No, that post was to long and apparently it wasn't worded clearly enough.

I'm not particularlly worried about the potential issues raised by the MorphOS team involving themselves in this situation. As intellegent individuals, I trust that their decisions would be sound concerning what organizations they involve themselves with.

Andreas' quotaation of these statements did trouble me:
> fund the development of new computers to run MorphOS2.x on and name
> them new Amiga computer models.

Andreas, I, and I assume the MOS development team know that can't occur because of the legal constraints Andreas has already pointed to in the Hyperion/Ainc aettlement.
>its "Substantially Similar Software Architecture" clause

That same clause would probably affect CUSA's abillity to ship PCs with either MorphOS or AROS installed (as the restriction is not hardware specific).

So no Dave, I'm not "worked up about a connection between Amiga Inc. and the MorphOS Team that only existed in your own perception".. I was worried about statements made by others (and quoted by others) that could lead someone else to a coclusion that such as relationship might exist (when it cleatrly can't). Then I spent way to much time on the potential ramifications of oa situation we know won't occur

As I am not a lawyer, and shouldn't have offered my opinions on the ramifications of a situation that isn't likely to occur.

Further, I never should have made that statement regarding AInc not producing anything. At the time, I was thinking of hardware, and they have produced some software (ie Amiga Anywhere). Also, as an IP holder, they are not obligated to produce anything.

So for that inaccurate statement and for foolishly voicing speculation that I'm sure all of us have considered, I appologize.I My opinions regarding all parties, comments, and quotes mentioned in this thread had too great an influence on that post and I should use more caution when mixing opinion, conjecture, and facts.