20-Apr-2024 06:16 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 427 items in your selection (but only 27 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 427]
[News] Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former AttorneysANN.lu
Posted on 02-Oct-2003 05:11 GMT by Rich Woods (Edited on 2003-10-02 07:15:20 GMT by Christian Kemp)427 comments
View flat
View list
Amiga's Attorneys Are Granted Leave Leaving Amiga with NO Legal Representation. "This court hereby orders, judges and decrees, that Diana S. Shukis, Stephen P. VanDerhoef & Cairncross & Hempelmann P.S. may withdraw as counsel of record for Defendant Amiga, Inc. The withdrawal is effective immediately upon entry of this Order.

DONE IN OPEN COURT this 30th day of September, 2003.

/s/

Robert S. Lasnik"

Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 401 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 05-Oct-2003 08:45 GMT
Wow, over 400 posts. What is the highscore on ann when it comes to the number of posts in a single thread?
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 402 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 05-Oct-2003 09:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 398 (EyeAm):
> What AROS is writing is technically incompatible with what I'm doing.

Does the quote below describe what you're doing?:

> I have this dream of Amiga OS ... flawlessly executing classic Amiga 32-Bit
> code within the new OS, for full backward compatability.

In other words, you want API and ABI compatibility. Yet you just admitted your total ignorance on that subject, when you sincerely suggested that this would imply IP infringement and even theft of source code. Either you were joking or you just don't have a clue.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 403 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 05-Oct-2003 10:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 402 (Anonymous):
>In Reply to Comment 398:
>> What AROS is writing is technically incompatible with what I'm doing.

>Does the quote below describe what you're doing?:

>> I have this dream of Amiga OS ... flawlessly executing classic Amiga 32-Bit
>> code within the new OS, for full backward compatability.

No, it doesn't describe what I'm doing with my OS. :)

>In other words, you want API and ABI compatibility. Yet you just admitted your >total ignorance on that subject, when you sincerely suggested that this would >imply IP infringement and even theft of source code. Either you were joking or >you just don't have a clue.

You'll have to be more specific than that. (If you meant about where I said I might do the same with my OS, then I was halfway joking; but if it's perfectly legal, then I just might).

Regarding IP infringement and theft...why, that comes from a Genesi employee, stating that theirs is the same as Amiga's.

Regarding my OS, what is legal, I may do :) If others are legally running Amiga stuff, well then mine may. It also may not. The only plans I've really made regard the importing and morphing of certain file formats (sort of a migration solution).

It'll be interesting to see if Amiga does anything regarding all this 'sameness' between MorphOS and Amiga OS. I shall watch intently to see. (couldn't ask for a better legal litmus test, eh?)

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 404 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 05-Oct-2003 10:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 395 (EyeAm):
getting more and more OT :-)
Yes, you can do that. It is 100% legal.
Just look at Wine and the ReactOS Project. Both re-implement the Windows API. Microsoft can do nothing against this (well, almost. The only thing that would be a problem is to re-implement patented algorithms like that in video and audio codecs - all the patents for mp3, aac, mpeg2, mpeg4, asf, wmf, quicktime, real , etc. make that a big problem... ).
Amiga certainly has no patents that apply to the OS. There is no problem to make a clone. What you must not do is to use disassembled code.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 405 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by - on 05-Oct-2003 10:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 401 (takemehomegrandma):
This thread doesn't count. It wandered around and ended up in some actual real exchange of information. Wonders never cease :) Keep it up guys. I am learning a bunch, but am coming up with more questions.

Stew
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 406 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Christian Kemp on 05-Oct-2003 11:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 401 (takemehomegrandma):
Over 500, I think.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 407 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 05-Oct-2003 11:52 GMT
On Topic:

Where can I find a schedule for the court case--one that is kept up to date?

And the 'counter suit' by Amiga is being handled within the same case, right? Or is that to be a separate thing?

I hope someone was putting together a page on that
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 408 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 05-Oct-2003 15:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 403 (EyeAm):
You are coding an OS and don't even know the basic principles...
MorphOS *reimplements* all of AmigaOS's *functions*, recreating the
whole AmigaOS 3.1 API. The information to do it is available in
the Autodocs, RKMs and several other OFFICIAL sources.
That's perfectly legal.
You don't have to steal code to be compatible. You need to have full
understanding of the product you are going to clone. The MorphOS team
did as they were AmigaOS developers for many years.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 409 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 05-Oct-2003 15:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 406 (Christian Kemp):
~700, it was a flamewar on the legal status of MorphOS. Everyone vs Samface it was. :-)
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 410 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 05-Oct-2003 16:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 408 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
>In Reply to Comment 403:
>You are coding an OS and don't even know the basic principles...

I don't see how you arrive at that conclusion.

>MorphOS *reimplements* all of AmigaOS's *functions*, recreating the
>whole AmigaOS 3.1 API. The information to do it is available in
>the Autodocs, RKMs and several other OFFICIAL sources.
>That's perfectly legal.

That's for a judge to decide, of course; should Amiga pursue it.

>You don't have to steal code to be compatible. You need to have full
>understanding of the product you are going to clone. The MorphOS team
>did as they were AmigaOS developers for many years.

Cloning = copying = sameness = illegality because of copyright infringement. Amiga DOES hold the copyright. Still, I hope they sue. I think it's illegal. If they do nothing with their counter-suit, then that's pretty much a green light to go ahead and do it.

At any rate, even before your post, it was pretty much settled as far as I'm concerned. It's really up to Amiga. If they don't sue over this, then I suppose it's a free-for-all to copy and clone Amiga OS and make alternative operating systems (even mine) support, mimic, run, load, implement, open, save, etc...Amiga applications, software, tools, utilities, and so on. :)

Wouldn't it be interesting for a brand new 64-Bit OS to be able to use all those classic Amiga programs, out of the box? (not to mention the new software) :-P And to do it ten times faster because the kernel wouldn't have anywhere near the overhead that traditional OSes do. And on x86/64, too.

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 411 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by info on 05-Oct-2003 16:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 170 (dammy):
Did I state something as fact in the above or is asking a question a lie? How strange, Mike post on here bold face lies and you say nothing. I ask a question and all of a sudden, I'm lying. Go figure.

Dammy
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 412 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 05-Oct-2003 16:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 399 (T_Bone):
>In Reply to Comment 398:
>> What AROS is writing is technically incompatible with what I'm doing.

>Fork it.

Time-slice it, dice it, and spoon it. :)

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 413 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by - on 05-Oct-2003 18:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 410 (EyeAm):
“Cloning = copying = sameness = illegality because of copyright infringement. Amiga DOES hold the copyright. Still, I hope they sue. I think it's illegal”

I am certainly no expert but it is my understanding reverse engineering is legal. Performing the same function is not a copyright infringement. If it is a direct clone of Amiga IP than an infringement has occurred, Amiga never pursued this when they had $$ so I tend to think the case must have been weak. I have yet to see someone give a reasonable proof that the code was stolen. My question is who has the burden of proof in these types of cases?

I think there are other more important questions needing answers, and I hate to see another flame fest over this.

Stew
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 414 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Rich Woods on 05-Oct-2003 20:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 407 (EyeAm):
On Topic:

Where can I find a schedule for the court case--one that is kept up to date?

And the 'counter suit' by Amiga is being handled within the same case, right? Or is that to be a separate thing?

I hope someone was putting together a page on that

------------
Thank goodness someone is asking the qustions pertinent to this thread.

Here is the complete docket info for this Thendic-Amiga case....

U.S. District Court
Western District of Washington (Seattle)
CIVIL DOCKET FOR CASE #: 2:03-cv-00003-RSL


Thendic Electronics, et al v. Amiga Inc
Assigned to: Hon Robert S. Lasnik
Referred to:
Demand: $0
Lead Docket: None
Related Cases: None
Case in other court: None
Cause: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Contract


Date Filed: 01/02/03
Jury Demand: None
Nature of Suit: 190 Contract: Other
Jurisdiction: Diversity






Plaintiff
-----------------------

Thendic Electronics Components, a foreign corporation

represented by

Richard John Hughes
1424 FOURTH AVE
STE 909
SEATTLE, WA 98101
206-903-0664
Fax : FAX 903-6144
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

Genesi Sarl, a foreign corporation located in Paris, France

represented by

Richard John Hughes
(See above for address)
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED


V.



Defendant
-----------------------

Amiga Inc, a corporation in the state of Washington

represented by

Diana S Shukis
CAIRNCROSS & HEMPELMANN
524 2ND AVE
STE 500
SEATTLE, WA 98104-2323
206-587-0700
Fax : FAX 587-2308
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED

 

 

Stephen P VanDerhoef
CAIRNCROSS & HEMPELMANN
524 2ND AVE
STE 500
SEATTLE, WA 98104-2323
206-587-0700
Fax : FAX 587-2308
LEAD ATTORNEY
ATTORNEY TO BE NOTICED





Filing Date

#

Docket Text


01/02/2003

1

COMPLAINT (Summons(es) issued) Receipt # 603192 (PM) (Entered: 01/08/2003)

01/10/2003

2

RETURN OF SERVICE of summons and complaint executed upon defendant Amiga
Inc on 1/8/03 (VK) (Entered: 01/10/2003)

01/28/2003

3

ANSWER to complaint [1-1] by defendant (VK) (Entered: 01/29/2003)

02/06/2003

4

ATTORNEY APPEARANCE for defendant by Stephen P VanDerhoef, Diana S Shukis
(VK) (Entered: 02/07/2003)

02/11/2003

5

ORDER RE: INITIAL DISCLOSURES, JOINT STATUS REPORT AND EARLY SETTLEMENT.
Joint Status Report due 3/25/03 (cc: counsel, Judge) (KERR) (Entered:
02/12/2003)

02/18/2003

6

First AMENDED COMPLAINT [1-1] by plaintiff; adding Genesi Sarl as a pltf
(VK) (Entered: 02/18/2003)

02/18/2003

7

PRAECIPE: by plaintiff re: amended complaint [6-1] (VK) (Entered:
02/18/2003)

02/27/2003

8

ANSWER to first amended complaint [6-1] by defendant Amiga Inc (VK)
(Entered: 02/28/2003)

03/05/2003

9

PRAECIPE: by defendant Amiga Inc re: substituting answer [8-1] with the
attached (VK) (Entered: 03/06/2003)

03/24/2003

10

Pltfs' ANSWER TO AMIGA's COUNTERCLAIM (VK) (Entered: 03/25/2003)

03/25/2003

11

JOINT STATUS REPORT filed by all parties. Est. Trial Days: 2-4 (VK)
(Entered: 03/25/2003)

04/03/2003

12

MINUTE ORDER by Judge Lasnik setting Trial Date and Related Dates pursuant
to LR 16. Trial set for 12/1/03 ; Deadline to Join Additional Parties is
5/1/03 ; Disclosure of expert testimony due: 6/4/03 ; Discovery Motions to
be filed by <date not set> ; Discovery deadline set for 8/3/03 ;
Dispositive Motions to be filed by 9/2/03 ; Settlement conf. per CR
39.1(c)(2) by 10/2/03 ; 39.1 designation effective 11/1/03 ; Motions in
Limine deadline 11/3/03 ; Agreed Pretrial Order set for 11/19/03 ; Trial
briefs and exhibits to be submitted by 11/26/03 Court trial set for 2-4
days. (cc: counsel, Judge, KL) (VK) (Entered: 04/04/2003)

08/25/2003

13

NOTICE of Unavailability of counsel Diana S Shukis for Defendant Amiga Inc
from 9/1/03 to 9/16/03 (Temp4, ) (Entered: 08/26/2003)

08/27/2003

14

MOTION for Sanctions and Exhibit (Part 1 of 2) by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl,
Thendic Electronics Components. Noting Date 9/19/2003. (Attachments: # 1
Exhibit (Part 2 of 2);# 2 Text of Proposed Order; # 3 Note for
Motion)(Temp4, ) (Entered: 08/28/2003)

08/27/2003

15

DECLARATION of Bill Buck filed by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic
Electronics Components in support of 14 MOTION for Sanctions (Temp4, )
(Entered: 08/28/2003)

08/27/2003

16

DECLARATION of Bolton Peck filed by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic
Electronics Components in support of 14 MOTION for Sanctions (Temp4, )
(Entered: 08/28/2003)

08/27/2003

17

DECLARATION of Richard Hughes and Exhibit (Part 1 of 2) filed by Plaintiffs
Genesi Sarl, Thendic Electronics Components in support of 14 MOTION for
Sanctions (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit (Part 2 of 2))(Temp4, ) (Entered:
08/28/2003)

09/17/2003

18

RESPONSE to Motion filed by Defendant Amiga Inc re 14 Plaintiffs' Motion
for Sanctions (Temp4, ) (Entered: 09/19/2003)

09/17/2003

19

DECLARATION of Diana S. Shukis filed by Defendant Amiga Inc in support of
18 Response to Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions (Temp4, ) (Entered:
09/19/2003)

09/17/2003

20

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Defendant Amiga Inc for 18 Response to
Plaintiffs' Motion for Sanctions, 19 Declaration Diana S. Shukis in
Support. (Temp4, ) (Entered: 09/19/2003)

09/17/2003

22

DECLARATION of RICHARD HUGHES in Support of Plaintiff's Response for
14Sanctions, filed by Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic Electronics
Components. (Temp5, ) (Entered: 09/19/2003)

09/19/2003

21

Plaintiffs' REPLY in Support of It's 14 MOTION for Sanctions, filed by
Plaintiffs Genesi Sarl, Thendic Electronics Components. (Temp5, )
(Entered: 09/19/2003)

09/19/2003

23

MOTION Requesting Leave to Withdraw as Counsel for Defendant by Amiga Inc.
(Attachments: # 1 Text of Proposed Order)(Temp5, ) (Entered: 09/25/2003)

09/19/2003

24

DECLARATION of DIANA S. SHUKIS in Support of 23 MOTION RequestingLeave to
Withdraw as Counsel for Defendant, filed by Defendant Amiga Inc. re
(Temp5, ) (Entered: 09/25/2003)

09/19/2003

25

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Defendant Amiga Inc re 23 MOTION for Leave to
Withdraw as Counsel, 24 Declaration of Diana S. Shukis. (Temp5, )
(Entered: 09/25/2003)

09/30/2003

26

ORDER granting 23 Motion for Leave to withdraw as counsel by Diana Shukis
and Stephen VanDerhoef for dft by Judge Robert S. Lasnik. (RS, )
(Entered: 10/01/2003)
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 415 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 05-Oct-2003 20:01 GMT
The Real big thread will come when Amiga Inc. are finally killed off... legally at any rate :-/
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 416 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Tigger on 06-Oct-2003 00:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 351 (Anonymous):
>>>>
Yet according to EyeTech, the AmigaOnes they have shipped ARE AmigaOnes.

So who is lying? Moss or EyeTech?
>>>>

Oh come on, you know the answer here. If you are looking for who is lying in a conversation and one of the options is Moss, Moss is the correct answer, each and every time.
-Tig
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 417 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Tigger on 06-Oct-2003 00:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 390 (EyeAm):
Eyeam,

You are very confused, it is not illegal for someone to take the SDK's and create an OS based on them. MorphOS (and AROS for that matter) has done nothing wrong in taking the publically sold SDKs and using them to create an OS. Its completely legal and done all the time.
-Tig
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 418 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 06-Oct-2003 04:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 415 (Matt Parsons):
>The Real big thread will come when Amiga Inc. are finally killed
>off... legally at any rate :-/

This will never happen. :)

I seriously doubt bankruptcy will be declared by Amiga, Inc., either. The other times were always the parent company. This entity's roots are resurrected from the original Amiga, Inc. (formerly Hi-Toro, Inc.). Interestingly enough, all of its glory days (AND troubles) have been mostly exercised through parent-company owners. I'm viewing it spiritually and metaphysically here. The only thing left over from the post-original-Amiga-company is the "OS", which was born later.

It's the NAME they want to hang on to (it's a Master Number, btw). Jupiter is now in Virgo :D Abundance comes to the name Amiga by January. Pluto is nearing the last decanate of Sagittarius; so dictatorial power is leaving a certain other company, and heading toward Amiga. It's the successor, mark my words.

Amiga is unkillable at this time. When the 'other' enemies realize this, they will line up to partner with it.

However, I must say that its Gemini President *might not* remain (depends on how he weathers all of this, lawsuit and all; stress.). Fleecy should, though, he's Aquarian. Amiga itself has met its dragons, so to speak; and while there should be another patch or two of trouble next year, those will be nothing compared to this darkest point. Amiga is going to prevail.

Do not be surprised if Amiga turns the tables on a few deserving of that. This lawsuit/case may well be the catalyst. In December, there should be one more big push (made on the part of Amiga) to propel it forward. I don't know what that would be, but that's the time-frame.

If I'm right, there's about to be an influx of money, coming into Amiga, beyond October 25th (starting point, plus or minus a few days).

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 419 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 06-Oct-2003 05:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 417 (Tigger):
>In Reply to Comment 390:
>Eyeam,

>You are very confused, it is not illegal for someone to take the SDK's and
>create an OS based on them. MorphOS (and AROS for that matter) has done
>nothing wrong in taking the publically sold SDKs and using them to create
>an OS. Its completely legal and done all the time.
>-Tig

No. I'm not confused at all. My focus is squarely on Copyright issues.

FACT: Amiga does indeed own and control the copyright to the Amiga OS and everything in it (which is put together in a particular order).

FACT: Anyone cloning/copying or otherwise creating a 'sameness' of the Amiga OS product, without actually coding 'something similar' from scratch...is infringing upon the copyright Amiga holds. It doesn't matter if they 'add to' that.

Now, again, I'll say that it is up to Amiga whether they pursue this, whether they see anything there which merits further pursuit (apparently they do, because there is a counter-suit from what I understand, addressing this matter). It will be for the court to determine. I just have my own opinions about it, as do others like yourself.

Regarding the SDK and the creation of things that utilize a standard (and public) library, there are a LOT of things that can be created which only seem to infringe copyright but are in fact legal.

I think someone could create an OS that runs parts or portions of things 'Amigan' and not break the law--but I think it is much harder to pull off the entire OS or its compatability without copyright issues. The *reason* I think this is because Amiga programs out there are going to be expecting things to be a very particular place (the C: drawer, the Libs: drawer, within the System directory, and so on), so about the only way around that is to *alias* a lot of things from the structure we know of as being within the Amiga OS, so the program only thinks it is finding those things. (Of course, the same thing can be done within a new Amiga OS to run software from other platforms, providing one sets it up so that the right functions are found and perform in an equivalent fashion as what the program expects).

Genesi can't say that this is what they've done; not now. It has been said that what they have is the same. A clone. (a copy). But if the issue is settled in favor of them in court (and I will believe it when I see it), then fine.

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 420 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 06-Oct-2003 05:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 414 (Rich Woods):
Yes, I saw that earlier in the thread. Thanks for replying and posting it again, though. What I was hoping for was a schedule or time-line of what is coming--what is scheduled, rather. More on the process. Like deadlines of when briefs are to be filed, or meetings take place, or deadlines to be met.

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 421 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 06-Oct-2003 06:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 419 (EyeAm):
"FACT: Amiga does indeed own and control the copyright to the Amiga OS and everything in it (which is put together in a particular order). "

So far so good...

"FACT: Anyone cloning/copying or otherwise creating a 'sameness' of the Amiga OS product, without actually coding 'something similar' from scratch...is infringing upon the copyright Amiga holds. It doesn't matter if they 'add to' that."

Wrong.

The ONLY time copyright woudl come in to play would be if the original sources were used.

They were not.

All that AROS and MorphOS teams have done is take the *PUBLICALLY AVAILABLE* APIs and write the necesary code to provide those functions.

Nothing illegal about that whatsoever. No copyright issues there either.
No matter how much you want there to be.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 422 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 06-Oct-2003 09:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 420 (EyeAm):
EyeAm, don't even try, this arguement has been done a million time and always
ended the same way: If the clone uses no source code of the original and none
of the developers ever saw the original source code (clean room reverse engineering), it's perfectly legal. Amiga's case was (is?) the claim that Ralph
Schmidt has/had the AmigaOS 3.1 sourcecode. There's no other case since the
only patents on AmigaOS are *not* used. (Did you see menu multiselection anywhere in MorphOS? Nope, it's patented, hence not used).
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 423 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 06-Oct-2003 10:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 422 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
Might I also point out that all of the original Amiga Patents expire this year.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 424 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 06-Oct-2003 11:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 401 (takemehomegrandma):
It's this one: http://ann.lu/detail.cgi?category=news&file=1019662253.msg
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 425 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by EyeAm on 06-Oct-2003 13:35 GMT
Ok, cool :-) I shall say no more.

--EyeAm
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 426 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 08-Oct-2003 02:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 219 (Rich Woods):
Rich Woods typed:
<I agree, that's why I didn't link it or quote it.

However, it still proves my point about Genesi being under Amiga's "Get legal or be shut down" umbrella.
-------------------
Get legal or be shut down was concerning Merlancia - since H&P is out of the country amiga couldn't "shut down" H&P. >
=============================================
I was at that show and was sitting near Bill and Ryan after Bill's speech. In their conversation, it was clear that Merlancia was not one of the targets of the Amiga Inc threats. And from what I have heard from other sources, Ryan was at the time supporting Amiga Inc.

Methinks your continuing anti-Merlancia bias is still showing. When you quote and post court papers, you're showing the truth, and lots consider that a public service. When you cyber-squat on someone's company name and fib about them in public, knowing that neither of the subjects is going to justify you and your obsession by replying in public, you're not doing anyone any good.
Thendic-Amiga Lawsuit - Judge Lasnik Grants Leave For Amiga's Former Attorneys : Comment 427 of 427ANN.lu
Posted by Matt Parsons on 08-Oct-2003 08:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 426 (Anonymous):
Smell my finger! Go on, Smell it!!!
Anonymous, there are 427 items in your selection (but only 27 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 250] [251 - 300] [301 - 350] [351 - 400] [401 - 427]
Back to Top