Amiga Inc sues Hyperion VOF for trademark infringement

[Piru]

case number 2:2007cv00631

::Update::

The complaint claims "breach of contract, trademark infringement, trademark dilution, unfair competition, replevin and declaratory relief".

::Update 2::

http://www.merlancia.us/amiga-hyperion/ has some legal docs. Specifically decmcewenshow_case_doc.pdf

::Update 3::

Hyperion has reponded with a press release

[Piru]

decmcewenshow_case_doc.pdf

[Piru]

@Fats

I would like to see the original contract. Why isn't it included in the filing, it certainly is related to the case.

The original, signed contract is here:
decmossshow_case_doc.pdf

Exhibit A, page 12 ->

[Piru]

@benJamin

Edit: And no signatures on one of the so-called agreements. How can you submit, as evidence, an unsigned document? Huh? How?!

Signatures are on the page 18 of decmossshow_case_doc.pdf

[Piru]

@Argo

Good question. Then again the contract has a clause 7.12 which states that "Neither party shall assign or subcontract the whole or any part of this Agreement without the other party's prior written consent."

[Piru]

@quenthal

True, but IMHO still bringing in such third parties would require written consent, in accordance with clause 7.12. At this point the actual license would be agreed upon, and any non-favorable agreement could be avoided (say for example I'm quite sure that Amiga Inc would object to such an agreement that the core component 'exec' would suddenly be object code only).

[Piru]

@quenthal

My best guess is that the pages starting from 20 are the "Annex II" mentioned (but I could be wrong). These pages list some tasks and people assigned to them.

[Piru]

Hyperion's response

[EDIT]
Oops, mixed dates a bit. That indeed IS the 2001 contract.
[/EDIT]

[Piru]

@Argo

My theory is that the kernel is already sufficiently divorced from the old 68K Exec that this is new technology.

@Jose

ExecSG (or whatever it's called) is said to be rewriteen from scratch but compatible without an extra layer.

Posted by  Ben Hermans/Hyperion (Registered user) on 05-Aug-2003 08:11:23

All current Exec functiionality was preserved in ExecSG and for compatibility reasons even some of the quirks were preserved.

There is even a little Exec code in ExecSG.

source

[Piru]

@humppa

And? These two declarations are not mutually exclusive.