Hyperion vs Cloanto

[OlafS3]

how I see it...

all companies involved understood that the 68k market is the only one you can still earn money (partly because of activities around apollo/vampire). For a long time Cloanto was involved in the 68k market (emulation) and Hyperion in what they call NG based on PPC. Then they included the kickstart roms in 4.X, then they licensed roms and now they offer 3.1.4 with 100% profit because the developers get nothing. So Hyperion more and more moved in the territory of Cloanto and that finally created the dispute. Trying to get trademarks and attacking all others they seem to have created a wave they cannot control anymore and in worst case will kill 4.X. Shit happens I can only say. Ben H. is attorney so he should know what he does...

Regarding the split... yes it is there. If 3.X would be standard and open source (with no "NG") that would have been best (the smaller but very active C64 market is a example) but it is how it is.

[OlafS3]

In IT market unfortunately harming competition not by better products but by lawsuits is very common and happened lots of times (like SAP against Oracle), there were even companies buying other companies just to get means to start lawsuits...

In this small market with only few companies involved the potential harm is even bigger but (in a way) that was always the case in the amiga market...

[OlafS3]

I do not need and use it but respect and thank you from me (even if we sometimes have different views about what is better open source or closed source)

 

[OlafS3]

it was a contribution to the community

unfortunately the money will not help the community (not even the AmigaOS community) but only feed lawsuits and attorneys...

[OlafS3]

@thor, Olsen

You two would have been better serve forming your own corporation and releasing "Patch 3.1.4" for Amiga OS 3.1 ...  As for the rom, I don't know what the best solution would have been except to describe how someone could build their own and just supply the added files and describe what needs to be removed.

In my contracting work - I don't own my source-code.  My client(s) owns it because they paid me for my time.  So I find this "Amiga" situation odd in regards to previous contributors, etc...  It seems to me, in Amiga-land, only executables and libraries are owned by the client  and the sources belong to the coder for some odd reason.  So in other words, I don't care who coded what parts of 1.3, 2.0, 2.1, 3.0, 3.1, 3.5, 3.9 - if I can enhance a library - and someone pays me to do it - I will.  Those previous contributors were already paid for their work.  And if they weren't paid then and didn't pursue that issue - then they shouldn't hold revisions to their work in limbo...

that was very common in the past... Maxon f.e. obviously only sold, the copyright stayed at the developers. One result was that they rewrote Cinema4D when leaving amiga to control both sources and copyrights.