Both of these nimrods better get there act together.
Both are licensees of a a product that may not have been legitimately owned by AInc.
BUT, Hyperion does appear to have a valid license to develop from OS3.1 source from AInc., AND Cloanto's license (most recent reaffirmed by AInc) gives them the right to distribute legacy versions of Amiga OS (even if it does NOT appear to confer ownership).
AND even if it did, Hyperion's settlement would pre-date the larte agreement.

Remember, Hyperion's settlement grants them the SOLE right to develop from OS3.1 source.

Cloanto may distribute legacy Amiga OS versions, it may have even acquired the right to the Amiga trademark, but their position in relation to owning the actual code or having the right to modify it is tenuous at best.

It would be in Cloanto's best interest to cone to a settlement with Hyperion on the use of the Amiga OS name and Hyperion's continuing right to distribute the OS it has been working on for over a decade.

Otherwise, this could de-evolve into the real discussion as to whether or not any of the parties, AInc., Hyperion, OR Cloanto ever really had a legitimate claim to the IP.