You think that is being nasty? Answering the question?
ROFLMAO!
Here it is in fluffy mode:
"Oh I do hope you don't take this the wrong way but in answer to your EXCELLENT question which was so delicately put and SO well researched I'm afraid no, it does not mean that at all. If Amiga Inc went breasts up they would have to file for bankruptcy for which public notice would be available in the state they are incorporated. It also does not imply any loss of control over the Amiga trademark or that the work "Amiga" when used in connection with computing equipment remains un-trademarked given there are several other ACTIVE status trademark Amiga instances ( for companies that do not formally exist any more - so much for the database accuracy ). So Im afraid, and I DO hope you do not feel let down in any way whatsoever by this answer, and that you are sitting on a VERY comfy sofa when reading it, that DaveP above is quite right, that this on its own is not conclusive proof of diddly squat. Oh no did I use the word squat? I meant crouch."
Yrs. Ms Fluffy
