Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Checkmate?  (Read 3710 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Tigger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 1890
    • Show all replies
Re: Checkmate?
« on: July 11, 2007, 05:47:59 PM »
Quote

AmigaHeretic wrote:
Not sure how it is a "checkmate" exactly.  Looking at the 2nd PDF, the ITEC one, there seem to be two strange things...

1. There is NO signed contract giving rights to ITEC that I can see, at least not that Hyperion signed.  There is only the original 2001 contract as always that was signed with Amiga Inc #1.  Aren't they claiming that Hyperion signed a deal with them, yet they have no copy of the deal??  Maybe I'm missing something?


Exhibit A is the April 24, 2003 contract between Itec and Hyperion, it is signed by Ben Hermans (for Hyperion) and Kouri (for Itec).  Hyperions latest tactic is to say that they did not agree to the transfer to KMOS and any money from KMOS (or anyone but Itec) doesnt count towards the buy back.  

Quote

2. And this seems very strange.  There is a copy of an uncashed check for $25,000 dated 06/20/07 ??  2007 is that right?  What does an un-cashed check prove?  That they didn't pay?  Or that NOW they are willing to pay the full amount?  


Back in April and May of 2003, Itec, Tachyon and McEwen sent a total of $24750 for the buyback to Hyperion.   Hyperion invoiced Itec for $22500, though they should have only invoiced them for $22,250 and say that McEwens money doesnt count and also really dont think the Tachyon money ($2250) should count either.  Since them AI(D) or KMOS has paid an additional over $15K in effort to finalize the buyback deal, Hyperion is now claiming in court that money from KMOS etc, doesnt count.   So to be sure, Itec sent an Itec check for $25K before the 6 months had elapsed from December 2006 (we're done) announcement to Hyperion, Hyperion made a copy of the check to include in there countersuit showing they did indeed receive it and then sent it back.   Itec is now suing to get the goods so they can finally deliver them to AI(D) (ie KMOS) who they sold them too.
     -Tig
Well you know I am scottish, so I like sheep alot.
     -Fleecy Moss, Gateway 2000 show
 

Offline Tigger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 1890
    • Show all replies
Re: Checkmate?
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2007, 10:48:55 PM »
Quote

pixie wrote:

*three if you count Genesi one...


They've lost 10 pixie already, as I first predicted and then reported over the years.  However they aren't going to lose either of these.  Legally they are completely correct, Hyperion has made huge mistakes and is about to have to pay for them.
     -Tig
Well you know I am scottish, so I like sheep alot.
     -Fleecy Moss, Gateway 2000 show
 

Offline Tigger

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: Feb 2002
  • Posts: 1890
    • Show all replies
Re: Checkmate?
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2007, 11:21:16 PM »
Quote

Hyperion???  When did they take "ownership"??  I think they are missing a signature on the contact?  If Amiga Inc, didn't own the code any more then it now belongs to the "Amiga One Partners" and I doubt that Hyperion could just sell it with out Eytech signature.  They could try and they could certainly sign a contract, but that doesn't make it valid.  

I think the 2003 contract is totally invalid just because of that one point.


But if its not valid, then Hyperion committed Fraud, thats what people are glossing over.  Hyperion wants to say the contract isnt valid, but oh btw we shouldnt be punished for defrauding Itec and Eyetech.
     -Tig
Well you know I am scottish, so I like sheep alot.
     -Fleecy Moss, Gateway 2000 show