found some nice Amiga 3D stickers for our cases!

[the_leander]

Nice!

Indeed they are! Very tastefully done. Nice find sir.

[the_leander]

Given the state of who owns what with regards Amiga. Even if one were so inclined to try to get licensing, who exactly would you go to for it?

Hyperion owns some of it, A.Inc owns some.

If the latter, well A.Inc doesn't really exist as a company any more.

[the_leander]

Thats correct: I believe they can use AmigaOne, AmigaOS and Boing Ball image

However this is as stated the Escom era Amiga name, not AmigaOne or AmigaOS.

Which puts a person in the position of dealing with a non existent company.

As for the Boing Ball image... I'd have to look into that. AFAIK that is still Amiga.inc's.

But regardless. The whole situation is a complete mess from start to finish.

Perhaps given that you've seen some demand and are apparently licensed, you might want to offer a competing "official" range of $1 stickers?

[the_leander]

The Boing Ball needs Hyperion's authority.  

Without wanting to be difficult, can you point to where this is the case?

I dont see any difference between selling, for example, copied Workbench disks and unlicensed Amiga merchandise.  But if a link to a person selling copied Workbench disks were posted on Amiga.org, it would be removed immediately..  just another perspective?

The problem is that Amiga.Inc are a dead company, or if we're being generous, currently not available to contact. So even if Hyperion has the rights for the Boing Ball, using the name AMIGA is still problematic.

Now again, given that you are apparently fully licensed already and that there is a market for $1 sticky labels with the domed transparent rubber finish, what exactly is there to stop you from offering an official, sanctioned product?

It's all well and good bitching about "unlicensed merchandise" and how it effects legit businesses. But if you aren't offering anything that is competing with your product base, it does come across as somewhat hollow. And that sir, is the difference between this and a set of workbench disks that you do stock.

[the_leander]

If we spend the time to set up the licensing and pay the royalty fee for stickers, that would have to be factored into the final selling price.  If we sold at the same rate at other unlicensed sellers, we would have greater costs to market.  Would this be fair?

I didn't say it would be fair. What I said was it came off as hollow that you (or, afaik anyone else with a licence) have nothing that this competes with it. If you're not offering a similar product, what exactly is the issue?

There is clearly a market for these sorts of things. Why not make a legitimate offering? I suspect that the market could take the entry of a sticker that cost a few pence more that had the official stamp of approval, especially when it comes from a known good supplier, such as yourself.

Here is the link:
http://www.hyperion-entertainment.biz/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=134:hyperion-entertainment-cvba-and-amiga-inc-reach-settlement&catid=38:corporate&Itemid=18

Thanks for the clarification.

[the_leander]

A quick search will reveal this:
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4008:fio9qg.3.1
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/showfield?f=doc&state=4004:bd746g.2.1

Those links come up as with the following:

This search session has expired. Please start a search session again by clicking on the TRADEMARK icon, if you wish to continue.

But again, Kolla's point about what exactly constitutes a "boingball" is quite important.

Also, wouldn't the person who wrote the original Juggler demo (from which the boing ball logo is derived) have some say in this?