Nitro wrote:
@ JoePillow
If all it took was for a company to be inactive, there would be flocks of companys selling Amiga brand computers. There would be OS4 hardware here and now, but it doesn`t work like that. This is about computer and the brand name.
From the Amiga Inc. site: The Amiga brand name is recognized worldwide...
Well, this is the point I was trying to make. Companies named "Amiga, Inc." are already flocking. :-) If each US state can have one company with a given name, there soon may be 50 "Amiga, Inc." companies, and if one hands out a press kit the other will feel it has a right to have it removed from eBay, and
nobody in the community will even think for a second that these are different entities, and that company B maybe has no right over what company A handed out.
As I indicated, official records show that the web site and the trademark mentioned in this thread in relation to the Australian company are owned by the former Amiga, Inc. of Washington, not by Amiga, Inc. of Delaware. These are two separate companies. Redrumloa sold on eBay something that the Washington company had handed out. But it was another company, based in Delaware, who complained to eBay. Why do we keep treating them as one, if ownership of domains and trademarks is not in the hands of only one? Why do we always accept that they can keep confusing us with this game of identical names but different companies? This game is not honest, IMHO.