@Tigger
Quote:

with regards to the wonder twins

Quote:

For 75 Euros an hour and no time limit, you could have gotten some real programmers.

Quote:

Actually at the gateway 2000 show, we thought of the Friedens as code monkeys and really given the "technical prowess" they have shown over the years the monkeys may be mad I call them that.

Your arguements are degraded by your lack of respect towards the parties involved, and your petty name-calling. By continually talking about the parties involved in this manner you are degrading any point you may be trying to make. Additionally the uneven application of your poor attitude gives the impression that you have some personal axe to grind with either/both of Hyperion and the Friedens. This may be the case, in which case please state it, and we can take your comments with a better understanding of the context in which they are made.

With "19 years programming experience" you must be at least 40 - assuming you gained a professional qualification before starting your career - therefore I'm surprised that this needs to be pointed out to you : to maintain respect from others you must show respect yourself.

With this in mind, please can you make your points about the current issues without attacking - professionally and personally - the people who have spent a lot of time, money and effort to develop the OS (remind me: which OS did you develop..?). It would make reading - and responding - to any points you might make a lot easier, clearer, and less likely to be polluted with emotive arguements irrelevent to the current issues.

Thankyou.

_________________
Troll - n., A disenfranchised former potential customer who remains interested enough to stay informed and express critical opinions.
opp., the vast majority who voted silently with their feet.

I'd be interested to know the circumstances in which the Artic contract was actually signed - what was AI's & Hyperion's relationship at that point? It certainly seems odd for Hyperion to have signed a new contract with AI, when they were still arguing about the buy-back in the first contract. Particularly since this does seem to weaken Hyperion's buy-back case (how much is yet to be decided). It just seems plain wierd.

@Boot_WB
That's my feeling also.

Last edited by ChrisH on 23-May-2007 at 10:48 PM.

_________________

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: AI presented an early version of the contract, it doesnt have fake signatures or anything like that on it. How on earth do you believe that is lying to the court. They asked in there discovery for all signed contracts between the parties, that by itself will buy alot of leeway in this effort .

I said they *might* be misrepresenting through omission, at least thats how I see Hyperion painting the situation. I don't remember Amiga saying it was an early version and that they lost the current valid one and were hopeful it would be one of the documents found through discovery. Did they say that?

Quote:

I'm not saying that Annex II as provided is a fake, its identical to the one leaked to the amiga community years ago. The issue is that as several of us have pointed out, the way the "subcontractors" are grouped, assuming that the Friedens are subcontractors of Hyperion would not be first (or even second) guess.

Well I guess whats more important is what the judge and/or jury think of that.

Quote:

I think it likely that the judge and jury may see it that way as well.

Well I must say I'm glad you are not certain what they will make of it. Being that none of us here on this forum are them.

Quote:

Given the contract now provided to us by Hyperion with regards to the wonder twins

Are you calling them the "wonder twins" out of some sort of animosity towards them? Just curious.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 23-May-2007 at 11:13 PM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@Boot_WB

Quote:

Boot_WB wrote: @Tigger Quote: with regards to the wonder twins Quote: For 75 Euros an hour and no time limit, you could have gotten some real programmers. Quote: Actually at the gateway 2000 show, we thought of the Friedens as code monkeys and really given the "technical prowess" they have shown over the years the monkeys may be mad I call them that. Your arguements are degraded by your lack of respect towards the parties involved, and your petty name-calling. By continually talking about the parties involved in this manner you are degrading any point you may be trying to make. Additionally the uneven application of your poor attitude gives the impression that you have some personal axe to grind with either/both of Hyperion and the Friedens. This may be the case, in which case please state it, and we can take your comments with a better understanding of the context in which they are made. With "19 years programming experience" you must be at least 40 - assuming you gained a professional qualification before starting your career - therefore I'm surprised that this needs to be pointed out to you : to maintain respect from others you must show respect yourself. With this in mind, please can you make your points about the current issues without attacking - professionally and personally - the people who have spent a lot of time, money and effort to develop the OS (remind me: which OS did you develop..?). It would make reading - and responding - to any points you might make a lot easier, clearer, and less likely to be polluted with emotive arguements irrelevent to the current issues. Thankyou.

Extremely well said, thanks Boot_WB!

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@fairlanefastback

I'm just curious who the "we" are he's referring to at the gateway 2000 show. I wasn't that involved with amiga stuff at the time, so that period of history is pretty much unknown to me. What were the Friedens known for at the time, that they would have a reputation as "code monkeys", and with whom? I suspect Tigger's animosity towards them stems from something that went on between them before that.

Last edited by CodeSmith on 23-May-2007 at 11:19 PM.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

I was refering to the "buy-back - the code" not the money FYI.

Then you were discussing a completely separate issue.

What *I* have been arguing is that

(a) They took the money, (b) they receipted it, and (c) they kept it (the money).

Yet they are now claiming that there was nothing to buy, that no payment, no matter how big, would ever have bought what Itec/KMOS/Amiga thought they were buying, and that the description Hyperion themselves gave on the receipt was in error.

Hyperion want to establish that they have had an exclusive license to AmigaOS for the last FOUR YEARS. Yet their behaviour during those four years flies in the face of any such claims --- showing quite clearly that this is an argument concocted rather recently:

They signed additional contracts (note: plural. Yes, they did not know in March 2003 what McBill would state something which they now believe would trigger the insolvency clause in August, sure. But they signed another agreement in 2004). They sent potential licensees for OS4 to Amiga Inc. They even kept haggling over whether any money was still outstanding for the buyback clause, in 2006.

I suspect there is quite a simple reason for their desperate rewriting of history, though. The whole "we released it in 2004" rewrite is just way too flimsy to hold up, and they know it (look back at the "final update" release announcement and the resulting discussion here --- whoever HyperionMP is knew damn well that they were in trouble). And if that falls, then there is nothing left to stop the buyback, because as of November 2006, there can be little doubt that sufficient money was paid. Or, if they could somehow show that AI is still short, AI could simply make up whatever shortfall is shown, and be done with it. And at that point, the rest of the case becomes meaningless (well, it would still have to go through the formality of establishing that once you return all interest in something, you no longer hold any interest in it, and that that includes no longer receiving royalties for it --- which should take all of two minutes).

@dirigent

Quote:

I'm sure he can speak for himself, but from what he says he simply was against Hyperion doing the OS from the beginning on, and now he sees all his doubts confirmed. Whether that's justified or not I cannot say. It's more or less that simple I think. No need to attack him.

Removed post for ""Flame/Attacks: Do not flame! Flaming refers to derogatory, abusive, threatening, sarcastic, rude, or otherwise mean-spirited messages directed at members/users. "" Tomazkid

Last edited by tomazkid on 25-May-2007 at 02:34 AM.
Last edited by scabit on 24-May-2007 at 12:27 AM.

_________________
AmigaOne uA1-c 512M RAM - Only Amiga Makes It Possible!
Check my blog AmigaOne Computing

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

Sure you declare under threat of perjury that you did not know the Friendens were contractors and then you submit what may be an incomplete version of a document to support that, where most convienently the section missing is the one that refutes your claim.

Uh, did you take a good long look at the version Hyperion submitted? Did you notice the number of people who initialed each page? Did you then compare those initials with those in other Hyperion contracts?

I doubt AI will go for this line of attack, but they *could* state that they have no knowledge of that last page, had never seen it in their life, and that it most definitely was not part of any copy of the contract they ever signed. And unless they have other copies lying around somewhere, Hyperion have no way of showing that to be wrong.

@COBRA

Quote:

McEwen admits that Amiga was insolvent from May through July 2002

Uh, no. Not paying your debts is quite separate from not being able to pay your debts. I am sure we have all missed to pay a utility bill at some point; That didn't really make us insolvent, right?

Look, personally I would love for AI to be declared insolvent in mid 2002. But I'd give you 4:1 odds against that happening, and if you took those odds, I'd think to myself that I was hustling you....

@umisef

Quote:

Yet they are now claiming that there was nothing to buy, that no payment, no matter how big, would ever have bought what Itec/KMOS/Amiga thought they were buying, and that the description Hyperion themselves gave on the receipt was in error.

No they say that it was not a "buy-back" but a "buy-in". They don't dispute the clause existing but the interpretation ot it.

The description on the reciept noting the clause is incorrect in what way?\

___________________________
From the invoice:

Quote:

Payment pursuant to article 3.01 of the November 3, 2001 agreement between, Amiga, Eyetech and Hyperion

____________________________


Quote:

They signed additional contracts

That required Eyetech's signature which was never obtained. And they were not fully aware of Amiga's status.

Quote:

They even kept haggling over whether any money was still outstanding for the buyback clause, in 2006.

To my understanding they were arguing over total debts owed, not necessarily tied to the "buyback" or "buy-in". Amiga has tried to paint it as being related to that. Hyperion counter that other monies were owed and point to a clause where other monies owed must be paid before other monies can be applied to the buy-in.

Quote:

Or, if they could somehow show that AI is still short, AI could simply make up whatever shortfall is shown, and be done with it. And at that point, the rest of the case becomes meaningless (well, it would still have to go through the formality of establishing that once you return all interest in something, you no longer hold any interest in it, and that that includes no longer receiving royalties for it --- which should take all of two minutes).

Assuming first that the judge makes the determination its a "buyback" and not a "buy-in" as described by Hyperion, and then further assuming that it was valid to terminate Hyperion's license. (BTW you say Hyperion acted as if they did not have a license the last 4 years, yet if thats true why did Amiga say they were terminating it late 2006?). Well then I guess you are right. But I think its far from guaranteed that thats the way it will be seen yet by the court.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@umisef

Quote:

umisef wrote: @COBRA Quote: McEwen admits that Amiga was insolvent from May through July 2002 Uh, no. Not paying your debts is quite separate from not being able to pay your debts. I am sure we have all missed to pay a utility bill at some point; That didn't really make us insolvent, right? Look, personally I would love for AI to be declared insolvent in mid 2002. But I'd give you 4:1 odds against that happening, and if you took those odds, I'd think to myself that I was hustling you....

I believe thats why they entered the deposition from a previous case as an exhibit, the one refering to only $100 in the bank or so. Bill also has referred not only in that deposition from years ago, but in the very recent Seattle Times article about having been owed personally $740,000+ that could not be paid to him.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@scabit

I may disagree with some of what Tigger says but I disagree with all you say (about "publicly repremanded" and "removed from access to all Amiga forums") . He may have an agenda but so do alot of other people. In fact looking back at the revision of history I see alot of agenda being forwarded. Sorry to burst your bubble, but not all Amiga supporters think everything Hyperion has put forth is the truth (not that the AInc version is much better).

@Tigger

Quote:

The Friedens arent worth 75 Euros an hour as a pair, they surely arent worth it each. For 75 Euros an hour and no time limit, you could have gotten some real programmers.

Real programmers? Real programmers just laugh when they hear the name Amiga.

But seriously you are right you know. Those two guys are a couple of over the hill hacks who couldn't code themselves out of a box! Between you, me, Amiga Inc., and BBRV they did a HORRIBLE job on AOS4. Infact the operating system itself is really more of a joke. So, I suppose in the end Tigger you're right. So why don't you go on ahead and let AI and BBRV know that they can both stop going after AOS4 and we'll just let Hyperion go ahead and keep that little toy OS that those two crapped together in their basement.

Good idea.

_________________
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

@umisef

Quote:

So you'd keep money you believe someone sent you in error? And you'd do so silently, after having made several actions which you should know would be perceived by the other party as acknowledging the legitimacy of the payment? Remind me never to do business with you!

We don't know that (yet), all we know are the current submissions.
From the quality of both parties submissions, I would say there are probably more submissions to be made.Surely, you cannot make the above assumptions in such a case, you can only interpret the presentations of both parties.

When we know the full extent of the debts betweeen the two company's, and what payments were actually made and receipted, can you state the above assumption.
Even then the timeline and correspondence between both parties, would all affect the way the payments are interpreted.

_________________
Peter Swallow.
A1XEG3-800 [IBM 750FX PowerPC], running OS4.1FE, using ac97 onboard sound.

"There are 10 types of people in the world: those who understand binary, and those who don't."

@scabit

Quote:

Removed, original quote moderated /tomazkid

Get a grip. I don't know him personally, but from reading his posts for quite a few years now my impression is that, while he can be sarcastic and does have strong opinions, these are generally well-founded. He hasn't been a fan of the Friendens, which he is totally upfront about, but this doesn't mean he has a "hateful agenda." And I think he'd be the last guy to "spread rumor and lies" as he's clearly pretty confident about the validity of his information and I'm sure could indicate the sources to you if you doubt them. What you see as a mission to undermine "Amiga enthusiasts" (uh, check his credentials again please) is just him expressing his opinion here like everybody else. I don't necessarily agree with his take on this particular issue, but that's beside the point.

-- gary_c

Last edited by tomazkid on 25-May-2007 at 02:35 AM.

_________________
zukakakina.com - themes.tikiwiki.org

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

No they say that it was not a "buy-back" but a "buy-in". They don't dispute the clause existing but the interpretation ot it.

No, they dispute that it was even still applicable in April 03. They now claim that because of the "insolvency", 2.07 would have triggered first and thus 3.01 could not possibly be done.

With respect to that other issue --- they may claim it was a "buy-in", and that they would still hold some rights afterwards --- but the language of 3.01 and 2.06 is rather unambiguous: "Hyperion shall transfer all source code, interest and title" and "Amiga may elect to acquire the Object Code, Source Code and intellectual property of OS4.0". It then even states explicitly that should Amiga not elect to acquire these things, then they remain with Hyperion.

"Acquire" does not mean share. "Transfer" does not mean share.

Quote:

The description on the reciept noting the clause is incorrect in what way?\

Well, Hyperion claims that there could not possibly have been a buyback, because AI was insolvent. Also, they now claim that they "completed" OS4 in December 04, and that thus there could not be a buyback after June 05, anyway. And yet, they hang on to the money receipted for the buy-back clause. Odd, isn't it?

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

I believe thats why they entered the deposition from a previous case as an exhibit, the one refering to only $100 in the bank or so.

Well, no --- whether Amiga Inc(W) had $100 or $100,000,000,000 in the bank in August of 03 has absolutely no bearing on whether they were insolvent prior to April 23rd 03. That's pretty obvious, isn't it?

Yes, the same deposition also states that AI(W) had not paid a number of debts prior to that date, but it says absolutely nothing about AI(W)'s ability to pay those debts prior to the deposition date.

Quote:

in the very recent Seattle Times article about having been owed personally $740,000+ that could not be paid to him.

So? First of all, I believe that was a "was no paid" rather than a "could not be paid", and secondly there was nothing in the article indicating about any inability to pay debt prior to April 23rd, 2003.

@gary_c

Yea but Gary your opinion on many subjects really stray from reality too and they seem to match tiggers on those many occasions.

Now in support of Tigger statements.

In New York State as in many other states any design work paid by your employer is property of your employer. In other words if it done on company time it belongs to your company. That is why at my last job all of my design work was done by me at home on my time and all protoparts paid by me out of pocket. This way when I left a few years ago to start my own company all of my designs went with me. I could legally take all designs and plans and unless my former employer wanted to license them from me he would not be able to legally use them.

Subcontractor contracts should always be written the same. All work paid for by your employer belongs to your employer unless specified by your contract.

The really strange thing about all of these contracts shown by both sides are
There should be intials from both sides on the bottom of all the pages.
The last page should have titles and signatures from both sides.
There also should be a embossed time stamp and witness signature from a notary.

None of the Amiga documentation shows this.
While some of the Hyperion documentation shows some of this most doesn't and that is troubling to me.

Now for the real issues. Listen now TIgger from someone who has done legal research for some of the best lawyers in the country. Don't #### off the judge.
The fastest way to achieve that is to do what AI pulled. When you submit a document into evidence don't tamper with it. AI has really done themselves by submiting a fraudulent copy of the contract. If you read ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS!! yes I know that requires some effort on your part. You will see that Hyperion has submited better and more complete evidence to the courts. Redacting of documents submitted into evidence is a big no no. AI lawyers could be in big trouble if it can be proven that they even knew that the information provided to the courts was false.

Like it or not Tigger you can spout crude till it comes out your ears. Unless AI can submit some damn good reasons for their actions they are toast.

Kgrach

@umisef

Quote:

umisef wrote: @fairlanefastback [quote] No, they dispute that it was even still applicable in April 03. They now claim that because of the "insolvency", 2.07 would have triggered first and thus 3.01 could not possibly be done.

They say they were not aware of the previous insolvency at the time and hence did not know at the time that the buy-in/buy-back could not proceed I believe.

Quote:

With respect to that other issue --- they may claim it was a "buy-in", and that they would still hold some rights afterwards --- but the language of 3.01 and 2.06 is rather unambiguous: ... "Acquire" does not mean share. "Transfer" does not mean share.

Yet if its ambiguous by your own admission then you can't be sure what it means or does not. Hence why this is going to court.


Quote:

Well, Hyperion claims that there could not possibly have been a buyback, because AI was insolvent. Also, they now claim that they "completed" OS4 in December 04, and that thus there could not be a buyback after June 05, anyway. And yet, they hang on to the money receipted for the buy-back clause. Odd, isn't it?

Again I believe they say they were not aware of the insolvency at the time of the insolvency.

Where does it say Hyperion needs to give back partial payment for the buy-in/buy-back, especially when they said they were owed other monies into 2006?

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 24-May-2007 at 03:18 AM.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200

@gary_c

Quote:

He hasn't been a fan of the Friendens, which he is totally upfront about, but this doesn't mean he has a "hateful agenda."

Still he'd garner more open ears I would think not saying stuff like "the monkeys may be mad I call them that", where "the monkeys" are the Friedens.

I have no idea the nature of his issues with him, but if anything its harder to distinguish what portions of his posts are "well-founded" as you say when they also have stuff like that in them.

_________________
Pegasos2 G3 running AOS 4.1 and MorphOS 2.0
Amikit user, tinkering with Icaros VM (AROS)
EFIKA owner
Amiga 1200