[News] Serious allegations about H&P | ANN.lu |
Posted on 08-Nov-2001 14:17 GMT by Christian Kemp | 164 comments View flat View list |
Amigo follows up on serious allegations about H&P and says: "I also just asked Unisys as it says here, and am waiting for a reply. If true, H&P could probably be forced to close."
[ If H&P indeed didn't pay royalties for Unisys' GIF algorithm, they might not be forced to close per se, but if this is indeed true, and Unisys decides to sue, they might have to pay some serious fines. Also note that while this is not in unmoderated, it's highly speculative, unconfirmed and generally should be taken with the usual grain of salt - CK ]
|
|
List of all comments to this article |
Serious allegations about H&P : Comment 121 of 164 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 10-Nov-2001 21:38 GMT | In reply to Comment 119 (Stefan Burström): @Stefan B.
>Ben please! You have actively been defending H&Ps continues sale of Amitholn >incl illegally selling AmiTCP.
I certainly have not. I just pointed out that H&P is legally in a rather comfortable position because of the fact that there is no direct contract between them and NSDi and they do have a sublicense from a licensee.
My advice was: sue Wiles.
> Yet you just didn't seem to answer that question when I put it
>instead you talk like you have just been discussing these things theoretically.
That's exactly right. I was raising the legal arguments, I didn't make a concrete judgement in this case nor did I condone anything.
>So, when will we get a real answer from you? Do you think it is correct and
>do you believe it is legal for H&P to continue to sell AmiTCP when they have
>acknowledged that they don't have a valid contract?
1) I don't have all the facts to make a complete determination in this concrete case. This would require me to have access to all the contracts and communication between the parties, which I don't have. (Neither does anybody else here but that certainly didn't stop them from commenting.)
This should not be confused with "endorsing" or "condoning" whatever action H&P has taken or not taken.
2) To the best of my knowledge, H&P have never acknowledged any wrong doing.
It is true that they tried to settle this case but this does not imply any wrongdoing.
Many legal disputes are settled without any party admitting to any wrong doing.
This happens all the time.
You are confusing their willingness to negotiate and settle the issue with an admission of wrong doing which is simply incorrect.
This is the reason why lawyers always end their letters with "reserving all rights and without any prejudicial admission".
So that whatever proposal they put forward in negotiations cannot be construed as an admission of guilt or wrong-doing.
I'm sorry that things are a bit more complex than you think but why do you think people need to go to law-school? Because just anybody can make legal determinations?
Once again, I don't pretend to know anything about coding or software development but somehow everybody out there seems to think they know about the law.
Reminds me of those women magazines where they explain about science and medicine.
Same level of indepth insight. |
|
List of all comments to this article (continued) |
|
- User Menu
-
- About ANN archives
- The ANN archives is powered by #AmigaZeux. It was updated daily (news last: 22-Oct-2004; comments last: 18-May-2005).
ANN.lu was created, previously owned and maintained by Christian Kemp, www.ckemp.com.
- Contribute
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- Hosting
- ANN.lu was hosted by Dreamhost. Sign up through this link, mention "ckemp" as referrer and he will get a 10% commission on any account you purchase.
Please show your appreciation for any past, present and future work on ANN.lu by making a contribution via PayPal.
|