> Jim, Cloanto [...] are *the owners*

He knows that claim of Cloanto's, but he clearly doesn't believe it. There's hope that Cloanto will publish the respective 2011/2012 paperworks in the course of the current lawsuit so it'll be for everybody to see if true or not.

> “The Settlement” is between Hyperion an Amiga Inc, noone else.

The 2009 settlement agreement is between 4 companies:
- Amiga Inc. (Delaware; renamed from KMOS Inc. in 2005)
- Itec LLC
- Amino Development Corp. (Washington; renamed from Amiga Inc. in 2007; renamed from Amino Development Corp. in 2000)
- Hyperion Entertainment VOF

http://www.hyperion-entertainment.biz/index.php/news/38-corporate/134-hyperion-entertainment-cvba-and-amiga-inc-reach-settlement

>>> They sued Titan Computer

>> Any more examples of Hyperion's "unnecessary litigation"?

> Amiga

As said, that was a countersuit, and certainly not unnecessary from Hyperion's viewpoint.

> possibly Epic, possibly H&P.

...or possibly not. I'm not aware of litigation between Hyperion and either company.

> Being litigious isn't just about suing people, it's also about giving people
> little choice but sue you.

Seems it has been language barrier at work then. The German translations for "litigious" can only be used for the suing party, but not for the party sued. As you are a native English speaker I'll have to give that to you.

>>> and seem to have fallen out with Haage&Partner for a similar reason.

>> Any details on that?

> See Steffen Hausser, ANN.lu.

I cannot find anything on a fallout between H&P and Hyperion on anna.amigazeux.org, less so involving Steffen "MagicSN" Häuser. Can you give more hints to better define the search?

>>> They spent enormous time trying to convince people that [...]
>>> bPlan were putting logic bombs in their firmware

>> Any details on that?

> See ANN.lu, the ShopIP saga. [...] Ben was posting on AWN's hidden forums and the
> OS4 mailing list [...], forging a false narrative that the fanboys could all parrot.

I vaguely remember this story between Genesi, ShopIP and certain OpenBSD developers. There was a public accusation (later retracted) by Mitch B. Parker regarding a "logic bomb" in the CrunchBox code allegedly inserted by Genesi.
I'm not sure of the relevance of "firmware", Ben Hermans, hidden forums or OS4 (mailing list) in this context.

>>> They walked into the original agreement with Amiga Inc believing that
>>> that AInc would just go bankrupt and they'd walk with the Amiga name

>> I'm not aware that the 2001 agreement would have given ownership
>> of the "Amiga" name to Hyperion in case of Amiga Inc. bankruptcy

> Not ownership - just the ability to use it wherever they liked.

Unlikely, as the "Amiga" name would have been purchased off the Amiga Inc. remnants by someone else who probably wouldn't have allowed Hyperion to "walk with the amiga name".

> Much like A-Eon does now.

No, A-Eon have been doing it much more subtly for the last 3½ years ;-)

Quote:

Sure they would, didn't stop Ben from claiming that that bankruptcy clause was his masterpiece.

The only way it might have worked if AInc had been 100% solvent and creditfree at the time of signing.

AInc on the other hand had insited on the 25000$ buyback clause being fully aware that OS4 would cost much more to develop.


So in short, 2 conmans who thought they had just pulled a fast one on the other......

Quote:

Its not really a matter of belief, I just don't see how a 2011/2012 agreement would negate a 2009 agreement.
This IS quite a hot mess.

As to belief, I'm unsure that AInc. itself ever truly owned the rights to OS3.1 in the first place, but as latter variants were created under license from AInc. (although...wasn't that the first AInc....Amino, ah whatever).
Basically, no one else was in a better position to claim ownership...


[ Edited by Jim 04.01.2018 - 17:08 ]

Amy owns a car. Since 2009 she has let Hyper Harry use it. Still Amy”s car though.

Cloe has also been allowed to use the car, actually for much longer, even since long before Hyper Harry even existed. Over time, Cloe has taken over more and more of the actual ownership of the car from Amy. She has still let Hyper Harry use it though, at least as long as they were friends.

But then in his eternal wisdom Hyper Harry decides to screw Cloe over in her own domain as part of an obvious robbery scheme against her. Then Cloe won’t allow him to use the car anymore.

“But hey”, Hyper Harry says, “Amy lets me”!

“It’s my car”, Cloe say, “it’s my property as registered in public records since years. And I say no”!

“But my agreement with Amy...” Hyper Harry wines...

“Talk to *her* about it then, see if I care. It’s not her car, it’s *mine*! You should have given me love instead of hate! After all we were in bed together, we had something going, but you decided to rob me!”



(Edit: The names has been changed to protect the innocent. And with the hope of Kronos won’t start targetting grannies with his car...)

[ Edited by takemehomegrandma 04.01.2018 - 22:17 ]

It‘s all alright as long as someone uses that car to driver over granny!

[ Edited by Kronos 04.01.2018 - 16:19 ]

Quote:

Lousy analogy.
Let's look at this from a contractual law perspective.
You, in a legally binding document, assign specific rights to develop from an IP.

Without qualifiers or expiration clauses. In fact, the sole right to develop from that code base.

Your later sale of that IP to another entity does not negate your earlier contractual obligation, or the assignee's rights to use the IP, as the new IP holder has no right to challenge a license issued by the previous IP holder.

In fact, since the first agreement predates the later, it could be interpreted that Amiga Inc. did not have the right to confer full ownership of the Amiga IP, as it had previous legal obligations.

Look, I live in Delaware (home to many of the parties involved in this fiasco), and I'm pretty sure we have a very linear interpretation of contract law.
You're trying to throw emotive reasons into this mix, but that's a sure path to defeat.
Because this is about issues that are defined in writing and are meant to be strictly interpreted in a rational manner.

Quote:

If that was my grandmother, she'd be the one doing the driving.

[ Edited by Jim 04.01.2018 - 10:26 ]

It's a fundamental difference in concept between a loan/lease and ownership. If Hyperion is unhappy with Amiga Inc for whatever reason, they should bring it up with them.

Heck, should Amiga Inc want to release a product based on Commodore Amiga OS (the "Checkmark Branch"), they would have to get a license from Cloanto, the registered copyright owners.

It doesn't matter anyway. The whole purpose with the lawsuit is to disarm Hyperion as opposers to the Amiga trademark registration, to make a case that Hyperion in no way is entitled to this, since it is about ownership of IP that Hyperion has never owned, and any and all rights Hyperion might have to use the IP in question is predated by Cloanto by several years, no matter how you count. When that is done, when the situation has settled, when the Amiga trademark registration is a done deal, I am pretty sure Cloanto won't give a f!ck about Hyperion continue to develop and sell their OS4 to all 80 or so owners of €3000 AeonKit PPC motherboards. They might even be positive to that thought. I think they are. I think they want OS4 to continue. Maybe they will once again be part of new OS4 products as well. I also think they want Olsen to continue his development of the 68k side of the "Bong Ball Branch" as well.

Cloanto is as old as Commodore Amiga. They must be the oldest still existing Amiga company in the world. Nothing in their track record suggest anything in the line of them wanting to stop or prevent things. That kind of crap is all in Hyperion's domains. No, with Cloanto it is the opposite, they want Amiga to exist forever in whatever past/present/future shapes and forms possible, and they want as many as possible to be part of it.

Hence their talk about "A discourse on possible Amiga futures":

http://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb/viewtopic.php?mode=viewtopic&topic_id=42002&forum=2&start=0&viewmode=flat&order=0

Quote:

I'm obviously missing some obvious explanation here. Perhaps you can help explain this to me...

Quote:

Source

Since it's already been proven in this thread that 1.3 was included with 4.1...
Source

How did this right get to Hyperion if Amiga Inc. is making the admittance (above) that it was not their right (and therefore obviously not their right to transfer via a settlement agreement with Hyperion)?

#6

Quote:

Confusing, isn't it?
When it was in AInc.'s interests to offer licenses for AmigaOS, it did.
That's where H&P came in until OS4, development of which was transferred to Hyperion, which managed to secure an agreement with AInc. that included a bankruptcy clause...which they exercised in order to obtain the sole ownership of OS4 and, in a settlement resolution were awarded the sole right to develop from OS3.1 source code.

Its convoluted, but as there is more than a little valid proof that the entity that owned AmigaOS never properly completed transfer to the new AmigaInc. in Delaware (with whom Cloanto has their contracts).
AND that the former holders of the IP, and AmigaInc. of Delaware, and Hyperion mutually agreed that a license for the sole right to develop from OS3.1 was conferred to Hyperion.

I don't think Delaware courts will invalidate this settlement, as it involves all the related parties, while the Cloanto agreement is only between Cloanto and AmigaInc. Delaware, a company that may not even have the right to confer that IP, which has in any case previously assigned rights to license that product to another company.

SO, anyone not with my logic here? You don't have to agree with it, but between the you and me, I probably have more experience and education dealing with Delaware business law than most of you.

[ Edited by Jim 04.01.2018 - 14:11 ]

I dont care either way if either or both companies sue the shit out of each other until they're broke and end up closing up shop.

That would be great. I'm glad I went the MorphOS way, regardless of how little I use it. Its amazing how people get so wound up about the Amiga nowadays.

Quote:

Actually, I'd agree that the inclusion of Kickstart 1.3 is NOT covered by the KMOS, AmigaInc., Hyperion settlement.
That WAS pretty stupid on Ben's part.

Including 3.1 should not pose a similar problem, or development of further variants of 3.1.

Here I'd tend to side with TMHGM. There's no real threat to OS4 here, only Hyperion itself, as a financial judgement against them could mortally wound the company.

This WILL get interesting.

There are a multitude of possible outcomes.

Hyperion might just be required to eliminate infringing material from their current and future stock of CDs, they could be required to pay for their past infringements, or both parties could come to a mutually agreeable settlement.

My guess is this will slowly be worked out.
Because even if pursued aggressively, Clanto could never gain ALL the rights to OS4.
And its unlikely they want to see the only company legally entitled to develop from the OS3.1 sources eliminated from the market.

And Ben hasn't threatened Cloanto for their development of 3.1....yet.

Something tells me these two entities will work this out.
After all, I doubt Hyperion wants to base OS3.X on OS3.0 or earlier.
And the loss of Kickstart 1.3 to Hyperion is no big deal (they could even help Cloanto gain some business by referencing customers to them for earlier releases).
Just as Cloanto could help Hyperion sell some copies of OS4 for emulation.

Some both parties could gain in this, and a one sided solution is not going to benefit either.

If you eliminate the irrational/emotive logic messing up this equation, then a rational approach seems simple.
A mutual agreement for cross licensing and promotion is the most likely outcome.

The Eyetech Debian CD for the AmigaOne came with UAE and a full install of OS3.1 was included with permission from Amiga Inc. I don't think any other version were included.

Quote:

For most of us, that would be all we require.
I don't even understand the logic in including earlier versions, outside of their possible use under emulation for increased compatibility.

And I don't require THAT much compatibility in an NG system.

Hey, if I can't get it to run on my NG hardware, my A2000 or my CD32/SX1 without resorting to really ancient ROMs...I don't need it.

Jim, there is a difference between the ”Checkmark Branch” 3.1 and the ”Boing Ball Branch” 3.1.

Some tries desperately to ignore this historical fact, but that doesn’t make it less true.

Cloanto are the registered owners of Commodore Copyrights, 0.7-3.1. They do what they want with it, as they have been doing with ”Workbench 3.X” since... what, 1.5 decade? Longer? Currently 3.X is largely what AmigaOS 3.9 was.

What Hyperion has been using (with permission) is Olsens ”3.1” sources, whose main feature is that it largely is a port/rewrite for more modern programming languages and toolchains. Just like AROS and MorphOS it provides 3.1 API using source code and toolchains that *does not* compile the Commodore 3.1 binaries, but is cleaned and more suitable for further development. Main difference is that MorphOS/AROS is clean room while Olsen had access to the Commodore sources while writing/porting it, which ”polluted” it with Commodore IP. The implications of this is yet to be seen.

But please be aware that there are two ”3.1”; the ”Checkmark Branch” and the ”Boing Ball Bramnch”.

Cloanto fully owns the first one.

Olsen and Cloanto owns the second one.

Amiga Inc owns nothing.

Quote:

Commodore binaries or Olsen binaries?

Quote:

The original settlement made no mention of multiple OS3.1 variants.
And if 'Olsen's' 3.1 variant is a cleaned up version of the original, then Cloanto's claim to IP control may violate the basic terms of the 2009 agreement.

IF it could be determined which source the agreement references.

If its the original Commodore version, Cloanto would stand to lose even more by pushing this.
And if its 'Olsen's' code, even compromised by some legacy 3.1 code inclusion, it would be better to leave that to Hyperion.

SO, let me guess, Cloanto uses Olsen's work for its 3.x variant...right?

Looks like BOTH parties have erred.
Herman's never should have included Kickstart 1.3 with OS4, and Cloanto should never have assumed that their purchase of assets from AmigaInc. negated the IP rights assigned to Hyperion.

BTW - Copyrights, at least in the US, are generally for intangible assets of value (names, trademarks/logos, audio, video, other IP, etc.) distributed by tangible or intangible means.
That definition does cover computer software, but in no way would a prior licensing agreement be voided by a copyright transfer.

And if the assignee in the first agreement was given a license to exclusive use of source code before Cloanto obtained said copyrights from the SAME source, but later, then Hyperion would appear to have a good position to fall back on.

So far, the only major point I can see in Cloanto's position is the clear violation of their IP rights to Kickstart 1.3.
Their IP rights to 3.1 were already limited by AmigaInc's past obligations.

Cloanto probably does have the right to distribute unaltered versions of 3.1, but new one?
Nope.

Should Hyperion care to, they could realistically enhance their current work and relabel it OS4 for the 68K.
Then the controversy would be even more threadbare.

[ Edited by Jim 04.01.2018 - 16:22 ]

Quote:

I don't see why it's relevant but it should be fairly obvious that it was the Commodore binaries. The actual source was the Magic Pack, the rest of the software was also included as part of the Amiga OS3.1 install.

Quote:

That's interesting, but it makes sense, the variant TMHGM keeps calling the 'Olsen' version is obviously more recent.

So, if "Hyperion is granted an exclusive, perpetual, worldwide right to AmigaOS 3.1 in order to use, develop, modify, commercialize, distribute and market AmigaOS 4.x (and subsequent versions of AmigaOS including without limitation AmigaOS 5) in any form, on any medium and for any current or future hardware platform under the exclusive trademark “AmigaOS”, 1n 2009, then how could Amiga Inc transfer the rights to the same software to Cloanto three years later?

Some here have said that Hyperion's rights are limited to OS4, but that quote mentions OS4, OS5, and subsequent versions of AmigaOS "without limitation".

OMG, Jim!

You surely have Ben Hermans venom pumping into your veins intravenously. Why?

What has the Amiga ever done to hurt you this much?

The world doesn't revolve around Hyperion's "the settlement", there are many more things to take into account, and you obviously aren't aware of more than *a fraction* of it.


Quote:

That "Olsen" version you are mentioning I call the "Boing Ball Branch"...


(Click!)

...and its 3.1 was merely an obvious part in Hyperion's current war plan (that I was honestly surprised that Olsen was a part of, perhaps (hopefully so) out of naive ignorance) and it was quickly retracted from market for trademark infringement!

Search the forums for more info before responding!

I would be *very* surprised if Olsen and Richter would allow Hyperion to publish *anything* new (read: this) until this matter is settled.

That would *seriously* be burning bridges and sending the Amiga legacy into a black hole!



[ Edited by takemehomegrandma 05.01.2018 - 01:24 ]

>'read this'?

I got to this comment.

http://www.amiga.org/forums/showpost.php?p=833125&postcount=23

I'll have to look at the rest later, but Olsen seems to be indicating that there's very little overlap.

> I am pretty sure Cloanto won't give a f!ck about Hyperion continue to develop
> and sell their OS4 to all 80 or so owners of €3000 AeonKit PPC motherboards.

...or to users of UAE or, even better, Cloanto's AmigaForever, which, as you sure remember, still contains files required for running OS4 :-)

> Cloanto is as old as Commodore Amiga.

Not quite.

Quote:

Perhaps not, but quite...

Quote:

”Everything that's in the box directly comes from either the original Commodore code base”

-> The Checkmark Branch




”or from material licensed for inclusion in the AmigaOS 3.5/3.9 updates”

-> The Boing Ball Branch




BTW: ”the 3.1.4 update.” ?!?? WTF?!?? A three-digit version number! That’s Unix or whatever! The Commodore Reference Manual *specifically* specify how Amiga uses a *two-digit* version number, every true Amigan knows this!

What’s next?

The inclusion of a mediocre .so system? (That was a rhetorical question )

BTW, it seems that Olsen has *concisely* joined the dark side... “Open letter” my a$$...



Ah well. It was only the Amiga.

There is still MorphOS!

[ Edited by takemehomegrandma 05.01.2018 - 03:06 ]

I'm surprised there are people here suggesting this will be resolved in mediation amicably, with Cloanto and HYPErion holding hands walking off into the sunset. That is not going to happen. Clearly Cloanto has been trying to resolve HYPE's piracy without litigation for years and that didn't work. Cloanto also is not an insolvent company run by a clown conman that HYPE can outlast in court. OTOH Herman's ego won't let him admit defeat and settle the case in a manner that admits infringement. You can tell this by HYPE's laughable statement in response to the lawsuit in which they claim to be sole owners of all AmigaOS versions.

Cloanto is the actual owner - Irresistible force
HYPErion is in the wrong but run by an egomaniac - Immovable object

HYPErion is not going to survive this lawsuit either directly or indirectly. Only a couple years back they were bankrupt and had to be bailed out by a white knight investor. HYPE can't afford legal fees from a prolonged legal battle and considering they have no chance at a judgement in their favor, they cannot afford to pay damages. I also think there is probably ZERO chance that a white knight investor bails them out once again.

I also see likely collateral damage. Most likely A-Eonkit liquidates their PPC boards at a major loss and tries to survive focusing on the Amiga Classic market. The zombie that is OS4 is finally put down for good.

[ Edited by redrumloa 04.01.2018 - 21:35 ]