|[News] Amiga vs Thendic Update: Genesi fights back!||ANN.lu|
|Posted on 27-Mar-2004 18:34 GMT by samface (Edited on 2004-03-29 02:28:03 GMT by Teemu I. Yliselä)||143 comments|
REPLY in Support of Motion filed by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic Electronics Components re 49 MOTION to Modify the Order Granting Specific Performance, (LT, ) (Entered: 03/25/2004)
Richard Hughes, Attorney for "Thendic", accuses Bill McEwen of perjury, refering to Bill McEwen's deposition taken on August 14, 2003, nearly four months following the sale Amiga's OS system to Itec wherein he testifies that Amiga's assets included its Intellectual Property Rights to AmigaOS.
Bill Buck testifies as a person with "'a unique knowledge base regarding Amiga'", refering to the days of when he was the CEO of a company that was partnered with ESCOM to develop and promote The Amiga Operating System through a hardware platform, claiming that "'applications such as a web-browser, an MP3 player, and a mail client are application programs that adhere to an operating system just as Microsoft Outlook Express is an e-mail application that works with Windows'". Furthermore, he concludes that "'If the Amiga DE Operating System did not include an operating system and was touted as beeing only an "application" as Amiga now contends, it could not have been promised or discussed integration of Java, MP3 and mail client as stated in the ("Agreement")'".
Bill Buck claims that he was the one who suggested that the Amiga Operating system and the AmigaDE should be seperate enteties as an explanation to his "'Amiga OS is an operating system, DE is something different that makes alot of things work in other than Amiga operating system environments'" statement.
Bill Bucks states: "'I believe the mail attributed to 'Fleecy Moss' was and still is from Fleecy Moss"'.
|List of all comments to this article|
|Amiga vs Thendic Update: Genesi fights back! : Comment 104 of 143||ANN.lu|
|Posted by Gregs on 29-Mar-2004 06:09 GMT|
|In reply to Comment 100 (gary_c):|
I didn't realize you were a lawyer as well as an Amiga computing fan. The personal profile you posted at moobunny fails to mention this, out of modesty, I suppose. ;-) (Just kidding, but it's amazing to me how we get all these layman's analyses of the case, when really nobody knows squat.)
I am no lawyer Gary_c but I have not been spending my life in a closet either, and I tend to read a few books when I get the chance. Far from knowing squat we have about as much as the judge has to go on, even without the transcripts. Submissions are the critical part of any court case outside criminal law, it only requires a bit of application and a small amount of knowledge to make sensible comments.
Opinions that what Bill Mc said constitute perjury, are just that, opinions worth nothing at all. To be perjury requires more than just a sentence that can be interpreted a few different ways, or a question which is so broad that it too could mean a few things. It requires the conscious misleading of the court on issues before it, not some asides along the way.
This at least should be common knowledge, ever heard two people give evidence about an accident to which they were both witnesses? You could be forgiven most of the time in believing that two accidents occurred -- is one a liar and the other honest, it simply does not work out that way in reality. All the various points must be brought together, the issue itself rules out much that is irrelvant to the evidence. In short, perjury is a specific thing, not "lair liar pants on fire" accusation as it has been bandied about here and elsewhere.
Besides which the whole thing turns on rights to IP, one of the more complex areas of law and contracts. Intellectual Property is one of those rare things which can exist in different degrees, can be both in a specific place and in no-place in particular IP exists in rights to it and these can be many and varied, even a royality is a specific right to IP which is possessed.
Now there is an old saying about not attacking the man but the ball, consider it in this case, instead of having a go at my expertise (which is just that of an educated layman), how about instead making a comment on the issues raised. It is not hard to do, it just requires application and a desire to take things on directly in a forthright way.
|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.
- Not possible at this time!
- Search ANN archives
- Advanced search
- 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.