Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Amiga Kit Amiga Store Iridium Banner AMIStore App Store A600 Memory

AuthorTopic: Hyperion vs Cloanto  (Read 15348 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline Gulliver

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #30 on: November 13, 2018, 03:11:56 PM »
Cloanto may not have been able to develop 3.14 but they certainly would have been able to distribute it (with legal trademarks). On the hand, Hyperion's inability to distribute 3.14 (with legal trademarks) suggest a common sense collaboration between the two companies. But of course, this is not possible due to the greed and dishonesty of Hyperion's management.

As far as the 3.14 hosting for digital download issue, Hyperion blindly filed a lawsuit against the Amiga parties and without any serious consideration of the consequences of their actions. So to say Hyperion is in no way responsible, is not correct either.           

You just dont seem to get it:

Cloanto could have not been able to both distribute and/or develop 3.1.4 due to the content of the contributions, as Thomas mentioned.

There is no devil and no angel here: both companies have played their cards in order to try to accomplish the destruction of the other, instead of cooperating.

 

Offline number6

Hyperion Entertainment C.V.B.A. et al v. Itec, LLC et al
« Reply #31 on: November 13, 2018, 03:21:44 PM »
@thread

Don't mind me. Just making the topic (subject line) reflect the reality of the situation.
"etal" (and others) means exactly that.

#6
 

Offline SpeedGeek

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #32 on: November 13, 2018, 03:30:48 PM »
You just dont seem to get it:

Cloanto could have not been able to both distribute and/or develop 3.1.4 due to the content of the contributions, as Thomas mentioned.

There is no devil and no angel here: both companies have played their cards in order to try to accomplish the destruction of the other, instead of cooperating.

No, it's you who doesn't get it. I didn't say Cloanto had the developer rights but the only the distribution rights. Assuming, Hyperion has the developer rights (which include the 3.1.4 contributions) then cooperation would be possible.

BTW, Cloanto already has the rights to some of the OS3.5 and OS3.9 contributions (e.g. 3.X). Don't you think 3.1.4 users would like to have these contributions included as well?
   
 

Offline Gulliver

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #33 on: November 13, 2018, 03:44:52 PM »
You just dont seem to get it:

Cloanto could have not been able to both distribute and/or develop 3.1.4 due to the content of the contributions, as Thomas mentioned.

There is no devil and no angel here: both companies have played their cards in order to try to accomplish the destruction of the other, instead of cooperating.

No, it's you who doesn't get it. I didn't say Cloanto had the developer rights but the only the distribution rights. Assuming, Hyperion has the developer rights (which include the 3.1.4 contributions) then cooperation would be possible.

BTW, Cloanto already has the rights to some of the OS3.5 and OS3.9 contributions (e.g. 3.X). Don't you think 3.1.4 users would like to have these contributions included as well?
   

You still dont get it: Cloanto has no rights to distribute 3.1.4, and I am not assuming this, I know this for a fact, as I have seen the 3.1.4 source code, and I know where the contributions come from, and so does Thomas.

In the end, we can discuss it all you want, but it does not matter what you or I think would be best for the Amiga community, because it is not for us to decide.
 

Offline kreciu

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #34 on: November 13, 2018, 03:45:37 PM »
"then cooperation would be possible"

:hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: :hahaha: Please don't use "C" word, it is basically offensive ;).

I really, truly don't understand why people can't cooperate. I buy Cloanto and Hyperion etc. etc. products. To support BOTH (or more) parties, I'm sick and tired on those law suits. I(we!) put money to pockets and then they go to court to fight. Idiots.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 03:48:04 PM by kreciu »
A1200inE/BOX/3.1.4/AmigaOS3.9+BB1,2,3,4/060/66Mhz+603+/330Mhz/256Mb/FAST-ATA V /MediatorTX/R9200SE/SpiderUSB/LAN/SB128/16Gb-CF/DVD-ROM/ZIP-250/FDD-HD
PC/AmigaOS4.1/Xeon 1265Lv3  with Amiga Forever 2016!!!.
Dell T600/Win98SE/XP/256Mb/Radeon9600Pro/SBLive!/80Gb/DVD-ROM
Color Classic/System 7.1/030/16Mhz/FPU/10Mb/80Mb HDD
Performa 6400/System 8.6/PPC 603ev180Mhz+G3 350Mhz/Rage128Pro/136Mb/80GB HDD
IBM PC :)
 

Offline Thomas Richter

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #35 on: November 13, 2018, 03:45:48 PM »
Cloanto does not have rights on 3.9 or 3.5. They are entirely at H&P and at contributing parties, not at Cloanto. So while I certainly do not know how agreements with other parties were made back then, I hold rights on ViNCEd and BenchTrash all alike, also on the IOTools and probably a couple of other components I forgot. Me alone, and not Cloanto, and neither Hyperion, and neither H&P anymore, which just had a 2 years limited licence. I just decided that 3.1.4 was not the right place to include my contribution, so everybody is invited to get them from Aminet if found appropriate.

In fact, unless there is some hidden earlier agreement between Amiga Inc. and Cloanto that predates the settlement agreement beyond what I know, Cloanto could not have developped 3.X in first place (did they even develop anything?) without having development rights which were (negotiated) exclusively to be at Hyperion's side. As far as I know, Cloanto has sufficient rights "for emulation purposes", which does not state much. They can surely sell ROM images (1.2 up to 3.1 even), they may even have rights on the source code for 1.3, but none of that would have helped for 3.1.4 in any particular way.

3.1.4 with Cloanto would have been a much harder work, and it would have required to replicate a lot of work unnecessarily.



 
The following users thanked this post: Tygre

Offline SpeedGeek

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #36 on: November 13, 2018, 04:17:11 PM »

You still dont get it: Cloanto has no rights to distribute 3.1.4, and I am not assuming this, I know this for a fact, as I have seen the 3.1.4 source code, and I know where the contributions come from, and so does Thomas.

In the end, we can discuss it all you want, but it does not matter what you or I think would be best for the Amiga community, because it is not for us to decide.

From the Cloanto amended complaint:

Since 1997, under its AMIGA FOREVER trademark, Plaintiff has been the world leader in software that allows modern hardware and operating systems to emulate legacy AMIGA hardware and run AMIGA operating systems 0.7 through 3.1 (“Amiga OS’s”), as well as updates, patches and enhancements by various Amiga developers (“Enhancements”), AMIGA applications and games

Since 2000, also under its AMIGA FOREVER trademark, Plaintiff has offered and sold an Amiga OS “3.X,” which consists of Amiga OS 3.1 with further Enhancements. Cloanto released Amiga OS 3.X in order to address various needs, including those that might arise from “Y2K” and the rapid rate of growth in the size of hard drives. Unlike the Amiga OS’s0.7 through 3.1, Amiga OS 3.X did not initially run on original AMIGA hardware


« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 04:19:00 PM by SpeedGeek »
 

Offline SpeedGeek

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #37 on: November 13, 2018, 04:20:10 PM »
Cloanto does not have rights on 3.9 or 3.5. They are entirely at H&P and at contributing parties, not at Cloanto. So while I certainly do not know how agreements with other parties were made back then, I hold rights on ViNCEd and BenchTrash all alike, also on the IOTools and probably a couple of other components I forgot. Me alone, and not Cloanto, and neither Hyperion, and neither H&P anymore, which just had a 2 years limited licence. I just decided that 3.1.4 was not the right place to include my contribution, so everybody is invited to get them from Aminet if found appropriate.

In fact, unless there is some hidden earlier agreement between Amiga Inc. and Cloanto that predates the settlement agreement beyond what I know, Cloanto could not have developped 3.X in first place (did they even develop anything?) without having development rights which were (negotiated) exclusively to be at Hyperion's side. As far as I know, Cloanto has sufficient rights "for emulation purposes", which does not state much. They can surely sell ROM images (1.2 up to 3.1 even), they may even have rights on the source code for 1.3, but none of that would have helped for 3.1.4 in any particular way.

3.1.4 with Cloanto would have been a much harder work, and it would have required to replicate a lot of work unnecessarily.

https://www.amigaforever.com/kb/15-107
 ::)

Offline Gulliver

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #38 on: November 13, 2018, 04:34:21 PM »
Those links are not rulings, just claims from a party (Cloanto).

And even more than that, I believe you are missunderstanding what Cloanto was trying to accomplish in the ammended complaint: They were trying to address the 3.x issue, and position themselves in a better way regarding it. Nothing more.

Offline SpeedGeek

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #39 on: November 13, 2018, 04:50:16 PM »
Those links are not rulings, just claims from a party (Cloanto).

And even more than that, I believe you are missunderstanding what Cloanto was trying to accomplish in the ammended complaint: They were trying to address the 3.x issue, and position themselves in a better way regarding it. Nothing more.

The Cloanto claims appear to be supported by circumstantial evidence. Cloanto has successfully registered their Amiga Forever trademark and Kickstart 1.3 copyrights with the USPTO. Also, Cloanto has distributed their 3.X update and enhancements for at least 10 years without any objections from the Amiga parties.       
 

Offline Gulliver

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #40 on: November 13, 2018, 05:26:42 PM »
Those links are not rulings, just claims from a party (Cloanto).

And even more than that, I believe you are missunderstanding what Cloanto was trying to accomplish in the ammended complaint: They were trying to address the 3.x issue, and position themselves in a better way regarding it. Nothing more.

The Cloanto claims appear to be supported by circumstantial evidence. Cloanto has successfully registered their Amiga Forever trademark and Kickstart 1.3 copyrights with the USPTO. Also, Cloanto has distributed their 3.X update and enhancements for at least 10 years without any objections from the Amiga parties.     

Yes, indeed.

And that is one of the reasons the lawsuit is happening: Hyperion claims Amiga Inc. and/or its subsidiaries/shell companies did not defend their rights as they should have according to the settlement agreement.

But then despite Cloanto recognizes the agreement, they say it is no longer valid due to an alledged Hyperion´s breach.

And that is where things get really messy, and they both throw wild accusations upon each other to see what sticks.

A sad state of affairs for certain.  :'(

They shouldnt have stepped into each others toes.
« Last Edit: November 13, 2018, 05:29:05 PM by Gulliver »
 

Offline Thomas Richter

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #41 on: November 14, 2018, 06:57:57 AM »
The Cloanto claims appear to be supported by circumstantial evidence. Cloanto has successfully registered their Amiga Forever trademark and Kickstart 1.3 copyrights with the USPTO. Also, Cloanto has distributed their 3.X update and enhancements for at least 10 years without any objections from the Amiga parties.     
And why does  a trademark or copyright registration for 1.3 cover anything for 3.1?

So, a couple of things: First of all, an UPSTO registration means nothing - it is rather optional. An UPSTO registration cannot invalidate an international contract. Second, if you search for the copyright registration for 3.1, you will find that it is *not* registered by Cloanto (yes, been there, done that). They cannot. If you look into the Settlement agreement, you'll see that Hyperion there received the right to register themselves if Amiga Inc. does not register them after 30 days - but they have not done either.

Offline Thomas Richter

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #42 on: November 14, 2018, 07:14:01 AM »
https://www.amigaforever.com/kb/15-107
 ::)

Which proves nothing - these are just blant statements. I really wonder where they take the right from to distribute some V44 versions of libraries. Did they approach Heinz, for example? I do not know... They approached me for the Shell and layers, but all I could say is that these components were never mine, so it wasn't up to me to release them either. They went straight into the Os 4 pool, same as the scsi.device, by the way.

Just a funny side remark: Cloanto should really update their statement on MP3. MP3 patents run out last year. And, just another interesting remark: I *am* actually working for Fraunhofer Institute für Integrierte Schaltungen. Yes, the MP3 guys, execept that I'm not working on MP3.

Offline kolla

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #43 on: November 14, 2018, 11:39:50 AM »
I have seen the 3.1.4 source code

Noted, for future references :)
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC
 

Offline kolla

Re: Hyperion vs Cloanto
« Reply #44 on: November 14, 2018, 11:50:53 AM »
Just a funny side remark: Cloanto should really update their statement on MP3. MP3 patents run out last year.

Another funny side remark - you seem incapable of grasping the concept of "past tense" in English language - the text by Cloanto says "was", "were", "at the time" etc.
Quote
And, just another interesting remark: I *am* actually working for Fraunhofer Institute für Integrierte Schaltungen. Yes, the MP3 guys, execept that I'm not working on MP3.
Right, so maybe you can talk with Gunnar about "DVD Quality" mpeg1 video.
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC