Amiga.org

Amiga computer related discussion => General chat about Amiga topics => Topic started by: SpeedGeek on May 31, 2019, 01:08:34 PM

Title: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: SpeedGeek on May 31, 2019, 01:08:34 PM
If you have been following the legal dispute between Cloanto and the Amiga parties with Hyperion then you might be interested in this update:

https://www.pacermonitor.com/public/case/28135742/CA_Acquisition_Corp_et_al_v_Hyperion_Entertainment_CVBA

(A perfect example of what happens when you hire lawyers and give them a blank check  ;D).
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Louis Dias on May 31, 2019, 02:57:50 PM
Has anyone downloaded the documents?  I can't read them because I don't have an account...
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: SpeedGeek on November 24, 2019, 01:12:25 PM
Finally IMO some positive news:

Thursday, November 21, 2019
ORDER granting Plaintiffs'16 Motion for Default Against Hyperion Entertainment CVBA signed by Clerk William M McCool. (LW)


 :)
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on November 24, 2019, 01:35:53 PM
So, Hyperion lose by default.

Niiiiiccceee.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Rob on November 24, 2019, 08:34:22 PM
The motion can still be opposed after being granted so I wouldn't take this to mean that the current situation is coming to a close.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on November 24, 2019, 10:29:57 PM
It's a victory by default, they literally didn't contest it when they were supposed to. Ben's an ambulance chaser, he knew it would happen.

Now he could technically run into the courtroom five minutes before closing time and go "I'm here! I'm awake! What was the question again?" but what impression would that make on a judge?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Rob on November 25, 2019, 08:20:13 PM
Now he could technically run into the courtroom five minutes before closing time and go "I'm here! I'm awake! What was the question again?" but what impression would that make on a judge?

I'm not a legal expert and can only go on what i have read on the internet, including various official sources.  It would seem that filing a motion to have the default judgement vacated or set aside would be a little more formal and the time period in which to do so would be a little longer than you seem to imply.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: SpeedGeek on November 25, 2019, 09:14:37 PM
Now he could technically run into the courtroom five minutes before closing time and go "I'm here! I'm awake! What was the question again?" but what impression would that make on a judge?

I'm not a legal expert and can only go on what i have read on the internet, including various official sources.  It would seem that filing a motion to have the default judgement vacated or set aside would be a little more formal and the time period in which to do so would be a little longer than you seem to imply.

It's really not so much a matter of time but rather a matter of "Good Cause":

FRCP Rule 55 – Default; Default Judgment

(a) Entering a Default. When a party against whom a judgment for affirmative relief is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend, and that failure is shown by affidavit or otherwise, the clerk must enter the party’s default.

(c) Setting Aside a Default or a Default Judgment. The court may set aside an entry of default for good cause, and it may set aside a final default judgment under Rule 60(b).
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: number6 on November 26, 2019, 04:04:55 PM
Now he could technically run into the courtroom five minutes before closing time and go "I'm here! I'm awake! What was the question again?" but what impression would that make on a judge?

I'm not a legal expert and can only go on what i have read on the internet, including various official sources.  It would seem that filing a motion to have the default judgement vacated or set aside would be a little more formal and the time period in which to do so would be a little longer than you seem to imply.

I'm not sure I understand what you are trying to convey here, but I'll add this in case it clarifies:

Quote
Plaintiffs so move because Defendant Hyperion Entertainment CVBA (“Hyperion”) has declined
to accept service of the Summons and Complaint in this action
and
Quote
On August 12, 2019, Ms. Elsden advised Plaintiffs’ counsel that her firm had not
been retained to represent Hyperion in this action.
 Consequently, no appearance has been filed by anyone on behalf of Hyperion.

Source (https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.272892/gov.uscourts.wawd.272892.14.0.pdf)

Also note that a few days after the above  (August 29, 2019) there began numerous weekly motions to compel in the contract case as well:
Source by date (https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/6363972/hyperion-entertainment-cvba-v-itec-llc/)

In short the delays and refusals to respond have been going on since June, 2019.

#6
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Rob on November 27, 2019, 11:53:50 PM
@number6

I must admit that I haven't been paying close to this court so I was looking at this particular ruling in isolation and just referring to the rules around a default judgement.

Wouldn't the time limited period to apply for the judgement to be set aside begin after the actual ruling takes place rather than during the period in which the defendant failed to take the required action to prevent a default judgement?

My real point is that we should exercise caution in near expectations.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: SpeedGeek on November 28, 2019, 02:46:39 PM
@Rob

Apparently, you still don't get it. There is no specified time period for a Default judgment to be set aside. Hyperion could at any time file a motion to request this, and it will be up to the judge to determine if there is "Good Cause" to do so. But this discussion is really pointless.

Since, you have not been following this case you simply don't realize how very obvious it is, that Hyperion never intended to respond to this case.

Now exactly why is not known, but it's likely that Hyperion expects this judgment to be unenforceable outside the U.S. and what was at stake in the U.S. simply was not worth the legal cost to defend. Also, unlike the rather dubious definition of OS4 in the settlement agreement (which Hyperion used to claim rights to any version of Amiga OS) the Hyperion trademarks were exact and specific. So, Hyperion now has a much more serious problem claiming the rights to any trademarks they want.   
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on November 29, 2019, 02:40:19 AM
Which is the point I originally implied, if he had any intent to contest it he'd have done it by now. It's now so late if he did he'd just look like a dumbass.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: hlt on November 29, 2019, 09:53:41 AM
I looks like classic AOS gets some nice features, it would be a pity if they won't be able to sell it. What is going to happen with upcoming AOS 3.2 if Cloanto wins?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Louis Dias on November 29, 2019, 03:52:38 PM
I don't think Cloanto would stop 3.2 - just they would need licensing fees as well as proper copyrights that don't say "Hyperion"...though Hyperion could still be the 'publisher'.
I think the face to face meetings that happened between August and November may have smoothed some things over.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Gulliver on November 29, 2019, 07:20:08 PM
@Louis Dias

I believe you are more or less right with your assumptions.

For Cloanto it would be a nightmare to get control over 3.2. They don't have the inside knowledge, nor technical infrastructure to carry on the project. They also lack all the third party licenses and the access to OS4 code. Despite all its flaws, Hyperion has all this in a working state.

So it would not be reasonable at all to shoot for a kill, because they will lose it all, and in the best case scenario end up with 3.1 (v40) code that has gaps all over the place and won't compile.

The best solutions for both parties is a mutual agreement IMHO.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on November 29, 2019, 08:06:19 PM
For Cloanto it would be a nightmare to get control over 3.2. They don't have the inside knowledge, nor technical infrastructure to carry on the project.
Neither has Hyperion. The problem for Hyperion and Cloanto is to have support from the developers, and their/our good will, and their agreement to publish their contribution.

The trouble is that 3.2 depends on more than just the people that work right now on 3.2, but also on the people that contributed indirectly by working on Os 4.x and whose code was merged into 3.2.Thus, it would be necessary to research which agreements Hyperion made exactly with their authors, and in how far and under which conditions publication rights are transferable to another party.

It might well happen that everything falls apart as some parts of 3.2 remain at their authors, and it could only be published by Cloanto if the rights are re-negotiated individually.

Maybe this works, maybe it does not - but it surely takes a long time.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on November 30, 2019, 03:31:20 AM
Yes, 3.2 is now in the same legal swamp that has prevented updates for OS4 for years, where the individual developers who hold the rights to their individual components (or blocks of code, shrug) depend on Hyperion to organize OS releases.

In my view, as customer and user, Cloanto is the better choice as Mike has stated he will open the OS as much as possible, including open sourcing as much of it as possible, which (for example) would allow merging AROS and Amiga OS code where it makes sense to do so, and a common source tree for anyone to contribute to. Current developers with their individual copyrights can then make their own choices if they wish to participate and contribute, or if they wish to continue their current project with what they have.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on November 30, 2019, 07:12:04 AM
I don't see any reason to believe what Cloanto says. I think it much more likely that their current policy of just milking the platform for nostalgia money would continue, rather than advancing the state of the OS.

I for one would certainly not continue developing AmigaOS if Cloanto was involved.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on November 30, 2019, 07:52:43 AM
In my view, as customer and user, Cloanto is the better choice as Mike has stated he will open the OS as much as possible, including open sourcing as much of it as possible...
Which may be "not possible at all", a possibility you may have seem to forgotten. The question here is in how far the contributions can be opened as it requires a license change, and potentially renegotiations, potentially with parties that you can no longer reach. By that I not only mean "our contributions" or "Os 4 contributions", but the trouble goes back to CBM times, and what CBM negotiated, and which licenses they had.

So, just to give you some ideas: The dos.library is not only Tripos and CBM code, it is also ARP code. Did CBM have licences to put out the source in the wild? Or only for their internal Os development purpose? What about ARexx, which is a third-party contribution? What about CrossDos?

We already found out that the narrator.device didn't have a source code license at all, but only a binary license, so its sources are completely unacessible unless someone is willing to pay off SoftVoice, which is exactly the reason why it is no longer included in any Os version beyond 2.04. Chances are that its inclusion in 2.04 was not even covered by a valid license at all and only the original unextended version from 1.2 times was really ok.

Reaction is something Hyperion recently acquired. Whether the license they paid for allows opening the source I do not know, but I'll bet that Hyperion is not willing to give that away for nothing after having paid for it.

So please don't believe in the shiny rainbow Cloanto is willing to promise. That is nothing but politics. Reality is much more cruel. If you want something open, without entanglement of third party rights, your best bet is AROS.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on November 30, 2019, 04:02:29 PM
Blablabla... which part of “as much as possible” is so hard to understand?
It would be quite possible for them to open source the bits and pieces they have full ownership over.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on November 30, 2019, 04:10:37 PM
At least Cloanto has said they will look into these options - Hyperion not at all.

Regarding the licenses you mention, what did those old right holders get from the current development? What saying did they have in the so called transfer of rights (not really!) to Hyperion? Did William Hawes give his thumbs up for continued development of RexxMast?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on November 30, 2019, 04:25:08 PM
I for one would certainly not continue developing AmigaOS if Cloanto was involved.
That would be a nice bonus :)
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on November 30, 2019, 04:54:33 PM
Regarding the licenses you mention, what did those old right holders get from the current development? What saying did they have in the so called transfer of rights (not really!) to Hyperion? Did William Hawes give his thumbs up for continued development of RexxMast?
I do not know which arrangement exists between Bill and CBM besides rumours, but what I do care about is that that my back is covered it case trouble is coming.

How can Cloanto indemnify anyone working on it if the source is out in the wild? I wouldn't know how to arrange that.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on November 30, 2019, 05:00:08 PM
Blablabla... which part of “as much as possible” is so hard to understand?
The part of "how to make that happen".

It would be quite possible for them to open source the bits and pieces they have full ownership over.
The problem is just the "if" part, for reasons I already explained, and the "williing" part, i.e. how much to trust them.

What you probably do not understand or do not want to see is that this is a pretty obvious political move of Cloanto. Well, you are entitled to your opinion, but if I have a choice between politics and getting something done, I'll pick the latter.

Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on November 30, 2019, 06:22:00 PM
I don't see any reason to believe what Cloanto says. I think it much more likely that their current policy of just milking the platform for nostalgia money would continue, rather than advancing the state of the OS.

I for one would certainly not continue developing AmigaOS if Cloanto was involved.

That's funny. First you say that you think Cloanto would probably just milk IP rather than advance the OS, then you say you wouldn't advance the OS for Cloanto.

Almost a self fulfilling prophecy, if it wasn't for your nobody status.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Gulliver on December 01, 2019, 07:14:30 AM
I don't see any reason to believe what Cloanto says. I think it much more likely that their current policy of just milking the platform for nostalgia money would continue, rather than advancing the state of the OS.

I for one would certainly not continue developing AmigaOS if Cloanto was involved.

That's funny. First you say that you think Cloanto would probably just milk IP rather than advance the OS, then you say you wouldn't advance the OS for Cloanto.

Almost a self fulfilling prophecy, if it wasn't for your nobody status.

@CBH

Nobody status? What is this kind of argument?
Do you know what he does and what he did in the past?

I don't really understand these kind of extremist view on things. It is okay that you love Cloanto products, go buy them, and cheer for them, and let the rest do whatever they like and think differently. How can you call another human being like that because he chose to have an opposing view?

Minuous has been a long contributor to the Amiga community in general, supporting different OSes and architectures.

And not only that, he is the person who took the daunting task of porting back ReAction from PPC to 68k, and fixed a lot of bugs down the road, and optimized it in such a way that now works on a 68000 processor. And he started doing this alone, later we all jumped in to help him in the way each of us could.

If it was not for him, AmigaOS 3.2 would not have ReAction included.

He is a truly talented developer. We are fortunate to have him working on AmigaOS.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Pyromania on December 01, 2019, 08:02:50 AM
@Gulliver

I just wanted to wish everyone working on AmigaOS 3.2 health and happiness. I hope everyone is doing well. Thank you so much for your hard work updating and improving AmigaOS. You are doing the community a great service and it is really appreciated.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 09:53:28 AM
@Gulliver
So you’re saying that if Cloanto takes over, not only will Minious vanish, but he will take Reaction with him?

Even better!

I find it rather ironic that seemingly half the OS team now, are old pirates and hack&patch pushers...
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on December 01, 2019, 09:56:08 AM
Of course he isn't saying that. It would remain part of the OS. The rights to ReAction are owned by Hyperion not by myself.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 09:56:16 AM
(And by hack&patch, I don’t mean Haage & Partner - I mean hacks and patches)
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 10:04:02 AM
Of course he isn't saying that. It would remain part of the OS. I don't own the rights to ReAction.
It was never really part of the OS, it was always an additional package on top of the OS. I say that as someone who has been running OS3.9 without Reaction on 68000 systems for more than a decade. And from what I have read so far, even 3.2 will work perfectly fine without Reaction classes. Reaction is what people find “bloated” and “slow” with OS 3.5/3.9.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on December 01, 2019, 10:28:33 AM
It was never really part of the OS, it was always an additional package on top of the OS. I say that as someone who has been running OS3.9 without Reaction on 68000 systems for more than a decade. And from what I have read so far, even 3.2 will work perfectly fine without Reaction classes. Reaction is what people find “bloated” and “slow” with OS 3.5/3.9.
Err, what? So how is the palette preferences going to work without the color wheel gadget and the gradient slider gadget? How is the datatypes system to work without them? How is the icon editor to work? Just in case you confuse something: "Reaction" is not a "new subsystem" of the operating system at all, it is not isolated, and you cannot draw a line between "here reaction starts and here the os ends". It is all the same system to begin with, and "Reaction" does not invent anything anew. It is called "boopsis" and is part of intuition.

That is quite different from MUI, for example, which has its own system library, which loads its own components, and builds its own GUI based on its own logic and its own dispatchers. MUI reinvents the wheel. Boopsis don't.

What we call "Reaction" these days are just a collection of boopsi classes that use the intuition boopsi interface along with the exec library interface. There is no technical difference between the boopsis that came into the Os at CBM times, and those that arrived later and were implemented by Chris Aldi. Quite unlike MUI, it does not reinvent anything at Os level, just uses all the interfaces that are already present.

Why you want to draw a line between the original CBM boopsis and the boopsis provided by Chris (originally) and which were then further developed by multiple parties is beyond me.

You may want to argue that boopsis in general are too heavy weight for low end machines, mostly due to their "smalltalk" like dispatcher mechansim which goes through many indirection levels. That is certainly true, and one of the reasons why the GUI for 3.2 is based on an extended (scalable) gadtools version that uses boopsis only occasionally, but it still means that this gadtools interface uses boopsis (or "reaction" - there is not really a difference despite the name) after all where practible. In fact, as I already mentioned, this happened in 3.1 already. The colorwheel, the gradient slider, even the sketch pad of the icon editor and the pointer preferences: All these are boopsis. Or "reaction". No matter what you name them, it's all the same.

I would be just mad to ignore such contributions and leave them aside just for the name part, which is - as said - purely artificial.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 01, 2019, 02:31:49 PM
Nobody status? What is this kind of argument?
Do you know what he does and what he did in the past?

I don't really understand these kind of extremist view on things. It is okay that you love Cloanto products, go buy them, and cheer for them, and let the rest do whatever they like and think differently. How can you call another human being like that because he chose to have an opposing view?

Minuous has been a long contributor to the Amiga community in general, supporting different OSes and architectures.

And not only that, he is the person who took the daunting task of porting back ReAction from PPC to 68k, and fixed a lot of bugs down the road, and optimized it in such a way that now works on a 68000 processor. And he started doing this alone, later we all jumped in to help him in the way each of us could.

If it was not for him, AmigaOS 3.2 would not have ReAction included.

He is a truly talented developer. We are fortunate to have him working on AmigaOS.

The extremist view is to see myself call someone who's swinging his willy around a nobody, and then assume I must be some big cloanto fan. You've got "Us vs Them" tribal mentality, which is ridiculous in software development. The only time "us vs them" is useful is class politics.

I can call him a nobody very easily because it's an accurate and fair response to what he said. He said if Cloanto gets in control of OS3 development he'll take his ball and go home, when his ball is not very important.

Let's be honest, his ball sucks. It's reaction, a package of boopsi classes who's inclusion does little more than use disk space. What uses it outside of the 3.9 prefs, uh... Aweb? Can't think of anything else.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on December 01, 2019, 03:35:10 PM
Why should I work for free to help make profits for a company I dislike? That would not make sense.

BOOPSI gadgets are the way forward intended by Commodore. The amount of disk space used by the BOOPSI classes is minimal, it all fits on one floppy with room to spare. The alternatives are GadTools which is very limited or hack jobs like MUI.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: TribbleSmasher on December 01, 2019, 03:44:48 PM
Gadtools only lacks a little bit of layout/grouping.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 03:56:04 PM
I know perfectly well that Reaction is little more than a collection of third party boopsi classes, previously known as ClassAct, this is all well known. Bundling them with the OS doesn’t really change this much. The more you bundle into the OS, the more you need to coordinate, and the slower everything will go - this exactly the problem that OS4 has been struggling with, and now this mess is brought to OS3 as well.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Gulliver on December 01, 2019, 04:04:54 PM
The extremist view is to see myself call someone who's swinging his willy around a nobody, and then assume I must be some big cloanto fan.

You call someone "nobody" because he has an opposing view to yours and takes a personal stand for it. You are willing to humillate this person. That displays some kind of unique devotion. You called it fanatism, not me.

You've got "Us vs Them" tribal mentality, which is ridiculous in software development. The only time "us vs them" is useful is class politics.

Not at all. In fact, I have a different opinion than both Minuous and you. But I can certainly respect the choice you both made without any effort.

I can call him a nobody very easily because it's an accurate and fair response to what he said.

That is where I see a problem. You should not justify that.

He said if Cloanto gets in control of OS3 development he'll take his ball and go home, when his ball is not very important.

Well, he can certainly choose the path he wishes, and you can also think of it the way you want.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 04:29:16 PM
@Gulliver
Oh please, it’s Minuous, he will not go anywhere. Cloanto winning in court will not stop him, instead he will go back to “boingbagging” his so called unofficial updates, hacks and patches. As will you. And Cloanto will do exactly nothing to stop him, or you.

Unlike Hyperion.

Which is the point.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on December 01, 2019, 04:39:03 PM
Unlike Hyperion.
Err, whom is Hyperion exactly stopping? In case you didn't notice, he's working on the Os. And many others. Amongst them me. I certainly don't feel "stopped" by anyone.

So nobody is stopping anyone.  The only one who is stopping you is yourself.

Have you ever considered that Hyperion  requires you to sign contracts for a reason? Could you consider that the same reasons also apply to Cloanto?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 01, 2019, 05:19:35 PM
Why should I work for free to help make profits for a company I dislike? That would not make sense.

Cloanto pays it's developers. Why do you work to make profits for a company that doesn't?

It seems very strange to me - I understand wanting to contribute to a volunteer software project, a free software project, for free, but this is not one. Hyperion is a business not a charity, AmigaOS is a product it sells to make a profit. Your hard work makes someone else money, and you get nothing of it.

I wouldn't like a company that does that to me as a worker, and as an employer I recognize that people's work deserves compensation, they are not slaves or mugs to be taken advantage of. But Hyperion has never been a business with any commitment to ethics.

You call someone "nobody" because he has an opposing view to yours and takes a personal stand for it. You are willing to humillate this person. That displays some kind of unique devotion. You called it fanatism, not me.

Not at all. In fact, I have a different opinion than both Minuous and you. But I can certainly respect the choice you both made without any effort.

That is where I see a problem. You should not justify that.

Well, he can certainly choose the path he wishes, and you can also think of it the way you want.

No, I call him a nobody because he made a noise that is bigger than he can justify with his status.  In England we call that kind of person Ronnie Pickering.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on December 01, 2019, 08:49:13 PM
No, I call him a nobody because he made a noise that is bigger than he can justify with his status.  In England we call that kind of person Ronnie Pickering.
Who is bigger? Those who blame, or those that do?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 01, 2019, 09:29:56 PM
I'm not particularly concerned about being a nobody myself, on account of I don't walk around threatening to withdraw the world's smallest contribution to anything in the entire history of human endeavour.

My advice from a nobody to another nobody is simple: if you want to threaten to take your ball home, make sure people actually want to play with it in the first place. We can all already download classact for free, for the one program that needs it.

Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Gulliver on December 01, 2019, 09:59:00 PM
I'm not particularly concerned about being a nobody myself, on account of I don't walk around threatening to withdraw the world's smallest contribution to anything in the entire history of human endeavour.

How you label yourself or conduct in life is your own choice, an that should not be enforced upon others.

My advice from a nobody to another nobody is simple: if you want to threaten to take your ball home, make sure people actually want to play with it in the first place. We can all already download classact for free, for the one program that needs it.

You treated a person in a bad way, and if that was not enough you justify it and repeat it all over again.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 01, 2019, 10:43:22 PM
And Minious has been treating people badly for years... decades...
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on December 01, 2019, 11:09:35 PM
@CBH:

Please don't mischaracterize what I said; there is a difference between continuing to make further contributions and withdrawing existing contributions, and I never said anything about the latter.

@kolla:

Treating who badly how? When I disagree about I try to stick to the issues rather than launch personal attacks, unlike yourself. You've already been banned at other sites for such.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 02, 2019, 03:51:58 AM
How you label yourself or conduct in life is your own choice, an that should not be enforced upon others.

You treated a person in a bad way, and if that was not enough you justify it and repeat it all over again.

I've never found anything shameful or immoral about telling the truth of what I think, I speak with conviction. If you don't like that it's your problem not mine.

@CBH:

Please don't mischaracterize what I said; there is a difference between continuing to make further contributions and withdrawing existing contributions, and I never said anything about the latter.

Even better then, you don't threaten to take your ball home, you say we can keep playing with it, but threaten not to bring hypothetical future balls. Thank you for the clarification.

As the saying goes, a bird in the hand is worth more than two in the bush.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Gulliver on December 02, 2019, 04:34:48 AM
I've never found anything shameful or immoral about telling the truth of what I think, I speak with conviction. If you don't like that it's your problem not mine.

Again, I have no problem with your convictions or your view of what you think the truth is.

The problem is not what you say, but how you say it.

You should not treat other people as "nobody" because they do not share your opinion.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kamelito on December 02, 2019, 06:39:47 AM
I guess having Reaction for OS 3.2 and beyond will make backporting apps and OS parts from OS 4 easier.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 02, 2019, 06:46:22 AM
Apparently, the ReAction classes themselves are a “backport”.

Will resource.library make a return as well?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 02, 2019, 12:39:37 PM
Unlike Hyperion.
Err, whom is Hyperion exactly stopping?

Context is such a beast, nice of you to leave it out entirely.

For sake of argument, let us assume that Cloanto wins in court, and that ownership of OS3.1 source code etc. ends up at Cloanto. As you have mentioned, this does _not_ necessarily mean that everything that has been shipped with OS 3.1.4 will be owned by Cloanto, and it certainly does not mean the Reaction classes will be owned by Cloanto and chances are high that Hyperion will continue to own the Reaction classes.

You have written that what you will do, is to talk and wiggle your way to continue the development of OS3 further.

But for Minuous this is not an option as it would mean "signing up with Cloanto", his decades long nemesis - too much camel meat to swallow.

So he would just quit, he says, but I am not sure I believe that he would. If history is anything to go by, he would continue on his own, copyrights and NDAs be damned.

And it would not be Cloanto's copyrights and NDAs he would be breaching by pushing on with Reaction classes for OS3, it would be Hyperions.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Rotzloeffel on December 02, 2019, 12:49:39 PM
 ::)
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: guest11527 on December 02, 2019, 02:37:49 PM
You have written that what you will do, is to talk and wiggle your way to continue the development of OS3 further.
Yes, to the amount possible. The question really is what will be left of it in case of a takeover. The worst case scenario would be "only a fraction of 3.1".

And it would not be Cloanto's copyrights and NDAs he would be breaching by pushing on with Reaction classes for OS3, it would be Hyperions.
In such a case, yes. Certainly not my style of game. If we cannot use certain contributed code, we cannot use it - and that's it. Which may be unfortunate. The narrator is already lost, and the H&P contributions are lost as well.

As it currently stands, the amount of accessible code is larger with Hyperion than with Cloanto, but that's not a judgement of their companies, just a fact.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 02, 2019, 03:00:32 PM
You should not treat other people as "nobody" because they do not share your opinion.

You don't know what the word opinion means. An opinion is a subjective belief.

"if cloanto win I will stop contributing to OS 3 development" is not an opinion. It is a statement, specifically of future intent, and it also fits into a subcategory of statements of intent called threats.

So I haven't called him a nobody because of any opinions he has.

I have called him a nobody because 1) he is a nobody 2) he makes threats that would only be meaningful if he wasn't a nobody.

It is a reminder, don't act like you are important when you are not.

I'm also a nobody, so I don't behave like him. I never threaten to take my ball home because I know I don't have one anyway. He should learn from this.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: number6 on December 02, 2019, 05:34:04 PM
@thread

While those who have followed the lawsuits have a fairly firm understanding of what is transpiring, the thought hit me that the "casual" reader of such a thread as this one might be somewhat confused. So...
Just to clarify again, it is the "trademark" lawsuit where the default judgment was issued. While the "contract" case had many repeated motions to compel response (as I noted in prior posting), this case has currently had no such judgment issued by the court.

Based on logic which may not apply here, it is "likely" that Hyperion will use whatever resources it may have to pursue the "contract" case, but not the "trademark" case. Recent talks by Hyperion (q/a from Amiga34) strongly indicate a stance of ownership of AmigaOS in total. There has not, to the best of my knowledge, been any such claims concerning the Amiga trademark(s).

Source talk and q/a by Timothy De Groote at Amiga34 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XbB35uvPUyc)

#6
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on December 03, 2019, 02:27:49 AM
"if cloanto win I will stop contributing to OS 3 development" is not an opinion. It is a statement, specifically of future intent, and it also fits into a subcategory of statements of intent called threats.

How ridiculous. Presumably you are not planning to do any free work for Microsoft, does that mean you are threatening them? If I volunteered at some charity for a while and then stopped would I be threatening them? I am not anyone's slave.

And I never made any claims that I was particularly important. I just pointed out that not every current AmigaOS developer would necessarily be willing to work for free for Cloanto. I don't see how that is a particularly controversial thing to point out.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 03, 2019, 02:56:45 AM
How ridiculous.

Indeed you are.

Presumably you are not planning to do any free work for Microsoft, does that mean you are threatening them? If I volunteered at some charity for a while and then stopped would I be threatening them? I am not anyone's slave.

Nice try. Currently you're doing free work on AmigaOS, your threat is to cease if it's legal owner gains control of it's development.

And yes, a person can threaten to withdraw from something if they don't get their way, that's what you did. (Once I did work at a charity shop, ran the whole place with only one other person each day, threatened to leave if the manager didn't get building repaired. He got it repaired.)

You're already quite comfortable with the life of a slave, allowing master hermans to keep all the income your hard work creates. Meanwhile, your feared Cloanto would pay you for it.

Are you a house elf from harry potter or something?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: giZmo350 on December 03, 2019, 03:24:33 AM
@CBH

You, my friend, whom came out of nowhere, are behaving like an A$$.

@Minuous

Ignore this loser.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 03, 2019, 06:57:39 AM
Treating who badly how? When I disagree about I try to stick to the issues rather than launch personal attacks, unlike yourself. You've already been banned at other sites for such.

You are aware that this site has a search engine, and that one can look up all the posts of a user through the statistics? Just saying.

And no, I was not been banned anywhere for launching personal attacks - banned from EAB yes, because (quote DamienD)
Quote
derailing / trolling every single Vampire / OS 3.1.4 / numerous other threads for many months

At apollo-core.com I am not banned, just prevented from posting until I send them a copy of an ID card, passport or similar - something I would never do. The reason for this is accusations of using several accounts for trolling. And they all know this is false, as I have never tried to hide my IP address, several of the team members know me also from Facebook and elsewhere. It's all just ridiculous, so F them.

Interesting to observe certain apollo team member "liking" just about all posts here where Thomas is answering me - attempted sycophantry?
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: F0LLETT on December 03, 2019, 09:23:32 AM
Really, is another thread going down the drain.

I dont agree with some of whats said, but that said, like every one else is my right. Some of us have said our pieces and its been civil"ish". Some posts are close to the line, but come on. Lets not kill yet another thread.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: OlafS3 on December 03, 2019, 11:56:46 AM
How ridiculous.

Indeed you are.

Presumably you are not planning to do any free work for Microsoft, does that mean you are threatening them? If I volunteered at some charity for a while and then stopped would I be threatening them? I am not anyone's slave.

Nice try. Currently you're doing free work on AmigaOS, your threat is to cease if it's legal owner gains control of it's development.

And yes, a person can threaten to withdraw from something if they don't get their way, that's what you did. (Once I did work at a charity shop, ran the whole place with only one other person each day, threatened to leave if the manager didn't get building repaired. He got it repaired.)

You're already quite comfortable with the life of a slave, allowing master hermans to keep all the income your hard work creates. Meanwhile, your feared Cloanto would pay you for it.

Are you a house elf from harry potter or something?

@Minuous
 
What is your motivation to work for a commercial entity for free?

I can understand people doing that in a open source project or (in case of morphos team members) if they benefit to a certain degree but I do not understand it in case of  a commercial project someone else keeps the money
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 03, 2019, 12:09:04 PM
I suppose it's a kind of charity - Ben spent the money he nicked from trevor dick that time and since he doesn't know how to earn an honest income the new OS3 devs are working without pay so that the poor man doesn't starve.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 03, 2019, 01:01:02 PM
What is your motivation to work for a commercial entity for free?

He has about 20 years of "Reaction is the standard!!111" to fulfil - he is _the only one_ who can be bothered to actually do it, and he will do it for anything and anyone.
Except, perhaps, for Cloanto. Because he also has 20 years of "Cloanto is evil!!!1111" to fulfil.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 03, 2019, 01:48:32 PM
I'll code a mui app in his honour.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: number6 on December 03, 2019, 02:20:20 PM
Really, is another thread going down the drain.

I dont agree with some of whats said, but that said, like every one else is my right. Some of us have said our pieces and its been civil"ish". Some posts are close to the line, but come on. Lets not kill yet another thread.

This is just an unfortunate by-product of the legal activity. Since neither side is allowed by their attorneys to convey strategies or status, the argumentation naturally turned to supporters of different philosophies going after one another.
Trust me on this. Neither side in unaware of how this further tears the community apart. We saw this same pattern of behavior materialize in the 2007-2009 lawsuit and this is scarcely different in its effects.

It comes down to the individual as to whether they wish to continue to let the stances of the parent companies dictate their own behavior in this matter.

#6
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: kolla on December 03, 2019, 02:44:30 PM
I'll code a mui app in his honour.
Or better yet, code some "native" OS3 program using your own custom native BOOPSI classes.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: Minuous on December 03, 2019, 04:45:39 PM
@OlafS3:

An opportunity to fix OS bugs at the source rather than having to work around them in applications, for one.
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: SpeedGeek on December 28, 2019, 04:54:04 PM
Hopefully, now that the trolls have posted their 2 cents worth, we can get back to a more respectful and on-topic discussion here:

ORDER granting Plaintiffs'21 Motion for Leave to File Over-Length Motion. Plaintiffs may file a motion for entry of default judgment of no more than 11 total pages. Defendant's response brief (if any) shall be no more than 11 total pages. Signed by Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. (PM)

BTW, all the trolling and threats here won't in any way influence the courts decision.  ;)
Title: Re: C-A Acquisition Corp. vs. Hyperion Ent.
Post by: CBH on December 28, 2019, 08:06:42 PM
This is taking forever, but I suppose courts have more important stuff to deal with. Like murders, or parking fines.