Let's get this right. A "Trademark" is just that. A way of marking your goods for the purpose of trade. You cannot "Trademark" a word that exists in a real language as this is considered a generic mark. Otherwise I would Trademark the word "Cleaner" and sue the arse off of thousands of companies. What you can trademark is the graphical representation of that word, and, to a lesser extent, the fair use of that word. It could be argued that the word "Amiga" on a computer could be what is trademarked.
I think it has never been any disputes and questions whatsoever about Commodore's, Escom's, Gateway's and Amiga Inc's registered trademark "Amiga". It would be "funny" to try to make an "issue" of that now...? I mean, even Hyperion has acknowledged and helped established this through their deal with Amiga Inc.
However, under "Fair usage" Hyperion could arque that the fair usage of the AmigaOS trademark (please hold in mind the graphical representation of that mark) is infringed by the Amiga trademark (written in the same graphical style) on another computer (made by say, commodoreUS)
Hyperion does *not* have a license for the use of the mark "Amiga". Their license explicitly grants them the right to use the four marks "AmigaOS", "Amiga OS", "AmigaONE", "Amiga ONE". See the difference? The four latter marks are for exclusive use by Hyperion. Nothing more, nothing less. As long as Amiga Inc (or anyone else) stays clear from those, everything is perfectly fine. (And this goes the other way around as well, as Hyperion had better stay away from "Amiga").
I can't see no mention in the contract (but maybe I missed it? If so, please point me to the right spot!) of:
1) Hyperion would even have been granted a right to use any specific and particular graphical representation of any trademark (except for "the Boing Ball", which is explicitly not exclusive)
2) That this granted right (if it's even there, which I think not) should in any way be exclusive to Hyperion
In fact, it's even specifically pointed out, for the sake of clarity (just to avoid situations like the one you try to paint to us), in the Hyperion/Amiga Inc agreement, that the Amiga Parties (Amiga Inc, ltec, Amino collectively, as defined per the topmost paragraph of the deal) are indeed the ones with the right to the "Amiga Mark" (as defined in Definitions C: "any mark owned and/or registered or licensed by or to the Amiga Parties containing the word "Amiga" whether in stylized form (figurative mark) or otherwise"), and that the Amiga Parties have the right to continue to use "the mark 'AMIGA' alone or in conjunction with other words, so long as 'OS' or 'One' does not directly follow the word 'AMIGA'." (as defined in Grant 1c).
There is no ground for confusion, everything is perfectly clear; Amiga Inc has the rights to the Amiga trade mark, including any "stylized form" it may be pictured in. Hyperion has the rights to use the "AmigaOS", "Amiga OS", "AmigaONE", "Amiga ONE" marks, in no particular stylized form (as far as I can see), and as long as Amiga Inc, Commodore and anyone else stays clear of those four marks, Hyperion does not have any grounds whatsoever for "legal actions".
Having said that it's all pancakes to me, my interest is in Natami and SAM.
Well, Natami I can understand, but Sam? Does it even have a Amiga sticker?
