Evert Carton leaves Hyperion

[Franko]

Brilliant idea Franko.
It would require someone willing to stand up to a legal challenge, but it could help resolve this matter.
This idea deserves a thread of its own, possibly sticky.

I'm up for it...

Never had anyone (including the British Government) that has challenged me on something "legal" and who didn't back down before it went to court cos they knew they didn't have a leg to stand on...

Trouble is for such a thing to get noticed properly you need the copyright mafia to stop their pathetic whining and demand that any links to my site be removed cos it may damage Amiga.org...

It needs as much exposure as possible for anyone who thinks they can genuinely claim to own these rights to notice it and take the appropriate action if they think they can prove it legally...

It's the whiners/ know alls and crapbags that need to keep their gobs shut and then maybe, just maybe the good folks of Amigaland can put an end to all this nonsense once and for all...

[number6]

It seems amiga inc hasn't been averse to some debt dodging in the past, so who knows.

Of course, there may also be a disconnect between what they think they own, and what they actually do own. As long as nobody challenges them on it, (and who would?) all is peachy for them.

You said a mouthful. Hence the war I mentioned. Not all parties who were a part of Amiga Inc. will see things the same way. You can bank on that.

Debts? I don't get involved in that, save where it concerns all the unpaid developers, who have been raped repeatedly by this bunch. Developers are often a mild mannered group of people in general and avoid the public fora to state how they have been treated over the years.
Although I've received hints at times to stop defending them, I see no valid reason why I should...
I'm not just talking about Bolton here. There is quite an extensive list.
I'm not content to accept the constant argument that what was done was legal and therefore there is no moral obligation in place that holds any water vs that.
And yeah, I've heard the argument about them knowing what they were getting themselves into as well. Irrelevant.

#6

[runequester]

You said a mouthful. Hence the war I mentioned. Not all parties who were a part of Amiga Inc. will see things the same way. You can bank on that.

Debts? I don't get involved in that, save where it concerns all the unpaid developers, who have been raped repeatedly by this bunch. Developers are often a mild mannered group of people in general and avoid the public fora to state how they have been treated over the years.
Although I've received hints at times to stop defending them, I see no valid reason why I should...
I'm not just talking about Bolton here. There is quite an extensive list.
I'm not content to accept the constant argument that what was done was legal and therefore there is no moral obligation in place that holds any water vs that.
And yeah, I've heard the argument about them knowing what they were getting themselves into as well. Irrelevant.

#6

I completely agree with you.

[Iggy]

I'm up for it...

Never had anyone (including the British Government) that has challenged me on something "legal" and who didn't back down before it went to court cos they knew they didn't have a leg to stand on...

Trouble is for such a thing to get noticed properly you need the copyright mafia to stop their pathetic whining and demand that any links to my site be removed cos it may damage Amiga.org...

It needs as much exposure as possible for anyone who thinks they can genuinely claim to own these rights to notice it and take the appropriate action if they think they can prove it legally...

It's the whiners/ know alls and crapbags that need to keep their gobs shut and then maybe, just maybe the good folks of Amigaland can put an end to all this nonsense once and for all...

Please consider it.
While I wholly back Hyperion's right to market AOS4, I'm beginning to believe that previous versions of AmigaOS may not have a valid owner.

[mongo]

Please consider it.
While I wholly back Hyperion's right to market AOS4, I'm beginning to believe that previous versions of AmigaOS may not have a valid owner.

That is not possible. People might dispute who owns it, but the fact is that somebody owns it.

[Franko]

That is not possible. People might dispute who owns it, but the fact is that somebody owns it.

Yeah... but that's the question we all want answered "Who does own what "...

Of course with all the grey/ shady and murky dealings over the years it may actually be proven in a court of law that "no-one" can actually now claim full rights on any of it after the whole shambles and "grey" dealings that have gone on over the years...

Myself I really couldn't care less about folk making such stuff free to download until someone steps forward and proves to the world that they actually own it, until that day then most likely these debates will continue as nothing more than speculation and rumours that for some odd reason we here in Amigaland seem to love so much...

As I've said simply make the stuff available on enough websites and see if anyone steps forward to challenge it, and forget about USA laws that may be upcoming, USA law does not apply to the rest of the planet as some would have you believe...

[nicholas]

Yeah... but that's the question we all want answered "Who does own what "...

Of course with all the grey/ shady and murky dealings over the years it may actually be proven in a court of law that "no-one" can actually now claim full rights on any of it after the whole shambles and "grey" dealings that have gone on over the years...

Myself I really couldn't care less about folk making such stuff free to download until someone steps forward and proves to the world that they actually own it, until that day then most likely these debates will continue as nothing more than speculation and rumours that for some odd reason we here in Amigaland seem to love so much...

As I've said simply make the stuff available on enough websites and see if anyone steps forward to challenge it, and forget about USA laws that may be upcoming, USA law does not apply to the rest of the planet as some would have you believe...

Marg bar Amrika!

[Franko]

Marg bar Amrika!

Hmm... all those translator thingies on the web and all they come up with is "Marg bar Amrika" ... Ruddy useless...

[B00tDisk]

There's a fine line between who the IP belongs to and whom fanatics feverently hope it belongs to (or wish it belongs to or believe it belongs to).  Who owns AmigaOS?  I myself don't give a fig; it isn't like we're talking about the sources to Windows 7 or a videotape copy of The Day the Clown Cried.  Odds are there's something locked up in a filing cabinet somewhere in the offices occupied by whomever succeeded Gateway (Acer, was it?) and nearly 20 years down the pike with no substantive improvements over the C= produced OS (the PD bundles of 3.5 and 3.9 aside...) they likely don't care.

[trekiej]

please stay

[Iggy]

That is not possible. People might dispute who owns it, but the fact is that somebody owns it.

An interesting point. Are the ownership rights to a piece of software perpetual? And can software owned by a defunct company be transferred legally without consideration of any debts the company may carry?

There's a fine line between who the IP belongs to and whom fanatics feverently hope it belongs to (or wish it belongs to or believe it belongs to).  Who owns AmigaOS?  I myself don't give a fig; it isn't like we're talking about the sources to Windows 7 or a videotape copy of The Day the Clown Cried.  Odds are there's something locked up in a filing cabinet somewhere in the offices occupied by whomever succeeded Gateway (Acer, was it?) and nearly 20 years down the pike with no substantive improvements over the C= produced OS (the PD bundles of 3.5 and 3.9 aside...) they likely don't care.

Acer may or may not have documentation. If the patents are no longer valid and AOS was never properly acquired by Escom or Gateway then it doesn't really matter.
I doubt Acer wants any part of this controversy.

[mongo]

An interesting point. Are the ownership rights to a piece of software perpetual? And can software owned by a defunct company be transferred legally without consideration of any debts the company may carry?

Do you understand how bankruptcy works?

[Iggy]

Do you understand how bankruptcy works?

Far better then most people. And once a company's assets are liqidated and all debts are discharged they cease  to exist.
Therefore, if is not possible for a former official to sign a valid contract transferring intellectual property two years after bankruptcy.
Such an act would constitute fraud.

[runequester]

Far better then most people. And once a company's assets are liqidated and all debts are discharged they cease  to exist.
Therefore, if is not possible for a former official to sign a valid contract transferring intellectual property two years after bankruptcy.
Such an act would constitute fraud.

In amiga circles, I believe "fraud" is usually phrased as "marketing strategy"

[mongo]

Far better then most people. And once a company's assets are liqidated and all debts are discharged they cease  to exist.
Therefore, if is not possible for a former official to sign a valid contract transferring intellectual property two years after bankruptcy.
Such an act would constitute fraud.

The contracts were signed to correct an oversight that occurred during the original transfer of assets.

[runequester]

https://docs.google.com/fileview?id=0BxlY9g_OfLqDMTk5M2VhZTAtMTEwZi00YTUzLWFkZDEtMTg0ODNkYTQ1ZWYw&hl=en

That document was a trademark assignment. Totally different from copyrights.