@fairlanefastback

Quote:

Which doc was that and where in it #6?

Order on motion to dismiss, pages 6 & 7 of 7 page document.

#6

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

@number6

Thanks.

In fairness to Amino/KMOS/Itec/Amiga/etc the judge actually wrote "potentially troubling". Which is less worrisome (at least by bit) for them then if he had just said "troubling" outright.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Jul-2008 at 03:31 AM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Jul-2008 at 03:30 AM.

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

@fairlanefastback

I should have said:

Filing #96

due the large number of docs.

#6

Last edited by number6 on 30-Jul-2008 at 03:39 AM.

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

I hope this new secrecy will help speed a settlement... it's entirely possible that this mess has dragged along as long as it has because of the need to keep up appearances, so this may help both sides to find common ground without the glare of public scrutiny.

That isnt just potentially troubling, that is exactly the same game enron played. ( And its true, i saw it on tv! ^^)

Last edited by mike on 30-Jul-2008 at 04:34 AM.

_________________
C= Amiga addict
,,,
(Oo)
⎛☮ໄ
ﮑὠՀ
Couldn't care less what other people think, seeing that there's concrete evidence they don't.

@mike

Another good one starting with Hyperion's website...

Quote:

Leuven, Belgium - May 1, 2007.

(snip)
Quote:

Following over 18 months of unproductive negotiations with Amiga Inc. through our management and attorneys, we welcome the opportunity to finally present our case in a court of law which was regrettably the only remaining avenue after Amiga Inc. repeatedly and consistently stonewalled any attempt to resolve the outstanding issues (including the "Party Pack" and "I am Amiga Club" voucher schemes and the failure to acknowledge the intellectual property rights of third party developers) through mediation and binding arbitration.

Followed a few days later by AI (by sheer coincidence, given they have had YEARS to do this) sending out emails to users about this same thing and promising to make good.

Amiga Inc gives you $100!

I have NO words for this one....really I don't.

#6

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

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

So you are saying Amino willfully withheld the code needlessly from Hyperion even though they had a contractual obligation to produce it?

Considering Hyperion's contract with Olaf predates the OS4 contract, and that Ben Hermans was most vocal about wanting Olaf's improved sources; And further considering that Hyperion has yet to produce a single piece of evidence that so much as hints that they ever asked Amiga for the source code, let alone demanded it and/or pointed out a breach of contract before happily going ahead (not) paying Olaf, the use of "withheld" seems rather inappropriate. Heck, Amiga even explicitly authorised Olaf to provide source to Hyperion...

And either you have been flapping your lips without ever reading what other people wrote, or your "I did not know that" is disingenuous. You should most definitely have been in the "we" that "did know". It's in the court docs, you know, and has been pointed out before.

Quote:

Hyperion says they had to pay out of pocket for the sources from 3.1 thru 3.9 needlessly when Amiga (WA) was contractually tasked with that and could not produce.

Which is a very different thing from saying "Hyperion bought the OS 3.1 sources from Olaf" --- especially if the context is "even if AI never owned the sources, Hyperion 'legally obtained' them somewhere else, anyway, so it doesn't matter". You know, the context in which you posted.

OS 3.1 sources were never Olaf's to sell. And as I have pointed out in the past, Olaf did not sell the 3.1 sources. Olaf sold his improvements to the 3.1 sources[1] --- so where the improved 3.1 sources prior to the sale were co-owned by Olaf and the 3.1 owner, after the sale they were co-owned by Hyperion and the 3.1 owner[2].

Hyperion, unlike Olaf, was then in a position to actually make commercial use of the improved sources, because they (a) had a license for the 3.1 source, and (b) owned the improvements. However, (a) only applies if those who had given them such a license actually owned the thing they gave a license to. If one were to posit that they did not, then Hyperion has no license to 3.1, thus cannot exploit the derived work that was Olaf's improved 3.1 sources, nor the work further derived from that which is OS4.

Quote:

I'm not arguing that

Well, then you should pay more attention to the posts you are replying to. Because you replied to
Quote:

If proper transfer was never completed then OS4 is illegal based on stolen source code. Not very convincing.

If you reply to that with "legally obtained elsewhere", guess what --- people may actually think you reply to the thing you quoted, not something else entirely.



[1]: Itself a somewhat troubling aspect of Olaf's contract, seeing as (according to the contract), the improvements were made as a contractor for Amiga, and no indication is given as to how contract work suddenly became Olaf's to sell to the highest bidder...
[2]: Assuming the sale ever happened --- which typically requires payment, which at least was anything but timely, according to the court docs. Combine this with the apparent "a contract which is not paid for does get cancelled implicitly" which [1] implies...

Last edited by umisef on 30-Jul-2008 at 04:59 AM.

Didnt he send out a mail recently to coupon people? I remember something about people receiving emails from them that they would/wanted to pay back the 50 dollars to the coupon conned? What ever happened with that

_________________
C= Amiga addict
,,,
(Oo)
⎛☮ໄ
ﮑὠՀ
Couldn't care less what other people think, seeing that there's concrete evidence they don't.

@mike

My link is to that narrow time frame in 2007 only where AI was accused of corporate fraud basically, followed by undoubtedly some lawyer with a correspondence school degree prolly telling him it would be a good idea to send out an email promising to make good.
imo, Denise would laugh herself silly on this one.

Anything after that...you would have to ask those who are owed.
Maybe you need to sign an NDA to get what is rightfully your own money.
More likely though, is that this issue is one of the negotiating points.

Pardon my humor above, but really...this had to be one of the dumbest most obviously staged moves I have seen since this started.

#6

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

@number6

They made something like 500 000, or was it 50 000 dollars on that scam, half a year later they folded. I read that in the court docs i think.


Interesting.
Quote:

AmigaOS 4.0 is going to include many of the features that were originally planned for later versions of the desktop AmigaOS. With the need to rewrite certain portions of the code, the Hyperion team has decided to go ahead and fold in a great many more of the features that they were planned for OS 4.1 and OS 4.2 into OS 4.0

This part too, man this screams scam, i think he must have read pyramid game 101 rather then Business 101.
Uhm, 10,000 amiga one's were made? or less?
Quote:

OK one more - hit 50,000 orders Amiga will give away 100 systems, 100 Amiga Enabled Cell Phones 3 trips for 2 to either Hawaii or Florida.

Last edited by mike on 30-Jul-2008 at 05:29 AM.
Last edited by mike on 30-Jul-2008 at 05:27 AM.

_________________
C= Amiga addict
,,,
(Oo)
⎛☮ໄ
ﮑὠՀ
Couldn't care less what other people think, seeing that there's concrete evidence they don't.

@mike

Quote:

Uhm, 10,000 amiga one's were made? or less?

#49

Note that the reference to Evert Carton is in regard to this figure being a matter of record.

#6

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

@number6

Guess that means bill mc{bleep} was just trying to look good in the moment, again.

Uh, well im obviously blatantly incompetent, the some time ago post i referred to was post no 4 and some time ago would be a year ago

Last edited by mike on 30-Jul-2008 at 08:04 AM.

_________________
C= Amiga addict
,,,
(Oo)
⎛☮ໄ
ﮑὠՀ
Couldn't care less what other people think, seeing that there's concrete evidence they don't.

@fairlanefastback

Quote:

Well it makes no sense then for you to comment on Hyperion's legal strategy if you aren't going to read their arguments in the case.

The only strategy in this kind of legal battles is to produce massive amount of filings and claims. Hyperions says they own Amiga, Amiga Inc. says no you dont, and argumentation goes on.

Quote:

They point it out as a breach of said contract.

This happened seven years ago. The court case was started, what, year or two ago? Arent Hyperion little late now? Also if Hyperion considers that it was treated unfairly by Amiga (WA) it has no relevance to KMOS or Amiga (DE).

Quote:

They argue that Amiga (WA) went insolvent first and that that fact was covered up. And thats relevant to them because the contract with Amiga (WA) says that if Amiga (WA) were to become insolvent that they get a perpetual Amiga OS license to sell, market, distribute the AOS 4.0 product.

Then they must take needed legal proceedings to execute 2.07 clause in their contract. It is too late now because Amiga WA no longer owns that contract. On the other hand if Amiga DE owns that contract now, and they go insolvet (but dont file bankruptcy) they probably could try executing 2.07 clause.

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

@umisef

Quote:

Olaf sold his improvements to the 3.1 sources[1] --- so where the improved 3.1 sources prior to the sale were co-owned by Olaf and the 3.1 owner, after the sale they were co-owned by Hyperion and the 3.1 owner[2].

Wouldn't this source code run into trouble as it would qualify as "derivitive works". I guess it would depend on any contract(s) Amiga Inc holds on the matter. And as we've seen so far, they are very poor at authoring/keeping documentation.

Plaz

@number6

Quote:

Maybe you need to sign an NDA to get what is rightfully your own money.

It seems a long time ago now, but I got a letter (or was it an email?). It asked me to send back the coupon (IIRC) for redemption, a course of action I thought at the time less than certain to yield a positive result.

I had lost the coupon many years before, anyway, so I was unable to participate in the redemption scheme.

My scepticism at the time still seems justified. I don't think I've missed out on anything.

_________________
cheers
tony

Hyperion Support Forum: http://forum.hyperion-entertainment.biz/index.php

@Plaz

Quote:

Wouldn't this source code run into trouble as it would qualify as "derivitive works".

Hence the "co-owned" status --- neither owner can make any use of it without the other owner's agreement.

Prior to Olaf selling his improvements (but not "the 3.1 source code"!!!) to Hyperion, Olaf couldn't use the improved source because he did not have a license for the 3.1 sources, and the owner of the 3.1 sources couldn't use the improved version because they had no license for the improvements.

After the sale, Hyperion was in a position where it owned the improvements, and had a license to the 3.1 code (assuming the license was AI's to give), so they could actually make use of it. They then went and improved the source further, leading to OS4 --- which however also includes a number of other third-party contributions, some of which Hyperion does not own. Thus, at that point, the OS4 source code is co-owned by the 3.1 owner, Hyperion, and third-party contributors. But Hyperion supposedly has at least binary distribution licenses for all those parts, so they could go ahead and distribute OS4 binaries.

Now, according to Amiga, three things have happened since (or actually, two things happened before Hyperion ever distributed OS4, but what's interesting are the effects on the current situations):

(1) Amiga paid $25,000 and bought all of Hyperion's title and interest in OS4. While opinions differ on what that actually means, it should be fairly clear that, if found to have happened, this would bestow at least co-ownership of parts of OS4 to Amiga, and as no license for those co-owned parts has been granted to Hyperion, it would at least leave Hyperion without the necessary ownership/license coverage to distribute OS4. At the same time, it is unlikely that even the most generous reading would get Amiga sufficient coverage to distribute, as some of the third party binary distribution licenses are probably not transferable.

(2) Amiga paid, upfront, for Hyperion's OS4-on-Arctic effort, according to a contract that assigns complete ownership of those enhancements to Amiga. Unless extreme care was taken by Hyperion (and its contractors :) to avoid any of this work ending up in OS4-proper, there is every chance that this, too, introduces Amiga-owned code into OS4 for which Hyperion does not hold a license.[1]

(3) Amiga cancelled Hyperion's OS 3.1 license --- meaning that, if upheld, Hyperion may find itself owning lots of improvements, but not having access to the thing that's being improved.


IMHO, Hyperion finds itself backed against a wall --- there are at least 3 completely separate reasons why they may require AI's agreement to distribute OS4, any one of them being sufficient to make distribution without agreement a clear act of disregard for IP ownership. And while any one of those reasons might be overturned, the odds of all three going Hyperion's way are, I believe, dim.
Of course, disregard for IP ownership is nothing new in the Amiga market (cf H&P and 3.9/AmigaOS XL), and it is doubtful whether Amiga could actually *do* much if a Belgian company decided to thumb its nose at them --- but as someone who makes his living from creating IP, I sincerely hope that that's not even a plan C at Hyperion.


[1]: Especially if/when Hyperion release SAM440 support (with the SAM having, IIRC, a CPU extremely similar to that in the Arctic, and quite dissimilar to those in the A1), the civil case standard of "on the balance of probabilities" would appear to swing Amiga's way here.

@CodeSmith

Quote:

I hope this new secrecy will help speed a settlement...

Well, docket 115 is on Pacer --- joint status report, with a request for a settlement conference in October, with all existing deadlines to be suspended until (long) afterwards.

Now, note that "settlement conference" is entirely non-binding (see
here (pdf) for details --- subclause (e)). So if (as 15 months of pure bloody-mindedness from both sides, as well as non-agreement on matters of procedure in the joint status report, would suggest) nothing comes off it, that's just a further 3 month delay.

@umisef

Quote:

And either you have been flapping your lips without ever reading what other people wrote, or your "I did not know that" is disingenuous. You should most definitely have been in the "we" that "did know". It's in the court docs, you know, and has been pointed out before.

Ever combative and condescending and entirely predictable as such. I've read the court docs, which is mind numbing enough at times. I have not read everything that other people have wrote about them. I don't have the time for that like you and (formerly Tigger) did to go on endlessly about it all in loops and loops and loops, I did for a bit and had enough. Thats your business how to spend your time and I'm not putting it down. But no I have not read the likely thousands of pages of armchair lawyer discussions about it on all Amiga forums. My recollection is they had to go to Olaf for 3.1 and that the copy he happend to have was the one he had made changes to. I don't remember any subtlety that Hyperion "only bought the changes". And I remember distinctly that they went on about Amiga not providing any of the sources as contractually required. I also remember distinctly Hyperion complaining about the extra expense occured to get 3.1 thru 3.9 and how it set them back on time. I don't claim to have a perfect robotic memory but thats what my recollection is. You can go shove your "flapping your lips" and "is disingenuous" garbage. I'm not accusing you of anything, learn to bite your tongue before you do of others unfairly.

Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Jul-2008 at 05:13 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Jul-2008 at 05:13 PM.
Last edited by fairlanefastback on 30-Jul-2008 at 05:12 PM.

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

@itix

Quote:

This happened seven years ago. The court case was started, what, year or two ago? Arent Hyperion little late now? Also if Hyperion considers that it was treated unfairly by Amiga (WA) it has no relevance to KMOS or Amiga (DE).

The original contract was seven years go. They use the later Bill Mcewen deposition from another case to show insolvency later than that. But yes it seems a little late regardless, even a lot late. I don't view either party as at all honest in this. Which devil are you going to root for is what it comes down to in my book.

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

@umisef

Quote:

After the sale, Hyperion was in a position where it owned the improvements, and had a license to the 3.1 code (assuming the license was AI's to give), so they could actually make use of it.

Thanks for the indepth explaination. It fills in some gaps in my understanding of the different bits of IP held by the various players.

So I see that if these two do not settle in mediation, it's unlikely any one involved (encluding us) wins where OS4 is concerned. Hyperion will not have license for the 3.1 bit, and Hyperion will probably not want/or be able to give Amiga Inc access to all the additional bits used to complete OS4. Amiga would be able cut ties with Hyperion and move on to OS5 if they wish. (har, har)

However, if Hyperion wins and keeps their OS4 license, they still don't have license to port OS4 to other platforms. Correct?

I'd have to say then... the only positive out come for OS4 would be for Hyperion to win. This would allow OS4 to continue possibly forcing Amiga to make some settlement in the future which might include porting rights. Unlikely though. Amiga Inc can always just wait around long enough for Hyperion to fade. How long could they last if not allowed to port to new hardware with more Amiga hardware dying or being scraped. Of couse things have a way of working out in ways I could never imagine.

Plaz