[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 69 of 164 | ANN.lu |
Posted by Nicholai Benalal on 09-Nov-2001 13:07 GMT | In reply to Comment 64 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion): David Gerber
Okay, one last try.
>- the license is not transferable to H&P and they simply cannot sell AmiTCP
Correct to some extent. Note that as a rule the license is transferable unless the contract between the developers and Wiles provided otherwise.
>- the license is transferable to H&P thus they must pay the license fee for >every "OS" 3.9 unit sold
> Not necessarily.
> First of all, this presupposes that the contract with Wiles imposes a per unit royalty on H&P and not a "lump sum" payment (which I believe was the case).
I haven't seen any of the contracts involved but what you say sounds fishy...
Do you mean that if there was a valid per unit licence between the original
AmiTCP author and Chris Wiles and the latter resells this licence for a lump sum of 1 Euro
to H&p, they suddenly get the right to sell any amount of it fo free? This is of
course wrong!
If the contract was transferable (and I have my doubts about that), there is no way that
Chris Wiles can legally grant H&P more rights than they hold themselves.
As for the good faith argument, that's another story. It might possibly hold but in
many legislations (for instance the scandinavian ones), it is extremely hard to make this claim for a
transaction between two businesses. As I'm sure you know, good faith is not only
tied to the fact that one of the parties belive the contract to be in order.
H&P has the obligation to make sure that the seller has the right he claims to have.
Reading the original contract and contacting the owner of the software is something
that would be expected.
/Nicholai |
|
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.
|