Hyperion trying to lay claim to the Amiga name?

[bhoggett]

xeron wrote:
If Hyperion gets full control over the Amiga name and AmigaOS from this court case, I think thats the best outcome.

Why is one bunch of liars better than two?

It doesn't matter any more. The Amiga lost its soul to dishonesty years ago and there is no way back.

[bhoggett]

deddly wrote:
Can someone clear this up for me a bit? I understand the anger directed at AI due to all the promises and lies. What's new to me is that people don't like Hyperion, what did they do that annoyed people? I missed all of that.

Long history - you'd have had to be there to understand. Let's just say some of us could see all this coming all along and said as much. Does it not strike anyone as surprising that Amiga Inc's legal consultant at the time these deals were struck was no other than Hyperion's MD? Or that when AmigaOS4 beta (or pre-release, as Hyperion insisted on calling it) is now considered the actual release of AmigaOS4, which is exactly what people suspected would happen at the time despite Hyperion ridiculing the idea. In short, anyone willing to see the truth could see what was happening and knew that both companies were not dealing in good faith. Hyperion have been just as dishonest as Amiga Inc all along.

[bhoggett]

vpamicue wrote:
This is about the source code to OS 4.0 and who owns it in the US only.

Not exactly. Patent laws may differ a great deal, and those in the US are irretrievably corrupt IMHO, but ownership of the source code is a matter of copyright, and copyright is recognised by most countries in the world.

Hyperion can't own the source code copyright (to any of the original AmigaOS code they might have used or had access to) unless they somehow acquired it prior to Amiga Inc, Washington's insolvency. AFAIK any attempt to "protect" assets in this manner is effectively illegal and voided by insolvency proceedings as it would be cheating the other creditors.

As far as I can make out they also claim to own the trademark so that they can continue to market the product as AmigaOS. Again, this falls under the protection of assets issue. The truth is it's a messy case with none of the parties involved really telling the truth. Each is trying to use a murky situation (which they created in the first place) to get something for nothing from the other party.