Amiga.org

Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Announcements and Press Releases => Topic started by: Kent on March 16, 2004, 06:48:59 AM

Title: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Kent on March 16, 2004, 06:48:59 AM
Amiga Inc. has returned to the court, backed up with legal representation, new evidence and testimonies.

With these resources, the defendant Amiga Inc. has managed to come up with a response to plaintiff's motion to modify order granting specific performance and no less than six declarations, and a certificate of service.

This is obviously not an overnight draft, thrown together out of haste, rather a very detailed research pinpointing solid evidence.

http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: restore2003 on March 16, 2004, 06:59:01 AM
Aha! Maybe this is why they had to sell OS4? Anyway this should be an easy win  :rtfm:
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: KennyR on March 16, 2004, 07:22:18 AM
Note that AInc don't really have a very positive history in court cases, even with "solid evidence".

Although they might just get away with this one. Genesi's evidence seemed flimsy and perhaps too much relying on the fact AInc wouldn't be able to scrape together any kind of legal representation.

If AInc survive again, the Amiga community doesn't get the sense of closure it needs and the pantomime is dragged on for years more. Because, make no mistake on this, AInc are still in no position to do real business or to do anything positive for the Amiga.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Tigger on March 16, 2004, 07:27:11 AM
Quote

Aha! Maybe this is why they had to sell OS4? Anyway this should be an easy win


Yeah, Genesi will win this easy, thats what you meant right??  :-P   Actually this testimony isnt good for Bill McEwen, it now makes him a liar during his depositions, since the OS was sold on April 23rd 2003 (according to the press release, Garry says it was sold the 24th).   Either date is before his deposition on April 30th or his deposition on August 7th, thats going to weigh heavy with the judge, given Bill claimed that Amiga Inc owned AmigaOS 1.0 and up during both depositions.  This KMOS fiasco has every appearance of a shell game with the IP, and the judge is likely to greatly frown on it.  
     -Tig
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Hattig on March 16, 2004, 07:32:57 AM
Quote
Because, make no mistake on this, AInc are still in no position to do real business or to do anything positive for the Amiga.


Who cares. AmigaOS is in the hands of a new parent company now, and from other accounts online, people involved are very happy indeed.

Anyway, surely it is important that the court case is just, not unjust in the name of making things simpler overall and giving "closure". If justice says that Bill Buck should go home with nothing because of his flimsy/faked evidence, then so be it.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Hattig on March 16, 2004, 07:36:45 AM
I think the judge will look upon Bill Bucks evidence supplied under perjory that he would have known was not reliable and yet he supplied it as fact, and which in fact turned out to be faked, and then Bill Buck did not inform the court of this. Perjury is a lot more important than a single day difference in a date (hell, could be timezones, could have been signed after an all-nighter, who knows).
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: choochy on March 16, 2004, 08:37:52 AM
"Genesi's evidence seemed flimsy "

Well more like contempt of court, conspiricy, etc

It seems Amiga are claiming that most of Bill Bucks evidence is misleading or down right lies.

I think flimsy wouldn't be the word to use!

Just my 2c's worth!
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: KennyR on March 16, 2004, 08:38:05 AM
Quote
Hattig wrote:
I think the judge will look upon Bill Bucks evidence supplied under perjory that he would have known was not reliable and yet he supplied it as fact, and which in fact turned out to be faked, and then Bill Buck did not inform the court of this.


If you mean the e-mail, I'm sure everyone on the planet knows emails can be faked. They aren't a secure media and never were, and I'm suprised Buck even decided to add one to his evidence. But the double edge sword of this means, that while they are useless as evidence, presenting a faked one doesn't really amount to perjury, since its impossible to prove their authenticity either way.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: T_Bone on March 16, 2004, 08:42:32 AM
"Who cares. AmigaOS is in the hands of a new parent company now, and from other accounts online, people involved are very happy indeed."

Shouldn't the people involved have known about this since last April when this happened? Why would they be happy now? It looks like Amiga Inc is playing "hide the assets" from the courts (including past judgements)
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: KennyR on March 16, 2004, 08:43:15 AM
Quote
choochy wrote:
It seems Amiga are claiming that most of Bill Bucks evidence is misleading or down right lies.


Of course they are, it's a court case, you don't win them by agreeing with the opponent. :-)

The question here is really not who we believe, it is who are the court going to believe? Will it be Amiga Inc., hiding its assets, and with a history even more checkered than their boing ball, or Genesi and its weak evidence?
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: bloodline on March 16, 2004, 11:37:02 AM
Now that Amiga Inc. are (apparently) now out of the picture regarding the Amiga Brand name OS, shouldn't we all be rooting for Genesi?
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: takemehomegrandma on March 16, 2004, 12:07:19 PM
This is how I understand things:

1. The Genesi vs. Amiga Inc case is closed. Genesi won.

2. After the cased closed, Genesi filed a "motion to modify order", to "refine" some of the wordings in the ruling. Note, this is NOT a new case, the case is still closed.

3. Now some Amiga Inc related people filed a lot of *responses* to that motion. This is not an appeal, the case is still closed and settled in the same way as before.

Am I right or am I right? ;-)
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Batman on March 16, 2004, 12:52:42 PM
@takemehomegrandma
Quote
Am I right or am I right?


Yes, you're indeed right. This is a whole
new
case, in which Ainc can bring in court new evidences...like the ones related to BBRV perjury.  :-)
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: takemehomegrandma on March 16, 2004, 02:23:22 PM
@ Batman

Huh?!?? :-? :-?

Are we talking about the same thing? Are we talking about this:

RESPONSE filed by Defendant Amiga Inc re 49 MOTION to Modify Order Granting Specific Performance (Shukis, Diana) (Entered: 03/15/2004)

... the documents #52 and forward in the Thendic/Genesi vs. Amiga Inc case, the same case that really ended with the Judgement the 20th of February?
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: cecilia on March 16, 2004, 04:00:25 PM
Quote
Poster: bloodline
     Now that Amiga Inc. are (apparently) now out of the picture regarding the Amiga Brand name OS, shouldn't we all be rooting for Genesi?
I'd rather root for AROS. (And WinUAE, for that matter!): the people's OS.
 :-P
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Tigger on March 16, 2004, 04:49:06 PM
Quote

 think the judge will look upon Bill Bucks evidence supplied under perjory that he would have known was not reliable and yet he supplied it as fact, and which in fact turned out to be faked, and then Bill Buck did not inform the court of this. Perjury is a lot more important than a single day difference in a date (hell, could be timezones, could have been signed after an all-nighter, who knows).

First of all the person that is going to get convicted of perjury is Bill McEwen.  In two seperate depositions (April 30th & August 7th) he said that Amiga Inc owned AmigaOS (all versions from 1.0 - 3.9) as part of a search for Amiga Inc assets.  Having it now become known that Amiga Inc sold the OS on April 23 or 24th, this is going to be a pretty big issue.  In both depositions, Bill McEwen lied about the ownership of AmigaOS, all that will happen with Bill Bucks usage of what is now believed to be a fake email from Fleecy, is that data will not be used, that doesnt hurt there case at all, McEwen lying about the ownership of assets is a huge issue.  
    -Tig
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Tomas on March 16, 2004, 06:17:48 PM
Quote
Shouldn't the people involved have known about this since last April when this happened?

How do you know they didnt?? I believe the parts involved has known about this for a while now..
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: KennyR on March 16, 2004, 06:25:57 PM
Quote
Thomas wrote:
How do you know they didnt?? I believe the parts involved has known about this for a while now..


And yet they didn't tell anyone outside their circle, preferring to put a false face on it and denounce anyone who speculated too close to the truth as liars and idiots. Compare this to Genesi, who are open about their faults and have never kept problems they have secret. And yet they're the one being demonised in this whole affair.

Ironic.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: IonDeluxe on March 16, 2004, 10:30:14 PM
Did B.McEwen purgor himself? Maybe. As we are unaware of anything excpt the date the deal was finalized and the fact the company that OS4 was sold to was then bought out, it is impossible to know. Statement of fact that he DID purgur himself are unfactual and flaimbait, for instance the deal may have been struck 1 year ago, but the transfer of ownership itself only happened now. Thats just one possibility and there could be many many others.
As for Genesi being demonized, well its not Genesi per se it is BBRV. IF BBRV had conducted himself in a professional manner and with integrity these past few years, and had not initiated what many believe to be a flippant lawsuit, or spoken of working with everyone in the community whilst trying to tear it apart then maybe there would be no demonizeation.
Genesi has made it's bed in this instance and now must lie in it, thanks to BBRV. Maybe they will pull it off, maybe not, but I for one wont be holding my breathe
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Hattig on March 17, 2004, 03:28:20 AM
Quote
In two seperate depositions (April 30th & August 7th) he said that Amiga Inc owned AmigaOS (all versions from 1.0 - 3.9) as part of a search for Amiga Inc assets. Having it now become known that Amiga Inc sold the OS on April 23 or 24th, this is going to be a pretty big issue.


The initialisation of the sale might have started 11 months ago, and that is the date of sale, but as no information has been released until now, that suggests that the sale was not finalised and completed until now (around last week I'd guess, to get time to write that stuff up with a new lawyer, etc, and the press release notices).

So Bill McEwan was not lying. No one asked him "Are you in the process of selling AmigaOS rights?" did they?
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: WarPiper on March 17, 2004, 06:35:28 AM
This whole Amiga Inc. drama crap is playing out to be worse than the O.J. trials.  with all the trouble that this poor system and its community has put up with over the past, what, 12 years?, I think has been way too much and I have to wonder what keeps people clinging to this drawn out soap opera of a computer platform that is much like a bad foster child.  THERE IS NO SENCE OF STABILITY GOING WITH A PLATFORM THAT KEEPS GETTING PAST FROM FOSTER HOME TO FOSTER HOME WITH NO LOVING PARENTS TO WANT TO KEEP IT! makes me pity the damed thing.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: gary_c on March 17, 2004, 07:32:10 AM
Quote
the deal may have been struck 1 year ago, but the transfer of ownership itself only happened now.


Sorry, but Garry Hare says in his statement to the court that Itec LLC "acquired" AmigaOS in April 2003. That doesn't mean striking a deal and starting to transfer ownership; it means "gaining possession of" as far as I know, and I imagine the judge would assume the conventional definition of the word. If he meant that an agreement had been reached that would be finalized in 11 months, as an astute businessman and a person not wanting to mislead the judge, I imagine he would have said so.

-- gary_c
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Hattig on March 17, 2004, 08:02:52 AM
I expect we will find out how the law works.

Bill McEwan's testimony was made some time ago. Garry Hare's was made recently, clearly after the sale. So what I said is still valid. Depends on American corporate law really.

I expect that this will be one thing that bbrv will try to gain clarification on though in the court case. It is about the only thing he can!
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: whabang on March 17, 2004, 09:06:34 AM
Bah! Amiga Inc. is no more! They have sold the OS, so they can do whatever they want for all that I care!  :ranting:
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: cecilia on March 17, 2004, 05:03:31 PM
Quote
This whole Amiga Inc. drama crap is playing out to be worse than the O.J. trials.
that's for sure! :lol:
Quote
I have to wonder what keeps people clinging to this drawn out soap opera of a computer platform that is much like a bad foster child. THERE IS NO SENCE OF STABILITY GOING WITH A PLATFORM THAT KEEPS GETTING PAST FROM FOSTER HOME TO FOSTER HOME WITH NO LOVING PARENTS TO WANT TO KEEP IT!
this is why I have encouraged people to ignore all the "heads" of companies. whomever they may be. and that we can only depend on each other.
Anyone who still (!) likes amiga - the machine that may be sitting on your desk right now - loves it because of what it is. And that has nothing to do with all the stupid owners.
and when you become an adult, you no longer depend on your parents. So we can't be orphaned.
My mother used to tell my brother and I when we were children that if something happened to her we would only have each other.
So, my Amiga brother, lets hold on to each other and nevermind the bad parents.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: Quixote on March 17, 2004, 11:19:31 PM
Cecilia chimed in:
Quote
So, my Amiga brother, lets hold on to each other and nevermind the bad parents.

;-) Well put, Cecilia.

Since it appears that this transaction occurred last year, the instability that some perceive now is a little unfounded, although I do agree that it is surprising, and a little unsettling.
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: DanDude on March 18, 2004, 12:54:41 AM
Bull Buck wants EVERYTHING in this world.  Why not ask him to go buy MICROSOFT and be happy with THAT company!
Title: Re: Amiga Inc. back in court
Post by: vortexau on March 18, 2004, 05:53:49 PM
BBRV wanted to be King of two Hills.
 or
push the two hills togather & bulldoze away the RED Soil!

Seems like he's only going to remain King of one Hill, with some DE Topdressing!

Now, he needs to install WinCE so the DE Topdressing can be added. . . . . . . .  :lol:
Now, for the paperback (http://home.swiftdsl.com.au/~vortexau/images5/mfufud.jpg)!