@AmigaPhil

Quote:

AmigaPhil wrote: Quote: they just dont have a leg to stand on. They didnt buy the trademark, they never owned the trademark, we have bills of sale from the original owner all the way to the new owner, so Hyperions opposition is basically without merit. That is to be seen. The bad news is that the opposition process WILL take months, even up to one year (till end February 2009) ! To strip the good (?) side of all this, some of us are going to be very busy trying to follow the ongoing legal battle on 4 (or 5) fronts.

A trademark situation is alot different then a court case. Unless Hyperion can show good cause, they have basically lost.


Quote:

That's a bit more complex than that. As far as I understand (I've just quickly read the documents), the main ground on Hyperion's claims is that many transfers or assignements which happened since A(W)'s insolvency are invalid or fraudulent.

First of all, there is no proof that AI(W) was insolent under title 11, which is the only type of insolvency that would effect whether they could sell an asset. Secondly the claim that they are fraudulent was because Hyperion claimed that Amino was not compensated for the Trademarks, we've seen from newer court documents (some of the signed and notarized by the state of washington) that this is not true. Even if there were an invalid or fraudulent transfer, that would give the trademark back to Amino, it would not mean Hyperion gets it, thats the entire problem with Hyperion fighting the transfer, there is no mechanism that makes Hyperion the owner of the trademark, if that is true, they cant oppose it in the way they are now succesfully. Even if AI were insolvent under Title 11, Hyperion still isnt the owner of the Trademark, Amino still would be and it would be sold to a highest bidder if Amino were dissolved or kept if they were reorganized. No scenario gets Hyperion ownership of the trademark.
-Tig

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

@Samurai_Crow

Quote:

Which is irrelevant since AROS changed their acronym to be a recursive acronym: AROS= Aros Research Operating System. -edit- Kitty is AROS' trademark and the Boing ball has been eliminated from most AROS software for legal reasons.

AROS was probably bad example. But if Amiga Inc loses its trademarks I could start selling Minimig with boing ball and maybe with Amiga logo, too.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

if amiga.inc ever do lose the trademarks, dont assume that they just disappear. someone will own them afterwards.

_________________

@Tigger

Do you have a link for this document?

Thanks,
Kirka

@kirka

Quote:

kirka wrote: @Tigger Do you have a link for this document? Thanks, Kirka

Not sure what document you are talking about, the Trademark documents from Compumark are documents 60 & 61 on the Justia site. Document 82 Exhibit L is the bill of sale for KMOS, (Document 92 Exhibit 5 may be a better version, it has the notary pages). Hyperions opposition info is on the Trademark site. If I didnt answer your question, let me know.
-TIg

Last edited by Tigger on 10-Feb-2008 at 03:30 PM.

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

@Derfs

Quote:

if amiga.inc ever do lose the trademarks, dont assume that they just disappear. someone will own them afterwards.

Dont take that granted. And if Amiga Inc losed its trademarks there probably would be many companies claiming ownership to that trademark.

_________________
Amiga Developer
Amiga 500, Efika, Mac Mini and PowerBook

@itix

Quote:

itix wrote: Dont take that granted. And if Amiga Inc losed its trademarks there probably would be many companies claiming ownership to that trademark.

If Hyperion wins the challenge, the owner of the Trademark will be the previous owner (ie Amino), thats how it works in a trademark case involving a reassignment. The Trademark doesnt just become owned by anyone or noone.
-Tig

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

@Tigger

When is the next BIG court day???

_________________

@AmigaMac

Motion on judgement of pleadings by AI is suppost to happen on Feb 22nd but I'm not really sure what they are referring to "noting." Perhaps Tigger will explain the terminology.

_________________
Dammy

@Tigger

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @Dandy Quote: You mean they claim to own the contract and it still remains to be seen if this claim is appropriate... I'm not sure what you are trying to imply here. Amino says they sold it, KMOS says they bought it...

The question for me is if this sale has become final at all, as contractually required signatures on the sales contract are missing (or atleast one signature is missing).

Quote:

Tigger wrote: ...so I'm not sure what evidence you think you have that they didnt buy it.

I don't think I have any evidence, I just think that so far I didn't see any evidence that the sale ever became final...

Quote:

Tigger wrote: Quote: As a member of the "Amiga One Partners" as per the 2001 contract they had with Amino/AInc(W) perhaps? That would be the cancelled 2001 contract I believe if we are going to be accurate.

Where it is more than questionable for me if KMOS/AInc(D) had a right to cancel the contract at all...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@AmigaPhil

Quote:

AmigaPhil wrote: @Tigger ... Also, the "Boing Ball" trademark is a different case. ... Since then, the boing ball symbol has been used for many other demo, several web sites, products, ... And even if it is now recognised as a Amiga symbol, it has also been used on other computer plateforms, like Atari.)

Well, here is the latest non-Amiga-related apearance of the Boing Ball...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Dandy

Quote:

I don't think I have any evidence, I just think that so far I didn't see any evidence that the sale ever became final...

Which of the two contract are you referring to?

_________________
Dammy

Quote:

There are even more dangers to Hyperion there -- it could be possible that "Amiga Research Operating System" could be absolutely legal if Amiga Inc loses its trademarks. I dont think that is what Hyperion wants, they just want to damage Amiga as much as possible.

But what's left to be damaged ?

_________________
http://www.warpdesign.fr/

@damocles

Quote:

damocles wrote: @Dandy Quote: I don't think I have any evidence, I just think that so far I didn't see any evidence that the sale ever became final... Which of the two contract are you referring to?

Tigger was referring to the 2001 contract in post #223:

Quote:

Tigger wrote: @AmigaPhil ... You seemt to not understand that Amiga cancelled the 2001 contract on Dec 21, 2006, ...

and I asked Tigger "Again: How can they cancel a contract they 're no party to?"

Then I got an answer from you in post #224: "Cuz they got the contract in a swap out of IP for debt. ..." and in #226 I asked you "At what time did ITEC owe money to KMOS? Must have missed that - can you please provide a link to a document that tells so?"

I'm still waiting for an answer to my last question...

Last edited by Dandy on 11-Feb-2008 at 01:22 PM.
Last edited by Dandy on 11-Feb-2008 at 01:15 PM.

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Leo

Quote:

Leo wrote: Quote: There are even more dangers to Hyperion there -- it could be possible that "Amiga Research Operating System" could be absolutely legal if Amiga Inc loses its trademarks. I dont think that is what Hyperion wants, they just want to damage Amiga as much as possible. But what's left to be damaged ?

I guess he's talking about the company - not the platform...

_________________
Ciao

Dandy
__________________________________________
If someone enjoys marching to military music, then I already despise him.
He got his brain accidently - the bone marrow in his back would have been sufficient for him!
(Albert Einstein)

@Dandy

Quote:

Dandy wrote: @Tigger Quote: I'm not sure what you are trying to imply here. Amino says they sold it, KMOS says they bought it... The question for me is if this sale has become final at all, as contractually required signatures on the sales contract are missing (or atleast one signature is missing).

AInc sold it, KMOS bought it, we have signatures from both companies, I'm not sure who exactly you think is the missing signature.


Quote:

I don't think I have any evidence, I just think that so far I didn't see any evidence that the sale ever became final...

The two companies involved sign the contract and money/stock changes hands, thats all you need to do to carry this out. We've seen the sign and notarized contract and the notarized documents moving the trademarks, IP etc to KMOS, what exactly else do you need to see?

Quote:

Where it is more than questionable for me if KMOS/AInc(D) had a right to cancel the contract at all...

They have the right to cancel it, I think if Hyperion had been clever they could have held out cancellation for a long time by opposing it, but by no opposing the cancellation they lost alot of there ability to fight this.
-Tig

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

Quote:

Tigger was referring to the 2001 contract in post #223: Quote: Tigger wrote: @AmigaPhil ... You seemt to not understand that Amiga cancelled the 2001 contract on Dec 21, 2006, ... and I asked Tigger "Again: How can they cancel a contract they 're no party to?" Then I got an answer from you in post #224: "Cuz they got the contract in a swap out of IP for debt. ..." and in #226 I asked you "At what time did ITEC owe money to KMOS? Must have missed that - can you please provide a link to a document that tells so?" I'm still waiting for an answer to my last question...

First of all I answered this already in #229, they bought the contract from Amino. As for your question to Dammy, Itec didnt owe KMOS, Amino owed Itec, Itec sold the debt to KMOS who collected on the IP. Its all in the documents.
-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 I answered this already in #229, they bought the contract from Amino.

The problem everyone is now seeing is that you can't "Buy" a contract like this
without an assignment of the rights covered by the contract.

Hyperion claims the 2003 contract was their assignment to ITEC but the consent of Amiga(W) and Eyetech were not given thus the assignment is not valid.

ITec says it was a sale of Hyperions rights to ITEC outside of the 2001 agreement as the 2001 contract was abondoned by both Amiga(W) and Hyperion leaving Hyperion as the party with the rights to sell OS4.0 (Not the 2001 Contract)in 2003.

Amiga(D) said the 2003 contract was an assignment of the 2001 agreement but now are trying to change their story to follow the ITEC one.

Amiga(W) have not said anthing yet but will have to say something during mediation if they go down that road.What ever they claim will be used against
both Amiga(D) and ITEC by Hyperion.

_________________
Sam460ex : Radeon Rx550 Single slot Video Card : SIL3112 SATA card

@Tigger

Thanks for the information. I was looking for the bill of sale.

How come there is no date where Gary and Bill signed on the same page? That page is not notarized. Is this typical?

It looks like the notary was only for Bill signing a different document or later on. Is this correct?

Kirka

@kirka

That kind of sloppiness is the reason why the court case has stretched over a year, and why we're having these mile long threads. The agreements are in many places ambiguous, and there are frequent cases of legal snafus like undated signatures. Overall, I'm disappointed in Ben and whoever Amiga Inc had as legal counsel at the time.