27-Apr-2024 22:31 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 214 items in your selection (but only 64 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 214]
[Web] How many unpaid Genesi employees?ANN.lu
Posted on 27-Feb-2004 08:29 GMT by Christian Kemp214 comments
View flat
View list
In a thread titled "How many unpaid Genesi employees?" on Moo Bunny, Johan Rönnblom posted his story.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 151 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 29-Feb-2004 19:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 148 (Gregg):
"It would be difficult to summarise in an extract the tedious history of this multiple personality on Moo Bunny - I just wanted to alert ANN to the fact that the poster has a well-documented history of making empty threats, never saying anything of substance, using multiple nicks, and telling lies. I think I can safely say it is currently the most unwanted and derided poster on Moo Bunny - and that's saying something."

Does that do it for you?

Gregg

Poor, Poor Gregg all you can do is take Bucks lies and spin as facts! Just because I ask alot of questions, and see past the spin, I'm the bad guy. Don't think so.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 152 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 29-Feb-2004 22:41 GMT
Obviously people posting here have either no brain at all or they are
just desperate to stir up trouble. But just to make a few things
_very_ clear:

1. I have not been "screwed" by anyone. It's true that Thendic owes me
3000 EUR. But the agreement was two-sided - I would also deliver my
IP. Since I'm not paid, Thendic got *nothing* out of me. So the result
is that Thendic lost, I lost, everybody lost. Nobody screwed anyone.

2. For other IP that is being transferred from Thendic to Genesi, we
must note that there are two issues here:
a) Does Thendic own this IP? If not, there are two options:
i) Genesi pays for this IP to the respective owner (eg, some unpaid
contractor)
ii) Genesi doesn't use this IP.
b) Ok - Thendic paid for this IP and owns it. Now Genesi has to
aquire it somehow from Thendic. Naturally the liquidator of Thendic
will want something in return from this.

Thinking that there would be anything fishy about Genesi aquiring IP
from Thendic is really bizarre. What good would this IP be doing, just
lying around at the liquidator? Who else than Genesi has a need for
MorphOS components? Of course the liquidator will be interested in
cooperating with Genesi to get the most out of Thendic's assets.


Then about this silly "BBRV is 'involved' in XYZ so BBRV are
responsible for everything". Bullshit. Learn some basic company law.
Certainly I was quite aware I made an agreement with Thendic and
without any sort of personal bailout by BBRV. Just because you own a
company doesn't mean you have to sell your grandmother in case the
company goes down.


Then finally about the comparison with AInc/McEwen. Of course
it's total bullshit that AInc told their employees to leave - we
know from court documents that they were just strung along. Well, I
think it is really comparable, but let's look at the differences:

1) AInc did this for a lot longer time.
2) AInc owes people a *lot* more money than Thendic/Genesi.
3) AInc have not even started to pay for over a year now, while
Genesi's troubles are just a few months old and being worked on (of
course you can speculate all you want, and I won't tell any inside
info to stop you).

Besides this, AInc did a lot of other things, like:
a) T-shirt/coupon scam.
b) Lying about OS4 being nearly finished when in fact it wasn't even
started.
c) Entering a stupid contract with Thendic, and then breaking it.
d) Selling IP they didn't own (parts of OS3.9, TCP/IP for example).

I could go on. But the part about not telling employees and
contractors to find new jobs when payments can't be made is
comparable. AInc loses even this partial comparison badly - but of
course, two wrongs does not make a right. That's why I wrote my story.
I'm sick and tired of people getting hurt because bad stuff is being
held secret.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 153 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 07:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 152 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Obviously people posting here have either no brain at all or they are
>just desperate to stir up trouble.

Not more than Bill Buck likes to stir up trouble... Like they say, don't play the game if you can't take the rules of the game.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 154 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 08:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 152 (Johan Rönnblom):
Not because I want to start another flamewar, but merely point the flaws in your so-called comparison:

>1) AInc did this for a lot longer time.

Well, they've been around alot longer than Genesi and Thendic. Besides, Thendic seems to owe alot more *people*.

>2) AInc owes people a *lot* more money than Thendic/Genesi.

I don't know, ask the Thendic liquidator how much the unpaid salaries of Thendic adds up to.

>3) AInc have not even started to pay for over a year now, while
>Genesi's troubles are just a few months old and being worked on (of
>course you can speculate all you want, and I won't tell any inside
>info to stop you).

Well, I'm just amazed how much they have accomplished in such a short period of time...

>Besides this, AInc did a lot of other things, like:
>a) T-shirt/coupon scam.

They have failed to deliver the t-shirts, but this fact alone does not make it a "scam". Regarding the coupons, how could they possibly give rebates on products that their third parties has yet to deliver? And no, the rebates was not for Linux based prereleases. Did you know that there are even those who are renewing their Club Amiga memberships? Yet people like you go on and on and on about this like it would be an outrageous "scam", while those who are actually paying are happy campers. How can this be? Is it possible that this whole scam thing is just the invention of MorphOS/Pegasos zealots?

>b) Lying about OS4 being nearly finished when in fact it wasn't even
>started.

What? MorphOS wasn't even started? Oh, I see... You conviniently forgot that they were negotiating with bPlan about making MorphOS the official next generation AmigaOS at that time. One could say that bPlan broke Amiga Inc.'s promise to the community, which would be kind of ironic.

>c) Entering a stupid contract with Thendic, and then breaking it.

That's a big NO. Genesi, who claims to have nothing to do with the actual licensee ("Thendic"), *claimed* that Amiga Inc. would have breached this contract. The judge ruled on a *summary judgement* because of the defendants inability to defend themselves with proper legal counsel. There is nothing what so ever in the ruling that says Genesi was actually right about their claims.

It is in my firm belief that Amiga Inc. would have easily been able to dismiss Genesi's claims if they only had legal counsel.

>d) Selling IP they didn't own (parts of OS3.9, TCP/IP for example).

Amiga Inc. != Haage&Partner
Noone should be blamed for the actions of others.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 155 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 01-Mar-2004 10:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 126 (Lost souls):
"Paris, France - November 23, 2002 Thendic-France SARL and bplan GmbH of Frankfurt, Germany have reached an agreement to merge and form a new company. The name of the new Company will be "Genesi". Genesi was incorporated this week under the supervision of PricewaterhouseCoopers in Luxembourg. Separately, Thendic-France has completed the necessary legal and financial steps to separate itself from Pretory USA Inc. and be acquired by Genesi. Genesi will begin operations from Luxembourg on 1 January 2003."

Is this the responsibility that they lined Christian up for? If so, it might be ponderable as to why..

AdmV
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 156 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 11:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (samface):
Samface, if you want to prove that Thendic or Genesi are so bad, you
have to prove it. You can't just *assume* that they owe lots of people
lots of money, while at the same time assuming that all accusations
towards AInc are "disputable" even if proven in court.

So you're saying that people are happy that AInc took their money and
didn't deliver? Well you're wrong, several coupon buyers are
complaining in public. Also, if you really think this bizarre
reasoning holds, wouldn't it work the other way too? Eg, since no one
from Thendic/Genesi supports your accusations towards them, it doesn't
matter even if you would be right, since you're not the person hurt by
this and thus you have no say.

Of course, I think that's bullshit. If you have something that puts
Genesi/Thendic in bad light, that is highly interesting. But only if
you can prove it somehow. Just assuming that they have stolen people's
IP and owe lots of people lots of money because this "could" be true
doesn't work.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 157 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 11:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 156 (Johan Rönnblom):
<snip>

>Well you're wrong, several coupon buyers are
>complaining in public.

What? Where? Who?

AFAIK, the attempt for a classact against Amiga was dropped because no more than 2 individuals showed their interest. How many Club Amiga members was there again?

<snip>

>Of course, I think that's bullshit. If you have something that puts
>Genesi/Thendic in bad light, that is highly interesting. But only if
>you can prove it somehow.

So, the fact that they owe you 3k in euros is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they are using the argument that they have nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to salaries, but don't mind beeing an associate of Thendic when it comes to their IP is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they have claimed that it would be "common knowledge" that Amiga Inc. would have a new CEO when all they had was a visiting card from someone claiming to be the new CEO is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they openly and in public slander their competitors chipset provider is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they have used the names of individuals representing their competitors for marketing their own products on google is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they have made use of the AmigaOne trademark to advertise the Pegasos on google is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they have been sponsoring atleast two lawsuits against Amiga Inc. for unpaid salaries while having problems to pay the salaries of their own employees is not putting them in a bad light? The fact that they are claiming the rights for Hyperions IP based on nothing but a summary judgement due to the defendants inability to defend themselves is not putting them in a bad light?

BTW, you don't happen to know how Bolten Peck is doing these days? I wonder if he is getting paid...

>Just assuming that they have stolen people's
>IP and owe lots of people lots of money because this "could" be true
>doesn't work.

There is no "could" about this, it's "common knowledge" like someone we both know would have said.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 158 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 01-Mar-2004 12:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 157 (samface):
Samface,

I think you are both arguing with the wrong person, and arguing about the wrong facts. Disputing the events with the person involved leaves you on little ground.

AdmV
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 159 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 12:35 GMT
In reply to Comment 158 (AdmV):
In what way is he "involved" in the Amiga rebate coupon scheme? In what way is he involved in the Amiga-Thendic lawsuit? In what way is he involved with Amiga Inc.'s employees and their salaries?

I'm merely playing the game by his own rules, Adam.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 160 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 13:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 157 (samface):
Ok Samface, if that's what you want, I'll answer ALL your questions
thoroughly.


>> Well you're wrong, several coupon buyers are complaining in public.
> What? Where? Who?

You're answering this yourself satisfactorily in your next sentence.

> AFAIK, the attempt for a classact against Amiga was dropped because no
> more than 2 individuals showed their interest. How many Club Amiga members
> was there again?

Even if everyone except those two were happy, they are still several coupon
buyers and they are complaining in public, so thanks for verifying my
claim.

>> Of course, I think that's bullshit. If you have something that puts
>> Genesi/Thendic in bad light, that is highly interesting. But only if
>> you can prove it somehow.

> So, the fact that they owe you 3k in euros is not putting them in a bad
> light?

Yes. Because I can prove it. Actually it is not disputed.

> The fact that they are using the argument that they have nothing to
> do with Thendic when it comes to salaries, but don't mind beeing an
> associate of Thendic when it comes to their IP is not putting them in a bad
> light?

Fact? You have not proven either that
a) They want nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to (unpaid) salaries. (This is in fact false.)
b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when it comes to IP.
(In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
IP.)

> The fact that they have claimed that it would be "common knowledge" that
> Amiga Inc. would have a new CEO when all they had was a visiting card from
> someone claiming to be the new CEO is not putting them in a bad light?

If you can prove that it was not. They claim that the CEO handed out this
card to everyone he met on a well-visited trade show. Several independent
people have confirmed this. Handing out the information on a large trade
show pretty much equates making it "common knowledge", I'd say.

The claim is also very much supported by AmigaInc themselves, as they list
Garry Hare as a person with full insight in AmigaInc, according to
court documents they have filed.


> The fact that they openly and in public slander their competitors chipset
> provider is not putting them in a bad light?

For it to be slander it has to be untrue. No one has proven that BBRV's
critique of the ArticiaS would be untrue, even though this would be very
easy if it was the case (just release a working driver).

In fact, the issue is not even disputed by MAI themselves, as they do not
claim that the ArticiaS would have working DMA.


> The fact that they have used the names of individuals representing their
> competitors for marketing their own products on google is not putting them
> in a bad light?

Only if you can prove that they did that, which you have not.


> The fact that they have made use of the AmigaOne trademark to advertise
> the Pegasos on google is not putting them in a bad light?

Again, prove it. If true, I personally find this natural and even
recommendable. Usually advertising is about misinformation rather than
information. But to help people who are clearly interested in a PowerPC
motherboard inform themselves about alternatives is a good thing, I think.
I would definitely not object to Eyetech or anyone else doing the reverse,
quite on the contrary. I think choice is a good thing.


> The fact that they have been sponsoring atleast two lawsuits against
> Amiga Inc. for unpaid salaries while having problems to pay the salaries of
> their own employees is not putting them in a bad light?

You have not proven either
a) That they have sponsored any lawsuit against AInc for unpaid salaries.
b) That they have been doing this while themselves having payment problems.
c) That "they" would be one and the same in these two issues.

In fact, as far as I know there have not even *been* any lawsuits against
AInc during the time when Thendic/Genesi have had payment problems, so how
could they have sponsored something that did not happen?


> The fact that they are claiming the rights for Hyperions IP based on
> nothing but a summary judgement due to the defendants inability to defend
> themselves is not putting them in a bad light?

This is not just unproven but blatantly false. Read the verdict, it is
based on the case at hand and the judge has considered the contract
carefully.


> BTW, you don't happen to know how Bolten Peck is doing these days? I wonder if he is getting paid...

I think you're talking about Bolton Peck, and no, I do not know him.

>> Just assuming that they have stolen people's IP and owe lots of people
>> lots of money because this "could" be true doesn't work.

> There is no "could" about this, it's "common knowledge" like someone we
> both know would have said.

Look - that's just what I said. You're simply assuming that Genesi are the
devil incarnated, you're not concerned in the least with proving it,
because you've already decided it must be true.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 161 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Dave Young on 01-Mar-2004 15:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Even if everyone except those two were happy, they are still several coupon
>buyers and they are complaining in public, so thanks for verifying my
>claim.

I`ll have to correct you on that point Johan, as I was one of the two.
That can be verified by the person organising the case.

I am not a coupon buyer, that can be verified by Ray.

So there was only one coupon buyer interested in claiming their money back.
Unless of course that person was doing the same as I.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 162 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 16:08 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Johan Rönnblom):
>> AFAIK, the attempt for a classact against Amiga was dropped because no
>> more than 2 individuals showed their interest. How many Club Amiga members
>> was there again?
>
>Even if everyone except those two were happy, they are still several coupon
>buyers and they are complaining in public, so thanks for verifying my
>claim.

Grammaticly correct, but extremely vague as an argument.

>> So, the fact that they owe you 3k in euros is not putting them in a bad
>> light?
>
>Yes. Because I can prove it. Actually it is not disputed.

The fact that it is true is not somehow going to put Genesi in a "good light", on the contrary.

>> The fact that they are using the argument that they have nothing to
>> do with Thendic when it comes to salaries, but don't mind beeing an
>> associate of Thendic when it comes to their IP is not putting them in a bad
>> light?
>
>Fact? You have not proven either that
>a) They want nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to (unpaid) salaries.
>(This is in fact false.)

Sure, all we got is alot of former Thendic employees that are not getting what they are owed, including yourself.

>b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when it
>comes to IP.
>(In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
>debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
>IP.)

"Thendic-France is STILL part of Pretory. This does not effect Genesi. Pretory and
Genesi have absolutely nothing to do with each other corporately with the exception
of common shareholders: Raquel and I."

http://saku.isoveli.org/discus/messages/2526/2863.html?1059331286 - 275k

But that was surely not what they told the judge in the Thendic-Amiga case, as can be seen here:

http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_6,16781,,,,1.pdf

>> The fact that they have claimed that it would be "common knowledge" that
>> Amiga Inc. would have a new CEO when all they had was a visiting card from
>> someone claiming to be the new CEO is not putting them in a bad light?
>
>If you can prove that it was not. They claim that the CEO handed out this
>card to everyone he met on a well-visited trade show. Several independent
>people have confirmed this. Handing out the information on a large trade
>show pretty much equates making it "common knowledge", I'd say.

BS! I mean, you don't think it would atleast be known to someone or anyone in the community before classiying it as "common knowledge"? You don't think there would have to be an official announcement from Amiga Inc. before classifying it as "common knowledge"? Furthermore, remember how Bill Buck was not satisfied making with just claiming that there would be a new CEO, but also extended this lie with the claim that the entire Amiga Inc. managment would have been replaced and that Genesi was negotiating with the new managment?

>The claim is also very much supported by AmigaInc themselves, as they list
>Garry Hare as a person with full insight in AmigaInc, according to
>court documents they have filed.

BEEEEP! Flawed logic. Fleecy explained who Garry was and in what way he was associated with Amiga Inc. There was nothing in that explanation that confirmed anything of BBRV's claims about a new CEO and managment.

>> The fact that they openly and in public slander their competitors chipset
>> provider is not putting them in a bad light?
>
>For it to be slander it has to be untrue.

I disagree.

>> The fact that they have used the names of individuals representing their
>> competitors for marketing their own products on google is not putting them
>> in a bad light?
>
>Only if you can prove that they did that, which you have not.

Proof? How about alot of witnesses:

http://www.ann.lu/detail.cgi?category=forum&file=1029786978.msg

>If true, I personally find this natural and even
>recommendable. Usually advertising is about misinformation rather than
>information. But to help people who are clearly interested in a PowerPC
>motherboard inform themselves about alternatives is a good thing, I think.
>I would definitely not object to Eyetech or anyone else doing the reverse,
>quite on the contrary. I think choice is a good thing.

Advertising an alternative is one thing, making use of your competitors trademark as well as names of individuals representing your competitor is another.

>In fact, as far as I know there have not even *been* any lawsuits against
>AInc during the time when Thendic/Genesi have had payment problems, so how
>could they have sponsored something that did not happen?

I didn't claim that it would have been occuring at the same time, just that it has happened. Now ask Bolton Peck yourself about wether he recieved legal aid from Genesi/Thendic or not. If you don't, you're obviously not interested in learning the truth to begin with.

>> The fact that they are claiming the rights for Hyperions IP based on
>> nothing but a summary judgement due to the defendants inability to defend
>> themselves is not putting them in a bad light?
>
>This is not just unproven but blatantly false. Read the verdict, it is
>based on the case at hand and the judge has considered the contract
>carefully.

Am I the only one who can read? From http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_47,16781,,,,1.pdf:

"In light of defendant's failure to participate in this litigation through counsel..."

>You're simply assuming that Genesi are the
>devil incarnated, you're not concerned in the least with proving it,
>because you've already decided it must be true.

The only assumption I made was that I thought you were already aware of these facts.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 163 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 01-Mar-2004 16:26 GMT
I think the people here should vote for changing the name of www.ann.lu to www.spamface.lu. Anyone second?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 164 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 01-Mar-2004 16:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (samface):
"One could say that bPlan broke Amiga Inc.'s promise to the community, which would be kind of ironic."

No, one could not.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 165 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Don Cox on 01-Mar-2004 16:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 155 (AdmV):
"Is this the responsibility that they lined Christian up for? If so, it might be ponderable as to why.."

It looks like they were making a collection of leading figures in the Amiga community, and Christian was a good specimen.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 166 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 17:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 162 (samface):
>> Even if everyone except those two were happy, they are still several coupon
>> buyers and they are complaining in public, so thanks for verifying my
>> claim.

> Grammaticly correct, but extremely vague as an argument.

I could spend an hour googling for statements from unhappy coupon buyers.
If you want to claim that no such statements exist, maybe I'll do that. It
doesn't matter anyway. Even if no one buys into a scam, it's still a scam.
The best thing which can happen with a scam is that it gets detected and
that people are warned about it enough not to be fooled.

>>> So, the fact that they owe you 3k in euros is not putting them in a bad
>>> light?
>>
>> Yes. Because I can prove it. Actually it is not disputed.

> The fact that it is true is not somehow going to put Genesi in a "good
> light", on the contrary.

Exactly! So if you want to put Genesi in a bad light, which you obviously
do, you have to prove that your accusations are true.

Personally I want to put Genesi in the light Genesi deserves to be put.
This means, among other things, that I think people should be wary about
working for BBRV under unclear terms, and that I do not currently recommend
anyone to take a position with Genesi unless they are paid in advance.

I also think that the abuse towards Nowee that BBRV posted on the Moo Bunny
are disgraceful.

This is of course not a very favourable judgement. But it is pretty far
from the accusations you keep making.


>> Fact? You have not proven either that
>> a) They want nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to (unpaid) salaries.
>> (This is in fact false.)

> Sure, all we got is alot of former Thendic employees that are not getting
> what they are owed, including yourself.

I've never been a Thendic employee. What "lot" of employees are you
referring to really?


>> b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when it
>> comes to IP.
>> (In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
>> debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
>> IP.)

> "Thendic-France is STILL part of Pretory. This does not effect Genesi.
> Pretory and Genesi have absolutely nothing to do with each other
> corporately with the exception of common shareholders: Raquel and I."
>
> But that was surely not what they told the judge in the Thendic-Amiga case, as can be seen here:

In what way does these quotes show that there would be anything fishy about
Genesi trying to aquire IP from Thendic?

Now let me make a little organizational sketch here to explain things:

Pretory <--> Thendic <--> Genesi

As BBRV claimed, Thendic was part of Pretory, in the capacity of being
owned by Pretory. As the court document claim, Thendic is/was part of
Genesi, in the capacity of being one part in a merger to form Genesi. The
link between Pretory and Genesi only goes through Thendic (or through BBRV,
for that matter). That's exactly what BBRV says.

No matter whether you understand this or not, you're still just trying to
shift focus. Why would there be anything wrong about Genesi aquiring IP
from Thendic, as long as they follow the proper procedures for doing so?

> > The fact that they have claimed that it would be "common knowledge" that
> > Amiga Inc. would have a new CEO when all they had was a visiting card from
> > someone claiming to be the new CEO is not putting them in a bad light?
>
> If you can prove that it was not. They claim that the CEO handed out this
> card to everyone he met on a well-visited trade show. Several independent
> people have confirmed this. Handing out the information on a large trade
> show pretty much equates making it "common knowledge", I'd say.

> BS! I mean, you don't think it would atleast be known to someone or anyone
> in the community before classiying it as "common knowledge"?

How would BBRV be able to read the minds of "the community"? Maybe they
were overstating it a bit - but I fail to see your problem with this. If
the CEO is handing out cards at a fair, it's hardly a secret, is it?

How would you like BBRV to refer to a person whom they've talked with on a
fair and who has presented himself as CEO of Amiga? "We have spoken with
the until now unknown CEO of AmigaInc..", uh, don't you think people would
be a bit pissed at BBRV for saying something like that, implying that AInc
would try to hide their management somehow?


> You don't think there would have to be an official announcement from
> Amiga Inc. before classifying it as "common knowledge"?

No. Contrary to what McEwen says, I think some things are true even though
they are not published at amiga.com.

> Furthermore, remember how Bill Buck was not satisfied making with just
> claiming that there would be a new CEO, but also extended this lie

If someone presents himself as CEO and appears to have full insight into
AmigaInc, I'd expect that to be true. Still to this day, AmigaInc have not
denied that Garry Hare was CEO at the time, and they have not given any
explanation for his actions.

A lie means telling something you think is untrue. I find it extremely
likely that BBRV really believed that Garry Hare was CEO of AmigaInc, and I
also don't find it unlikely that they were right about this.

> with the claim that the entire Amiga Inc. managment would have been
> replaced and that Genesi was negotiating with the new managment?

If that's what Garry Hare told them, that's a reasonable statement IMO.
You're really shooting the messenger. You should be asking AInc what
involvement Garry Hare had with them.


>> The claim is also very much supported by AmigaInc themselves, as they
>> list Garry Hare as a person with full insight in AmigaInc, according to
>> court documents they have filed.

> BEEEEP! Flawed logic. Fleecy explained who Garry was and in what way he
> was associated with Amiga Inc. There was nothing in that explanation that
> confirmed anything of BBRV's claims about a new CEO and managment.

I'm not talking about anything Fleecy may have said. He says a lot of stuff
and most of it is meaningless or undecipherable. I'm talking about the
document AInc have filed in the Thendic vs Amiga court case. They are
naming a small group of people who have insight into AmigaInc and Garry
Hare is mentioned as someone with complete insight.

>>> The fact that they openly and in public slander their competitors chipset
>>> provider is not putting them in a bad light?
>>
>> For it to be slander it has to be untrue.

> I disagree.

Well that's in the legal definition of slander. In fact, you can also make
untrue statements without slandering someone, if they are made in good
faith. For example, I can claim that I think O J Simpson murdered his wife
even though he was not convicted for doing so, and even if I cannot prove
100% that this is true. If O J Simpson can prove without reasonable doubt
that it's untrue and I keep stating that he murdered his wife, he can sue
me for slander.

>>> The fact that they have used the names of individuals representing their
>>> competitors for marketing their own products on google is not putting them
>>> in a bad light?
>>
>> Only if you can prove that they did that, which you have not.

> Proof? How about alot of witnesses:

Nothing in that thread proves that BBRV, Genesi or Thendic would have put
those adverts in.

Now, we can always speculate. And yes - I believe that they did. But these
ads were also promptly removed. I consider the whole affair a harmless
prank. I really fail to see what the big deal is.


> Advertising an alternative is one thing, making use of your competitors
> trademark as well as names of individuals representing your competitor is
> another.

I disagree. For example, I'm among those who think Commodore's ad "To be
this good will take SEGA ages" rocked. I also like companies who make
factual comparisons with their competitors in their advertising.

If you search on Google you get search results, and you may also get ads
which may or may not be related. The ads are not search results. If you
think they are, you should learn to use Google. Those ads are placed in
connection with certain search results because the advertiser think someone
searching for that may be interested in their product. In my opinion this
is better than normal ads which are not targeted at all, you have to see
ads for pop music when reading articles about geography, even if you're not
interested in pop music at all.


>> In fact, as far as I know there have not even *been* any lawsuits against
>> AInc during the time when Thendic/Genesi have had payment problems, so how
>> could they have sponsored something that did not happen?

> I didn't claim that it would have been occuring at the same time, just that
> it has happened. Now ask Bolton Peck yourself about wether he recieved
> legal aid from Genesi/Thendic or not. If you don't, you're obviously not
> interested in learning the truth to begin with.

Why should I ask Bolton about that? I'm not interested. I don't see what
your point is really.

Let's assume for a moment that they did help Bolton (I'm not saying they
did, but let's consider the possibility). Very good, what's the problem? I
think people should be paid. I have no problem with people suing in order
to get paid, if that's necessary. I have no problem with people helping
other people to get paid.

How does this relate to Thendic/Genesi's payment problems? I still think
people should be paid and I hope that everyone employed by or contracted by
Thendic and Genesi will get paid. I still have no problem with people suing
in order to get paid.


>>> The fact that they are claiming the rights for Hyperions IP based on
>>> nothing but a summary judgement due to the defendants inability to defend
>>> themselves is not putting them in a bad light?
>>
>> This is not just unproven but blatantly false. Read the verdict, it is
>> based on the case at hand and the judge has considered the contract
>> carefully.

> Am I the only one who can read? From
> http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_47,16781,,,,1.pdf

> "In light of defendant's failure to participate in this litigation through counsel..."

Nice quoting technique. The sentence continues: ", defendant has neither
opposed plantiff's motion for summary judgment nor presented evidence of
intent that would preclude a finding in plaintiff's favor."

Does this mean the verdict was based on nothing but AInc's inability to
defend themselves? Certainly not!

Instead, it is based on the judges independent consideration of the
contract, and Thendic's arguments to support their interpretation. The
verdict reads:

"[...] When the court first considered plaintiff's unopposed motion for summary
judgment, it noted that there was an ambiguity regarding whether the
parties intended to authorize the incorporation of Amiga's operating system
into certain Thendic products that were not listed in Appendix A. In
response to the Court's request, plantiffs submitted a memorandum
addressing the issues raised by the Court. In particular, plaintiffs
presented evidence regarding the intent of parties at the time the OEM
Software License Agreement ("License Agreement") was signed."

Then follows some previous law cases and the bit you quoted about AInc not
opposing Thendic's claims.

Then, based on all this, the verdict reads: »The Court therefore finds
that, as a matter of Law, the license granted by defendant was not limited
to Thendic products that operate on Windows CE and that the list of
products included in Appendix A "is not, and was not, intended to be
exhaustive of 'Thendic' products entitled to integration." [...]«

In other words, you're plain wrong.


>> You're simply assuming that Genesi are the devil incarnated, you're not
>> concerned in the least with proving it, because you've already decided it
>> must be true.

> The only assumption I made was that I thought you were already aware of these facts.

Such an assumption includes the assumption that those "facts" exist, and
you have not proven that they would be facts at all. Until you have, you
should be a bit careful with naming them facts - you can say that XYZ is
your opinion, perhaps.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 167 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 17:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 164 (Don Cox):
I respect your opinion to disagree, but surely you are not saying that I have to agree with you? IMO, bPlan's inability to cooperate was a treachery towards the community. This conflict has caused ten fold more damages for all parties involved than any continued negotiations ever could have. You see, the terms Hyperion managed to negotiate with Amiga Inc. tells me that bPlan could have got the same terms, if not even better since they had a nearly finished product, if they simply wouldn't have given up on negotiating.

The irony lies in the fact that bPlan supporters are now using this as an argument against Amiga Inc., ie failing to deliver as planned when they were negotiating with bPlan as the supplier of AmigaOS4.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 168 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 17:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
I'll have to split my reply in several posts since I cannot reply to all in one go. Let's begin from the top:

>>> Even if everyone except those two were happy, they are still several
>>> coupon buyers and they are complaining in public, so thanks for verifying >>> my claim.
>>
>> Grammaticly correct, but extremely vague as an argument.
>
>I could spend an hour googling for statements from unhappy coupon buyers.
>If you want to claim that no such statements exist, maybe I'll do that. It
>doesn't matter anyway. Even if no one buys into a scam, it's still a scam.
>The best thing which can happen with a scam is that it gets detected and
>that people are warned about it enough not to be fooled.

Like someone once told me, if you want to put Amiga Inc. in a bad light, which you obviously do, you have to prove that your accusations are true.

>>>> So, the fact that they owe you 3k in euros is not putting them in a bad
>>>> light?
>>>
>>> Yes. Because I can prove it. Actually it is not disputed.
>>
>> The fact that it is true is not somehow going to put Genesi in a "good
>> light", on the contrary.
>
>Exactly! So if you want to put Genesi in a bad light, which you obviously
>do, you have to prove that your accusations are true.

But you already confirmed this claim yourself! What is this kind of logic? I mean, are you suggesting that I should prove that they owe you €3K?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 169 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 01-Mar-2004 17:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 167 (samface):
People .. Just give up.

There is *NO* point on arguing with Samface. There is nothing in this world that could even once convince him that he's been in error on something. So there is no point on replying him or especially trying to reason with him. He lives in different world that most of us. I'm not saying his world is worse, bad, or someway wrong... But you have to understand that there is no way he could see things like others do.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 170 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 17:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 152 (Johan Rönnblom):
"Obviously people posting here have either no brain at all or they are
just desperate to stir up trouble. But just to make a few things
_very_ clear:

True, some are playing games, with this Blue vs Red thing. Others are looking for the truth. Others, have been burned by AI or BBRV in the past and want to know, before they spend their hard earned funds.

1. I have not been "screwed" by anyone. It's true that Thendic owes me
3000 EUR. But the agreement was two-sided - I would also deliver my
IP. Since I'm not paid, Thendic got *nothing* out of me. So the result
is that Thendic lost, I lost, everybody lost. Nobody screwed anyone."

We are talking a different story now. Be for-WARNED, if the IP you worked on is something that BBRV wants, then trust me this is not the end of the story. I know how BBRV has been working way, way back in the Viscorp years forward. He will try and get the IP, any way he can. Look at what is happening (for just one example) with the Amiga!

Since you have come out with your story. You might not be on good terms with BBRV. So, this is what might happen sometime in the future. Pressure will be put on you to "return" the IP! Something like; you worked on this IP during your employment and it's owned by me (BBRV). His lawyers might become involved or just the threat of them getting involved.

Like I said before this is one possible (might) happen. In any case, you are owed money and you had a contract with a now bankrupt company. So if you have a family lawyer, lay it all out in front of him for your own protection!

I know you have feelings etc. in this matter. However, business is business, and you were part of something that went wrong, its now time to protect your own interests.

This is just food for thought. Please take it with this in mind.

I wish you all the best in the future.

Lost Souls
aka Interesting (moo bunny)
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 171 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 17:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>>> Fact? You have not proven either that
>>> a) They want nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to (unpaid)
>>> salaries. (This is in fact false.)
>>
>> Sure, all we got is alot of former Thendic employees that are not getting
>> what they are owed, including yourself.
>
>I've never been a Thendic employee. What "lot" of employees are you
>referring to really?

Nit picking, are we? I was of course refering to Thendic-France which you had an agreement with according to your own statement from http://www.flyingmice.com/cgi-bin/squidcgi/mbmessage.pl/amiga/98439.shtml:

"I contacted BBRV telling clearly that I did not expect any further payment unless they told me otherwise, as my agreement was with Thendic-France, which was part of Pretory."
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 172 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 18:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 154 (samface):
"Not because I want to start another flamewar, but merely point the flaws in your so-called comparison:

Comparison is not a good idea. Both made some mistakes, some got screwed and in some cases the jury is out. The point to keep in mind; Scew me once, shame on you, screw me twice, shame on me!

>1) AInc did this for a lot longer time.

Well, they've been around alot longer than Genesi and Thendic. Besides, Thendic seems to owe alot more *people*.

>2) AInc owes people a *lot* more money than Thendic/Genesi.

I don't know, ask the Thendic liquidator how much the unpaid salaries of Thendic adds up to. "

Like I said above we shouldn't compare. However, you are not looking at the big picture here. The Pretory SA bankruptcy, that includes Thendic is in the multi-Millions of dollars. More than 800 people have lost their jobs, on and On. Also people/firms who invested in BBRV's company Pretory USA lost their investment.


Apples & Oranges
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 173 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 18:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 171 (samface):
BTW, I forgot:

>What "lot" of employees are you
>referring to really?

From http://www.amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2003-11-00105-EN.html:

"Inofficial sources are talking about wages not beeing paid since May 2003 for about 560 employees."

While this is not a fact, I "don't find it unlikely that they were right about this".
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 174 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 18:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 160 (Johan Rönnblom):
Yes. Because I can prove it. Actually it is not disputed.

> The fact that they are using the argument that they have nothing to
> do with Thendic when it comes to salaries, but don't mind beeing an
> associate of Thendic when it comes to their IP is not putting them in a bad
> light?

Fact? You have not proven either that
a) They want nothing to do with Thendic when it comes to (unpaid) salaries. (This is in fact false.)
b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when it comes to IP.
(In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
IP.)

Your both missing the bigger picture here!

1) Pretory USA (public company on pink sheets) owns Pretory SA, that OWNS (key word) Thendic.

2) By all rights Pretory USA should have first rights to any IP of Thendic from the bankruptcy and Buck as officer of Pretory USA should be trying to protect the interests of the stockholders of Pretory USA stock.

3) Anyone that wishes to can purchase Pretory USA stock. Owners of this stock can legally sue BBRV for not looking after the interest of the stockholders, and trying to take the assets of Thendic for is own use (Genesi).

4) You can't line your own pockets at the expense of others you promoted, and invested in your company!
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 175 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 18:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 170 (Lost souls):
Are you sure you're really "interesting"? That person was posting a
lot of incomprehensible gibberish on the Moo Bunny. You're writing in
understandable sentences.

Regarding claims about IP, I have to agree with you that it's
important to be 100% clear about the terms of your agreements. That's,
among other things, why it's important and no nitpicking at all to
note that I've never been an employee of Thendic.


When you're talking about Pretory, well that's another story. Of
course it's related as the Pretory bankruptcy is the cause of the
Thendic problems, but when Samface treats Thendic and Pretory as if it
was one and the same thing he's quite wrong.


Anyway, I don't mind if people want to speculate about BBRV or Genesi
doing this or that as long as people make clear that they are
speculating, and as long as they do this by arguing about known facts.
What Samface and many others do here is to hurl accusations by stating
them as facts, without ever giving any reasons why someone would
believe them.


Take the issue of IP transfer from Thendic to Genesi for example. As
far as I can tell, no one has given even the slightest support or
explanation for why there would be a problem with that. Yet several
posters are simply assuming that this would be problematic or even
illegal.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 176 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 01-Mar-2004 18:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>>> b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when
>>> it comes to IP.
>>> (In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
>>> debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
>>> IP.)
>>
>> "Thendic-France is STILL part of Pretory. This does not effect Genesi.
>> Pretory and Genesi have absolutely nothing to do with each other
>> corporately with the exception of common shareholders: Raquel and I."
>>
>> But that was surely not what they told the judge in the Thendic-Amiga case,
>> as can be seen here:
>
>In what way does these quotes show that there would be anything fishy about
>Genesi trying to aquire IP from Thendic?

I never made any claim that there would be anything "fishy" about Genesi's attempts to aquire IP from Thendic. All I ever said was that Genesi are beeing rather arbitrary about their relationship with Thendic-France and that it is putting them in a "bad light", ie it doesn't seem very serious. They are only associated with Thendic-France when it suits them.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 177 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 18:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 174 (Lost souls):
Your reasoning is utterly flawed since you have never explained why it
would not be in Pretory's best interest to make a deal that gives
Genesi the rights to Thendic IP.

Please tell me, if Thendic would not make a deal with Genesi, who else
do you think would be interested in MorphOS modules and other
MorphOS/Pegasos related software?

I think it would rather be irresponsible of BBRV to *not* attempt to
make such a deal.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 178 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 18:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
"Exactly! So if you want to put Genesi in a bad light, which you obviously
do, you have to prove that your accusations are true.

Personally I want to put Genesi in the light Genesi deserves to be put.
This means, among other things, that I think people should be wary about
working for BBRV under unclear terms, and that I do not currently recommend
anyone to take a position with Genesi unless they are paid in advance.

I also think that the abuse towards Nowee that BBRV posted on the Moo Bunny
are disgraceful.

A fair statement! Did you work with Nowee?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 179 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 18:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
"> Sure, all we got is alot of former Thendic employees that are not getting
> what they are owed, including yourself.

I've never been a Thendic employee. What "lot" of employees are you
referring to really?"

So you contracted for work with Genesi then?


>> b) There would be anything fishy about their association with Thendic when it
>> comes to IP.
>> (In fact, if Thendic's liquidator want to make Thendic able to pay their
>> debts, Thendic definitely NEEDS associates who are interested in Thendic's
>> IP.)

> "Thendic-France is STILL part of Pretory. This does not effect Genesi.
> Pretory and Genesi have absolutely nothing to do with each other
> corporately with the exception of common shareholders: Raquel and I."
>
> But that was surely not what they told the judge in the Thendic-Amiga case, as can be seen here:

In what way does these quotes show that there would be anything fishy about
Genesi trying to aquire IP from Thendic?

Now let me make a little organizational sketch here to explain things:

Pretory <--> Thendic <--> Genesi

As BBRV claimed, Thendic was part of Pretory, in the capacity of being
owned by Pretory. As the court document claim, Thendic is/was part of
Genesi, in the capacity of being one part in a merger to form Genesi. The
link between Pretory and Genesi only goes through Thendic (or through BBRV,
for that matter). That's exactly what BBRV says.

No matter whether you understand this or not, you're still just trying to
shift focus. Why would there be anything wrong about Genesi aquiring IP
from Thendic, as long as they follow the proper procedures for doing so?

You forgot one very, very important fact. Pretory USA legaly owns Pretory SA.

Pretory USA (Pretory) <--> Thendic <--> Genesi (BBRV & partners)

see anything wrong with this picture?

Now I'll really light the flames!

I can't see how the publicly own assets of Thendic (peg/MOS) etc. Gets into the private hands of Genesi (BBRV & partners)

Stockholders of Pretory USA could very well file a class action lawsuit against Genesi/BBRV to return the assets taken from thendic Thendic (peg/MOS) etc.

IMHO Thendic owns Peg/MOS and all IP etc., not BBRV!
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 180 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 18:59 GMT
In reply to Comment 177 (Johan Rönnblom):
"Your reasoning is utterly flawed since you have never explained why it
would not be in Pretory's best interest to make a deal that gives
Genesi the rights to Thendic IP.

Please tell me, if Thendic would not make a deal with Genesi, who else
do you think would be interested in MorphOS modules and other
MorphOS/Pegasos related software?

I think it would rather be irresponsible of BBRV to *not* attempt to
make such a deal."

Pretory USA does not own Genesi does it?

See the big difference is in ownership of Genesi. The assets of Thendic must be protected for the owners (Pretory USA), not BBRV.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 181 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 19:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (Lost souls):
Lost souls wrote:
> You forget one very, very important fact. Pretory USA legaly owns
> Pretory SA.

No, I don't forget that. It's stated by BBRV themselves in the quote
Samface made.

What's wrong about that?

You ask:
> I can't see how the publicly own assets of Thendic (peg/MOS) etc.
> Gets into the private hands of Genesi (BBRV & partners).

Presumably they reach some sort of agreement with the liquidator.

You seem to be hinting or implying that it was simply stolen. But you
have presented no evidence or hint as to why one would believe that
this would be the case. It seems a bit far-fetched imo. You could also
speculate about BBRV casually murdering babies in their secret
dungeon, but why would anyone think there's any basis for this?

> IMHO Thendic owns Peg/MOS and all IP etc, not BBRV!

That's a pretty strange theory since most of the Pegasos and MorphOS
was not developed by Thendic. I agree it does not appear to be owned
by BBRV either, but I'll refrain from further comments on this subject
as I don't want to reveal any inside info that I don't have complete
understanding of, either. All I'll say is that you really need some
facts to back up your theories. Hurling wild conspiracies around will
only muddle the waters and could in fact help to hide real problems
(certainly if you already heard 100 bogus theories, you're likely to
miss the 101st even if it's real).
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 182 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by JoannaK on 01-Mar-2004 21:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 181 (Johan Rönnblom):
This same person has been flooding moobunny with his wild accusations for months.. In some early days he (assuming he) made an announcement of new web site that would reveal all the dirt he's found about Genesi.. But that was months ago and so far, there has been nothing. Just this same hatred, half baked hints etc...
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 183 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 01-Mar-2004 21:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 179 (Lost souls):
The Pegasos is owned by bPlan GmbH.
MorphOS is owned by bPlan GmbH and various coders.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 184 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 21:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 183 (Alkis Tsapanidis):
"The Pegasos is owned by bPlan GmbH.
MorphOS is owned by bPlan GmbH and various coders"

Who owns BPlan?

Please explain this then:

http://www.morphos-news.de/?lg=en&nid=191&si=1

18.1.2003 Genesi needs YOU! The team of bplan GmbH, the creators of the Pegasos and MorphOS, and Thendic-France SARL, the exclusive master distributor, will be merged into Genesi shortly.

Thendic France is listed as the "Exclusive Master Distributor".

Thendic France is owned by Pretory Sa which is owned by Pretory USA a public company.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 185 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 01-Mar-2004 22:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 181 (Johan Rönnblom):
"Lost souls wrote:
> You forget one very, very important fact. Pretory USA legaly owns
> Pretory SA.

No, I don't forget that. It's stated by BBRV themselves in the quote
Samface made.

What's wrong about that?

You ask:
> I can't see how the publicly own assets of Thendic (peg/MOS) etc.
> Gets into the private hands of Genesi (BBRV & partners).

Presumably they reach some sort of agreement with the liquidator.

You seem to be hinting or implying that it was simply stolen. But you
have presented no evidence or hint as to why one would believe that
this would be the case. It seems a bit far-fetched imo. You could also
speculate about BBRV casually murdering babies in their secret
dungeon, but why would anyone think there's any basis for this? "

Problem I see with your thoughts is the Timeline.

1) When was Genesi formed?

2) When was the bankruptcy of Pretory?

without looking up the info. Genesi was formed way before the bankruptcy. Having said this, the liquidator did not have all the Thendic assets.

Right?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 186 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Alkis Tsapanidis on 01-Mar-2004 22:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 184 (Lost souls):
Let /you/ explain? Ok...
The copyrights of each individual component of MorphOS belong to the one who
made it... Most modules have the Ralph Schmidt signature...
The Pegasos BIOS lists all extensions under the bPlan GmbH copyright.
bPlan GmbH still exists as an entity. It did not magically disappear during the
formation of Genesi SARL.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 187 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 01-Mar-2004 23:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 185 (Lost souls):
Lost souls: Now I recognise you from Moo Bunny again. Lots of words
but no content. So now you claim/guess/speculate that the liquidator
didn't have "all assets". You also write some very vague words which I
can't tell if they are supposed to be evidence of this or just
something to confuse people.

Please don't post any more theories unless you're willing to
a) stick to one theory, instead of changing it as soon as anyone
questions it
b) defend the theory by pointing to facts
c) stop filling up your posts with statements which have no obvious
relation to the rest of the posts
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 188 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Lost souls on 02-Mar-2004 00:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 187 (Johan Rönnblom):
"Lost souls: Now I recognise you from Moo Bunny again. Lots of words
but no content. So now you claim/guess/speculate that the liquidator
didn't have "all assets". You also write some very vague words which I
can't tell if they are supposed to be evidence of this or just
something to confuse people. "

You didn't clear up my questions regarding the "exclusive master distributor".

Please explain this then:

http://www.morphos-news.de/?lg=en&nid=191&si=1

18.1.2003 Genesi needs YOU! The team of bplan GmbH, the creators of the Pegasos and MorphOS, and Thendic-France SARL, the exclusive master distributor, will be merged into Genesi shortly.

Thendic France is listed as the "Exclusive Master Distributor".

Thendic France is owned by Pretory Sa which is owned by Pretory USA a public company.

Now follow me on this:

1) My company owns the Exclusive Master Distributor for Rolls Royce around the world.

2) The company has fallen on hard times, and has to file bankruptcy.

3) The Exclusive Master Distributorship is an asset and would be valuable in court.

4) So, following this example why would the 18.1.2003 Thendic Exclusive Master Distributorship be worthless? It wouldn't; and remember it was owned by the Pretory USA stockholders.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 189 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 02-Mar-2004 00:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 188 (Lost souls):
I cannot answer you since I cannot decipher what you're trying to say.

If your native language is not English, maybe you could post in your
native language on another site (ANN doesn't allow other languages for
moderation reasons) and post a link there? I'm sure someone can help
to translate it.

It seems more that your reasoning can't be followed for the simple
cause that it simply doesn't stick together even in your own mind,
though. I'm afraid there's not much to do in that case.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 190 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 11:36 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>They are naming a small group of people who have insight into AmigaInc and
>Garry Hare is mentioned as someone with complete insight.

Of course Garry was listed as one of the people who have complete insight into Amiga Inc., as Fleecy explained at http://amigaworld.net/modules/news/article.php?item_id=430:

"Garry (Hare) is a content veteran with decades of experience at all levels of business. With the amount of interest and work coming into Amiga, Bill made it clear to the board that he just had too much to do. One of our main investors introduced Garry to Bill and since that moment Garry has been providing informal advice and support as a favour to the investor.

He looked over our strategy documents, did some research and digging and was very excited about Amiga. He thinks we have a good team, an excellent strategy and could be massive as we move to the next level. He is particularly excited about the AmigaOne and AmigaOS4 and believes it could have a huge future.

He has been very helpful and, if you read his CV, it would be fantastic if he was to come to work for Amiga. That however is upto him. One thing I have learnt from my dealings with him however is that he will not be impressed with Mr Buck spreading this kind of information around."
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 191 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 12:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>>>> The fact that they have used the names of individuals representing their
>>>> competitors for marketing their own products on google is not putting them
>>>> in a bad light?
>>>
>>> Only if you can prove that they did that, which you have not.
>>
>> Proof? How about alot of witnesses:
>
>Nothing in that thread proves that BBRV, Genesi or Thendic would have put
>those adverts in.

Since I know you are from Sweden, perhaps putting it this way will help you understand:

Svenskt uppslagsord
bevis beviset bevis bevisen subst.
det som tydligt visar att något är sant; vittnesbörd; intyg
<bevis på/ för x/ att + S>

Engelsk översättning
proof; evidence, testimony; certificate

>Now, we can always speculate. And yes - I believe that they did. But these
>ads were also promptly removed. I consider the whole affair a harmless
>prank. I really fail to see what the big deal is.

You confirmed yourself that it would put them in a "bad light" if I would be able to prove it. The "big deal" is business ethics, it's not very hard to figure out that it's difficult to cooperate with someone acting this "childish". Yet certain individuals keep talking about Amiga Inc. beeing so "unreasonable".
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 192 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 13:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 191 (samface):
And not to forget; associating your product with a trademark that you do not have the rights for is a trademark violation, ie illegal.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 193 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 02-Mar-2004 13:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 190 (samface):
Samface: Did Garry explain to you why he handed out business cards
which he didn't want anyone to talk about?


As for evidence.. well.. you showed me a thread where people talked
about an ad. You claimed that this ad was placed by Genesi. No one in
this thread has anything to say that would prove this accusation.


As for business ethics, well - some things are important, some things
are not. I fail to see a big problem with a joke of this kind. For me
the letters sent out by Ben H and others to dissuade developers and
dealers interested in Pegasos, spreading false rumours etc, are much
more serious. Yet this fact alone is not enough for me to lose
interest in OS4. If it's a good product, I will be interested even
though I deeply regret the methods used to promote it.


As for your understanding of trademark laws, well you're plain wrong.
Totally.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 194 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 15:05 GMT
In reply to Comment 193 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Samface: Did Garry explain to you why he handed out business cards
>which he didn't want anyone to talk about?

Twisted logic. Garry Hare did not claim that he was handing out business cards, why would *he* have to explain such claim? BBRV made the claim and therefore the burden of proof is his. Do you have any proof of BBRV's claim? All we've ever seen is a poor scan of a business card that could just as well have been a fake.

>As for evidence.. well.. you showed me a thread where people talked
>about an ad. You claimed that this ad was placed by Genesi. No one in
>this thread has anything to say that would prove this accusation.

The discussion is a testimony of the ad's existence, ie proof. The notion that someone would have pretended to be Thendic-France and paid Google for placing this ad is not even remotely plausible. Even if it would not have been Thendic-France themselves, they should have made that clear in public as well as contacted Google and inform them about the illicit use of their trademark. Comment 5 in that thread says it all:

http://www.ann.lu/comments2.cgi?view=1029786978&category=forum&start=1&138#message6

>As for business ethics, well - some things are important, some things
>are not. I fail to see a big problem with a joke of this kind. For me
>the letters sent out by Ben H and others to dissuade developers and
>dealers interested in Pegasos, spreading false rumours etc, are much
>more serious.

Live the way you preach and prove it.

>Yet this fact alone is not enough for me to lose
>interest in OS4. If it's a good product, I will be interested even
>though I deeply regret the methods used to promote it.

If it was only the way the Pegasos and MorphOS has been promoted...

>As for your understanding of trademark laws, well you're plain wrong.
>Totally.

Explain that to Microsofts lawyers after having used "Windows" for sponsoring your product on google...

Do you know that a Swedish court recently decided that Lindows is not entitled to use the Lindows trademark nor their Lindows.com domain for marketing Lindows in Sweden? Swedish customers are directed to http://www.lin---s.com. Check it out, there you can see what trademark laws can do to you...
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 195 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 02-Mar-2004 16:34 GMT
Samface:

Several people confirmed that they, too, got the same card at the
trade show in question.

The notion that BBRV would make a fake card in order to.. err.. in
order to make a fool out of himself when AInc denied the story (which
they never did, of course), doesn't seem to be very.. plausible.


Why wouldn't someone be able to register whatever ad they wanted at
Google? Certainly we've seen a lot of mischief. And obviously you
missed something here - the ad related to various people's names
*were* in fact promptly removed. Chances are pretty good that Genesi
were involved in this removal, don't you think?


As for proving Ben H's nasty letters, nope, I won't do that today. I
would if my objective was to smear Hyperion, but it's not. You don't
have to believe me. I merely used this as an example to show that I'm
consistent in my opinions.


As for the Swedish court decision - well, this was a very preliminary
decision, where, as far as I can tell, Lindows were not even notified
in advance in order for them to be able to defend themselves. The
decision is still a disgrace for the Swedish judicial system, of
course. And in any case it has nothing whatsoever to do with this
case. You're not allowed to use other trademarks to represent your own
product or to give the impression that they are affiliated. But you
can use them for other purposes, including making comparisons etc. Oh
- and besides Genesi had the right to use Amiga trademarks anyway, as
has later been decided in court, so it's really a complete non-issue.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 196 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 16:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>> "In light of defendant's failure to participate in this litigation through
>>counsel..."
>
>Nice quoting technique. The sentence continues: ", defendant has neither
>opposed plantiff's motion for summary judgment nor presented evidence of
>intent that would preclude a finding in plaintiff's favor."

...which is saying the exact same thing, ie they have failed to defend themselves. Everything that Bill McEwen tried to present to the court as evidence (after their lawyer witdrew from the case) was dismissed because he didn't have legal counsel.

>Does this mean the verdict was based on nothing but AInc's inability to
>defend themselves? Certainly not!

Of course it wasn't *solely* based on the defendant's inability to defend themselves, but you can't dismiss the "In light of defendant's failure to participate in this litigation through counsel..." part since it makes it perfectly clear that this fact is playing a significant role in this summary judgement. There would probably not even been a summary judgement if the defendant would simply have had legal counsel to oppose the plaintiff's motion. The fact that the plaintiff had done their part in regards of their burden of proof does not change this since the defendant have not been able to review nor dispute any of it.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 197 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 16:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 195 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Oh - and besides Genesi had the right to use Amiga trademarks anyway, as
>has later been decided in court, so it's really a complete non-issue.

Which is a total and blatant lie. The license specificly states that they may only use the *AmigaDE* trademark and only in relation with *AmigaDE* labeled products. The AmigaOne trademark is owned by Eyetech and there is nothing in the license saying that Genesi nor Thendic Electronic Components would have the rights for that.
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 198 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 17:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 195 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Several people confirmed that they, too, got the same card at the
>trade show in question.

Again, prove it.

>The notion that BBRV would make a fake card in order to.. err.. in
>order to make a fool out of himself when AInc denied the story (which
>they never did, of course), doesn't seem to be very.. plausible.

Amiga Inc. denied everything about the story about a new CEO and that both Fleecy Moss and Bill McEwen would be "out of the picture" (as BBRV put it). The business card scan is something BBRV needs to explain, not Amiga Inc. Amiga Inc. cannot explain the business card even if they wanted to since Amiga Inc. has nothing to do with it.

Furthermore, even if Garry would have been passing out those business cards, it's still very unprofessional of BBRV to make these claims in public without verifying such information first. No matter how we look at it, BBRV was obviously and indisputably wrong and I find it very unlikely that BBRV would have been completely unaware of the truth.

>Why wouldn't someone be able to register whatever ad they wanted at
>Google?

We're talking about marketing products and their trademarks, of course there are limitations to what you can do when it comes to trademarks that you do not have the rights for.

>Certainly we've seen a lot of mischief. And obviously you
>missed something here - the ad related to various people's names
>*were* in fact promptly removed. Chances are pretty good that Genesi
>were involved in this removal, don't you think?

Not Genesi, but hopefully atleast Thendic-France. However, what I'm questioning here is not about how long they continued these activities, it's about why the did it in the first place, ie the intent.

>As for proving Ben H's nasty letters, nope, I won't do that today. I
>would if my objective was to smear Hyperion, but it's not.

Regardless of your intent, your claim was smearing Hyperion. Avoiding to smear Hyperion was obviously not a priority.

>You don't have to believe me. I merely used this as an example to show that
>I'm consistent in my opinions.

Consistent in the sense that every claim that would put Genesi in a bad light would have to be backed up with proof, but Amiga Inc. & Co is someone you can unsubstantially smear in public?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 199 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 02-Mar-2004 17:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 166 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Let's assume for a moment that they did help Bolton (I'm not saying they
>did, but let's consider the possibility). Very good, what's the problem?

So, you don't see anything wrong with helping the former employees of your competitor to sue your competitor for unpaid salaries and then do the same thing towards your own employees? Ever heard of the expression "double standards"?
How many unpaid Genesi employees? : Comment 200 of 214ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 02-Mar-2004 19:26 GMT
This is my last post. I think I've answered all your arguments really.


About proof: Of course every ANN reader already knows that you have
your own highly variable definition of proof. It's pretty well
illustrated when you claim that a thread full of people who have seen
an ad, while no one has any information showing that Thendic or Genesi
would be involved in the placing of this ad, constitutes a proof of
Thendic or Genesi having placed this ad. At the same time, the
statements of several people who claim not only to have received a
business card, but also that they kept the card and have it in their
possession, does not prove that the card was in fact handed out.


About AInc's lack of denial: When did they deny that Garry Hare handed
out these business cards, or that he claimed to be CEO? Since they
didn't, and Garry Hare didn't deny this either, the matter is
undisputed is we have several people claiming that he did, and no one
claiming that he did not.


About smearing: I'm not smearing Hyperion as what I'm saying is true.
However, you don't have to believe me and I'm not in the business of
trying to prove it at the moment.


About double standards: You are assuming that the lack of payment was
intentional. This is a pretty stark assumption to make unless you have
a very good reason for it.
Anonymous, there are 214 items in your selection (but only 64 shown due to limitation) [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 150] [151 - 200] [201 - 214]
Back to Top