards…

A1200.net has a trademark license of some sort, so that's a special case. For US trademarks, only use in commerce is a valid concern AFAIK - which means that many of the things you list here are probably not relevant here: "commerce" means registered entity, paying taxes and all sorts of administrative fees etc. Not some fly-by-night-order-via-whatsapp operation run by a retired engineer in his spare time.

Quote:

it has been that ONE symbol one could use without fear of any kind of legal retaliation… for more than thirty years.

I assume that won't change for private, non-commercial projects - this strikes me as more of a defensive move.

Quote:

That Cloanto too have been using it, for more than 25 years, without registering it, just proves the point.

The checkmark image is an integral part of the software they licensed 25 years ago - i.e. they had the legal right to use it, while other parties just used it because nobody ever complained. Obviously, Battilana couldn't actually register it before he actually owned the relevant IP.


Quote:

AmigaKit are fully in their right to use it, just like everyone else.

Are they using the Checkmark on its own? I only remember them using the amiga.org logo (which includes the checkmark).

@kolla

Quote:

Notice the comment about the checkmark? Not even CBM bothered to register it.

That's because CBM sold computers, not legal actions. Primary business of the company was producing and selling hardware products, so they primarily focused on computers and their peripherals, not to graphic signatures and logos sold with them.

But, obviously, if your only business is just selling badges (any kind of badge) with a logo over it, then your only thing to worry about is other people using the same logo as well.

@paolone

Quote:

paolone wrote: @kolla Quote: Notice the comment about the checkmark? Not even CBM bothered to register it. That's because CBM sold computers, not legal actions. Primary business of the company was producing and selling hardware products, so they primarily focused on computers and their peripherals, not to graphic signatures and logos sold with them. But, obviously, if your only business is just selling badges (any kind of badge) with a logo over it, then your only thing to worry about is other people using the same logo as well.

🥇

_________________
I HAVE ABS OF STEEL
--
CAN YOU SEE ME? CAN YOU HEAR ME? OK FOR WORK

@cgutjahr

Quote:

Are they using the Checkmark on its own? I only remember them using the amiga.org logo (which includes the checkmark).

cough

announcement on same

kolla has some nice links to more in the above news story.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 12-Jul-2021 at 02:54 PM.
Last edited by number6 on 12-Jul-2021 at 02:47 PM.

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

@#6
More stepping on each other's feet. Amiga Corporation needs to defend against major trademark infringers making money in order to retain the check mark. There will likely be negotiation and licensing which will incur more legal fees. The situation with 4 Amiga businesses vying for power is not efficient. The business leaders feel hurt and then cease and desist orders and lawsuits follow. It's not Amiga Corporation's fault either as they own most of the Amiga IP and are trying to put Amiga back together. Are they going to want "Amiga Store" and "Amiga Shop" which Amiga Kit is sitting on back for Amiga use? Is "Amiga Kit" even too much of an Amiga trademark infringement? Will this only end when all 4 businesses are insolvent with no new Amiga hardware available?

@thread

MOTION for Leave to File and Supplemental Briefing

#6

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

@thread

Actual documents today, as opposed to content summaries:

motion-for-leave-supplemental-briefing

evert-carton-letter-to-judge-martinez

evert-carton-deposition

Quite a lot to read.
Courtesy Amiga Documents, as usual.

#6

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

@number6

Quote:

However, Mr. Carton’s testimony contradicts every aspect of Mr. Hermans’ assertion.

No surprises here. :)

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

@number6

"Manufactured and distributed by Amiga Kit under licence."

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

I am left wondering about the stock ownership situation at Hyperion when Evert resigned as manager (director).

Evert Carton 49 shares
Ben Hermans 48 shares
Timothy De Groote 3 shares

He states he was not compensated for his shares so did he give them away? Were his shares stripped from him by the combination of Ben and Timothy as shareholders? Was he notified by a shareholder majority that he was being forced to sell his shares?

Belgium business laws are likely different than the U.S. but the same situation in the U.S. would likely leave Evert retaining his shares of stock. He wouldn't need stock certificates either which often don't exist for small businesses. It might be worth Evert's time to talk to a Belgium business lawyer specialized in corporate law about his ownership rights in the business and how he lost them without compensation. If stock transfers were not done according to law, they may be invalid leaving Evert with 48% ownership of the business. I would love to see Hyperion audited as there appears to be unusual business activities especially in more recent years.

The deposition was indeed long. It gives some insight into the situation but nothing really ground breaking. What Evert remembers after so many years may carry some weight but I expect the wording of the 2009 Settlement Agreement to be more important. I still see AmigaOS 3.1.4+ as being an acceptable further developed version of AmigaOS 3.1 on the way to AmigaOS 4 despite the lower version number and that developing for the 68k is not restricted by the Settlement Agreement even if that was not originally planned. However, selling versions of AmigaOS prior to and including the mostly original AmigaOS 3.1, using Amiga IP not granted in the Settlement Agreement and challenging ownership of Amiga IP I see as problematic and adequate to terminate the agreement.

I found Evert's testimony honest and credible. One effect of Evert's testimony is as an anti-character witness against Ben. Once again, Ben comes across as an abusive controlling person which is even helped by Evert's matter of fact recollections of Ben's antics and activities. Evert does a nice job of controlling himself even if the animosity with Ben is apparent.

Last edited by matthey on 17-Jul-2021 at 02:18 AM.

@matthey

Just speculating here, obviously, and also after having read just 10% of the deposition, but to me it would be absolutely plausible if Evert would have waved his shares voluntarily.

He passed them on seven years after leaving the company. A company that, by OS4, had been focussed by Ben Hermans on activities completey different from the original aims it had been co-founded for by him once and in which he wasn't interested himself. A company he had significant losses with and a company that brought him bad experiences with his co-founder. A company run into debts and and a company once again involved in an interntional lawsuit.

Thus myself I would have gladly returned without compensation my shares of a business I'd not be interested in at all anymore and with a lawsuit I'd understandably not want to get involved with (as we've read, a previous attempt by Mike to get Evert involved as witness failed) - especially since this would mean I'd finally not have to deal with this topic and the persons involved anymore, being able to rule off this episode of my life completely once and for all.

Last edited by Senex on 17-Jul-2021 at 05:26 AM.

_________________
amiga-news.de

@Senex
I've never heard of anyone waving or returning stock shares. I don't know if it is even possible in the U.S. but it would be interesting to hear if and how it works anywhere in the world. I know about gifting stock shares which makes sense but is to the benefit of the recipient. I see the problem where Evert was making Hyperion money with contracts and Ben spending it on AmigaOS development and lawsuits but Evert had more control due to more share ownership and could have put a stop to it except when Timothy voted with Ben. Evert moved his contracting outside of Hyperion so why dispose of the stock? In the U.S., I believe he would be under no obligation to add capital to the business and could let it become insolvent and/or bankrupt although there could be potential personal liability unless the business is a corporation limiting liability. I just can't fathom giving the stock back to the business without trying to sell it even for a small price. If Evert didn't like Ben anymore, why do something that would benefit Ben? Why not sell the stock to Timothy for next to nothing as repayment to Ben?

Last edited by matthey on 17-Jul-2021 at 06:24 AM.
Last edited by matthey on 17-Jul-2021 at 06:16 AM.

@matthey

«Evert Carton» wonting to focus on embedded and washing machines is clearly why there is trademark mess right now, they should offered to buy the “Amiga” name, working on the product without owning the trademarks, has put Hyperion in major legal spaghetti.

Quote:

I still see AmigaOS 3.1.4+ as being an acceptable further developed version of AmigaOS 3.1 on the way to AmigaOS 4 despite the lower version number and that developing for the 68k is not restricted by the Settlement Agreement even if that was not originally planned. However, selling versions of AmigaOS prior to and including the mostly original AmigaOS 3.1, using Amiga IP not granted

AmigaOS3.1 was part of RunInUAE package, and as stand-alone product, Cloanto did not have an exclusive copyright to 3.1, until buying Amiga Inc. Workbench 3.1 / Kickstart 3.1 was removed from the web shop, some time ago, Amiga Inc was bankrupt. Clearly ben did not see it as problem at the time.

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

@Senex

Sounds reasonable to me.

Now go read the other 90% (evil grin)

#6

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

@thread
My thoughts are similar to those of Senex and I have read the whole deposition. If Evert had been through such a horrible time whilst losing a packet into Hyerion's coffers even to facing personal bankruptcy, I would have thought he would be glad to distance himself completely from them.

If Hyperion hasn't got any money other than what the sales of the OS bring in, and those being hotly disputed, perhaps he could see himself being required to pay out even more if the (eventual) outcome of the lawsuit is in Cloanto's favour and he was still a major shareholder.

edit: addition

Last edited by OldAmigan on 17-Jul-2021 at 06:47 PM.

_________________
Fred Booth
========================================
A500, A600, A1200 c/w Mediator and 030
AmigaOne and OS4.1
Mac LCII, G4 Powermac running OSX + Amigakit and MorphOS 3.0
Dell Mini 10 Netbook running IcAros and AmigaForever+Amikit+AmigaSys
2006 Macb

Didn't AInc (or whoever owned it at the time...) made part of the settlement agreement that they would be responsible for keeping the "trademarks healthy" or something to that effect ? How them missing renewal deadlines fulfill that ?
I can't change my idea that AInc and most of the others are just scavengers holding up to the "Name" and keeping others from doing anything...
BTW I don't know how some of you have the patience to read all that ...Jeez... ..

Last edited by Jose on 17-Jul-2021 at 09:03 PM.

_________________

José

Unfortunately Mr Carton comes across as being not very bright, and easily manipulated.

_________________

@OldAmigan

Quote:

OldAmigan wrote: I would have thought he would be glad to distance himself completely from them.

Oh, but Evert Carton did openly and very clearly distance himself from Hyperion when he resigned and left. He would have nothing more to do with Hyperion, no links whatsoever.

It’s a pity that moobunny is gone now. He posted a lot there, much info is now lost.

@TRIPOS

Well, at least parts of Moobunny are still available on archive.org.

I thought there was also a backup created by someone, similar to ANNA, but I guess I've mixed that up.

Last edited by Senex on 18-Jul-2021 at 09:30 AM.
Last edited by Senex on 18-Jul-2021 at 09:22 AM.

_________________
amiga-news.de