Checkmate?

[dammy]

Opening a two front war is probably a checkmate.  You can almost hear Pentti laughing in the background.  Guess we shall see how deep Hyperion's pockets really are.

Dammy

[AmigaHeretic]

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?

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?  

[B00tDisk]

Citing Hogan's Heroes?  Aw damn!  This is hilarious!

[dammy]

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?

In Federal court, Hyperion is claiming Itec did not transfer the license to AI DE.  So they are going to claim one thing in US court as a sworn statement and then turn around and refute it in another court?  Please remember, Hyperion signed a new contract with Itec, that means they clearly understood Itec is the new IP owner and their partner.

Of course as you know, he who runs out of cash to defend themselves first, loses.  Genesi proved that with their battle with AI WA.

Dammy

[Tigger]

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.  

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

[AmigaHeretic]

Ah, I said I thought I was missing something!  That is a much smaller contract.  

So reading that it does seem strange they just sort of wrote Eyetech out of the whole thing.  Can they even do that?  


Here is what I read...

First they define who the Amiga One partners are they even put Amiga One partners in quotes and everything just like I have it written except I put it in bold:

-------------------------------------
In the AmigaOne 2001 contract:

Article I

"Amiga One Partners" means Eytech and Hyperion collectively;
--------------------------------------

then still in the original contract

--------------------------------------
2.01  Appointment.  Amiga hereby grants the Amiga One Partners a right and license to use and modify the Software and an exclusive right and license to market and distribute OS 4 as a standalone version ...etc..  Amiga furthermore grants the Amiga One Partners a right and license to use the Amiga trademarks in conjunction with the Amiga One. etc...
---------------------------------------



here is what is strange in the 2003 agreement....

--------------------------------
Hyperion shall transfer the ownership of the Object Code, Source Code and intellectual property of OS 4.0 to Itec in accordance with the provisions of the November 1, 2001 agreement between Amiga, Hyperion and Eyetech and to the extent it can do so under the existing agreements with third party developers whose work shall be integrated in OS 4.0.
--------------------------------


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.

[pixie]

dammy wrote:

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?

In Federal court, Hyperion is claiming Itec did not transfer the license to AI DE.  So they are going to claim one thing in US court as a sworn statement and then turn around and refute it in another court?  Please remember, Hyperion signed a new contract with Itec, that means they clearly understood Itec is the new IP owner and their partner.

Of course as you know, he who runs out of cash to defend themselves first, loses.  Genesi proved that with their battle with AI WA.

Dammy

I'm willing to bet that Hyperion has deeper pockets then you might think off... that and that Amiga will lose, not once more but twice*, actually that's the only thing they're good at... losing

*three if you count Genesi one...

[Tigger]

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

[pixie]

No, no, no... I said yet three more ;-)

[guru-666]

that's not a checkmate, it's more like a WTF am I doing.

If I where an investor in INC I would be very very upset with what is going on.  In fact I would take my money elsewhere, some it is safe from the Amiga lunatics.

[Tigger]

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

[guru-666]

ooh for god sake, they have all committed varied degrees of fraud.. LOL
I will not be shocked if the judge tosses the whole thing out.

there is nothing to fight about, no assets, no products, no market, just a bunch of low lever crook and bad businemen.

how the hell does an OS for $25,000, high school kids thats who.

[dammy]

I will not be shocked if the judge tosses the whole thing out.

I'd be very suprised if he did, he can't leave that type (IP) property in limbo, ownership has to be maintained.  He may not like the case, he may not want to rule either way, but he's going to have to do it else the appeals court will shove it back into his face.

Dammy

[Methuselas]

Does anyone really care?? Amiga's dead and the people who are in charge aren't going to do jack to save it.

Enjoy what you have. It's all your going to get.

[edit]

WOO HOO! I have as many posts as Dammy. I'm l337 now!!! What do I get?

Monty, tell me what's behind door number 3!

[coldfish]

Two lousy bums...

...fighting over an empty wallet.

Please, oh please let them both go down and never be heard from again.