29-Mar-2024 13:22 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 113 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 113]
[News] Amiga vs Thendic UpdateANN.lu
Posted on 20-Mar-2004 02:25 GMT by samface113 comments
View flat
View list
Defendant Amiga Inc has filed a MOTION for Relief from Judgment, complemented with more declarations and exhibits from Ray A. Akey, Bill McEwen and Garry Hare.

That's 11 new PDF files available at:
http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 1 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 20-Mar-2004 01:30 GMT
Thanks Samface. It's good to see you posting these documents so that EVERYBODY can read them. It makes the efforts of another certain individual look pretty lame in comparison.

Cheers.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 2 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by JKD on 20-Mar-2004 02:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Darrin):
Troll troll troll troll...

:D
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 3 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cheesegrate on 20-Mar-2004 03:29 GMT
notice the date of the sale has changed to october 2003 to stop mcewan being charged for perjury? have a look at the gary statement. looks like some fodder for genesi to fight back.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 4 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by samface on 20-Mar-2004 03:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Cheesegrate):
I think there is a small misunderstanding here. Itec bought the rights for AmigaOS in April, while KMOS bought Itec and it's rights for AmigaOS in October. Garry Hare explained this in his declaration in support for Amiga Inc's response to motion to modify the order granting specific performance:

http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_54,16781,0,MAGIC,0,1.pdf

Noone ever said KMOS bought the rights for AmigaOS from Amiga Inc. in April.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 5 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by The_Gunner on 20-Mar-2004 07:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Cheesegrate):
lol

Shot down in flames

AGAIN !


I'm loving it
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 6 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Darth_X on 20-Mar-2004 07:47 GMT
iTec and KMOS.

I think there are more on the way. And in the end, just how many will there be?
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 7 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Mar-2004 07:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Darth_X):
Submissions to the court? As many as it takes to find justice.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 8 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 20-Mar-2004 09:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 6 (Darth_X):
> I think there are more on the way. And in the end, just how many will there be?

And how long untill we find out about them?
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 9 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Mar-2004 09:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (T_Bone):
Im fearful, uncertain and doubtful now T_Bone!
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 10 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by takemehomegrandma on 20-Mar-2004 09:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (samface):
They sold it twice to make it harder for the creditors to reach it. They arranged it this way to make it possible for KMOS to do business "in good faith" with Itec, and not with Amiga Inc.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 11 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 20-Mar-2004 09:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (Anonymous):
:D :D :D
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 12 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Neko on 20-Mar-2004 10:06 GMT
Amiga should just port the DE and get it over with.

What have they got to lose from porting it? Absolutely nothing, in fact they'll
gain $4.50 for every unit shipped with the DE (or any unit of DE shipped for
the Pegasos) as royalties, as per their contract. Make no bones, this case
isn't about money (damages possible from case: $0 for both parties, by
contract) it's about getting another OS for the Pegasos and increasing the
portfolio of the machine.

If they want the details on the Pegasos, they'll need to define exactly what
they need (screen size, processor and some other vague hand-waves is all they
define, be specific. McEwen, Fleecy, Ray, anyone, ask me for the information,
I dare you :)

Do you want AmigaDE on Pegasos?

Why do Amiga so vigorously NOT want it on Pegasos?

Do you want any other OS on Pegasos? Make it happen then! Stop fighting! Pick
one from the hundreds available.. and make inroads to porting it. :)

== Neko
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 13 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 20-Mar-2004 10:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (takemehomegrandma):
It sure looks like fraud to me. Neither of these companies (Itec and KMOS) appear to exist (or have existed in the case of the former) for any other purpose than to launder the IP. They have no record of other trading, and no website.

The original judgement went against Amiga Inc anyway, but they could not possibly comply with it as they have no one to port AmigaDE to the Pegasos and no rights to hand over the source code. The obvious conclusion is that unless their desperate (and inexplicably late) depositions find the judge in a particularly brain-dead mode, the original ruling will stand and Amiga Inc will face further punishment for failing to comply with the ruling (as they have failed to comply with every other court ruling against them in recent times). This time, such failure could push the company into liquidation and Hyperion's precious investment would go down the chute.

Hence Itec and KMOS, companies that only exist on paper to launder AmigaOS away from the troubles of Amiga Inc and enable Hyperion to "buy" it when Amiga Inc's mast finally sinks under the waves.

OTOH, you have Genesi resorting to the particularly despicable - if predictable - tactic of attempting to use the original court ruling to obtain rights to products which have absolutely nothing to do with their original contract, which is what everyone knew they would try to do all along, despite their protestations that they were genuinely interested in AmigaDE, a product so dead you'd need an archeologist to find any trace of it.

Crooks on the Red side, charlatans on the Blue, and a whole bunch of Lemons caught in between. That's the Amiga scene of today for you.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 14 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cosmo on 20-Mar-2004 10:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Neko):
> Amiga should just port the DE and get it over with.
> What have they got to lose from porting it?

Come off it Neko, you can't really be that naive. There are very good reasons why Amiga would prefer not to have to port it. Some practical; some finacial; some political.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 15 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 20-Mar-2004 10:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Cosmo):
Not least that they have no employees capable of doing the job, and no money to hire a third party to do it for them, even if their intent license allowed them to use a third party.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 16 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Mar-2004 10:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (samface):
> Noone ever said KMOS bought the rights for AmigaOS from Amiga Inc. in April.

Because it doesn't matter. What matters is if Amiga Inc was in possession of OS4 at the time it declared before the court that it was in possession.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 17 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 20-Mar-2004 10:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Cosmo):
"Come off it Neko, you can't really be that naive. There are very good reasons why Amiga would prefer not to have to port it. Some practical; some finacial; some political. "

Not anymore, they have nothing to do with AmigaOS, so they can't even claim "competition" anymore.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 18 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by AdmV on 20-Mar-2004 10:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Neko):
Port DE for pegasos..

But DE Is not an operating system, at least as I understand it. So what OS do you suggest they port to?

Let me ask you a question, whats the chances that IF they did [port to say MorphOS, Genesi would claim that they need to come back with ports for debian, SUSE, BSD ???

All pointless questions, just like Genesi's persuit of a broken company through the courts.

By the way, I assume its fair comment to say that some of the monies AI now waste on futile idiotic court proceddings, answering your own idiotic, futile, pointless case, could have gone to EX-amiga inc employees, people who deserve payment and you ones you have complained about previously. All at the same time you don't pay your own people.

What a giggle

AdmV
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 19 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cosmo on 20-Mar-2004 10:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Bill Hoggett):
> Not least that they have no employees capable of doing
> the job, and no money to hire a third party to do it for
> them, even if their intent license allowed them to use a
> third party.

That would come under the financial category:

If Genesi had more than just a few thousand machines out there then it might make some financial sense. But they don't and it doesn't. If there was a financial case for doing the port, then hiring contractors on a payment on delivery or royalty basis wouldn't be a problem. (I imagine.)
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 20 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cosmo on 20-Mar-2004 11:02 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (T_Bone):
> Not anymore, they have nothing to do with AmigaOS, so
> they can't even claim "competition" anymore.

That would come under the political category:

Why would they want to help Genesi if they didn't have to? Especially after all that has been said and done.

I guess it also comes under some other category too, given that I believe Amiga still owns the "Amiga" brand, and Genesi are obviously so keen to use the name themselves. (Otherwise what else has all this been about?) But then again, I guess this would just be in the political category again.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 21 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 20-Mar-2004 11:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (Cosmo):
Come off it Neko, you can't really be that naive. There are very good reasons why Amiga would prefer not to have to port it. Some practical; some finacial; some political.

Then why did they sign the agreement to port it in the first place? Even if their situation changes, a company can't just ignore its legal obligations.

-- gary_c
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 22 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Neko on 20-Mar-2004 11:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (AdmV):
Well at one time AmigaDE was a good idea.

One more added to the list of supported and working operating systems can only
help to sell machines. That alone makes it a worthwhile exercise.

If AmigaDE is "not an Operating System", then the contract was written up and
signed by McEwen while he was drunk, or perhaps sleepy, because it clearly
states AmigaDE Operating System.

But if it does turn out that Amiga is right, and their insistance that AmigaDE
is just a bunch of VP shared libraries on top of intent 1.x, and they can't
do anything with intent, then fine and fair enough!

Give us those shared libraries, make sure we get Ami3D and the audio stuff we
were all promised, when or if it finally arrives. We can get the basic PowerPC
version of the intent OS direct from Tao, and apply the Amiga binaries to the
top. One AmigaDE, put a pretty ribbon on it et voila!

I fail to see why they need directions on screen size and processor type if
they do not have an operating system, and they program for a virtual
processor and an adequate multimedia HAL in intent, but sure.. I'll bite.

I'll personally donate a Pegasos II board if they are so insistent :)

Come on, we can't say fairer than that.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 23 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cosmo on 20-Mar-2004 11:31 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (gary_c):
> Then why did they sign the agreement to port it in the first place?

I assume relations must have been somewhat better in the past. Genesi (and co) weren't then developing what many people today see as a direct competitor to Amiga interests.

> Even if their situation changes, a company can't just ignore its
> legal obligations.

That's true. Unless of course those legal obligations are disputed by one of the parties as being non-applicable in a particular case. (As it was up until the judge ruled on the matter.)

It's only once the matter has been ruled on that we can tell whether an obligation is being ignored or not. But with the motions submitted just recently, it seems the issue is still not settled?
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 24 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 11:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (gary_c):
> Then why did they sign the agreement to port it in the first place? Even if
> their situation changes, a company can't just ignore its legal obligations.

Whilst what you say is true ...

1) Amiga Inc. weren't provided with the hardware on which to port AmigaDE to, as required under 5.1 of the license agreement, and part F of the latest documents

2) Amiga Inc. were naive .... they should have limited the contract to Windows CE based devices because they is what AmigaDE ran on at the time. The original contract specifically mentions the Thendic WindowsCE based device that never emerged. The fact that Thendic merged/was bought out/became Genesi and the product line altered significantly to become a PowerPC based motherboard means that Amiga Inc had a significantly harder task to perform.

Now I'll wait for someone to nit pick one small irrelevant part and ignore the rest.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 25 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 20-Mar-2004 12:09 GMT
Damn, Diana Shukis sure is on a roll ;)
When's the next chapter?

Cheers
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 26 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 12:13 GMT
Amiga's motion mentions plaintiff's "..Reply in Support of Motion to
Modify the Order of Specific Performance submitted on March 18, 2004."

Where can I find this document?
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 27 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 20-Mar-2004 12:16 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Graham_nli):
Now I'll wait for someone to nit pick one small irrelevant part and ignore the rest.

Responding to you and to Cosmo, the case has been decided. The ruling is that Amiga, Inc. is legally bound to provide an AmigaDE port to the Pegasos. Genesi requested a clarification of the decision that expanded the scope of the contract, but the judge didn't go for it. What he did say, though, is that the AmigaDE port is required by the agreement. Nothing submitted by Amiga, Inc. this month has changed that AFAIK. What you're offering is nothing but excuses. The decision has been made.

-- gary_c
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 28 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 12:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 27 (gary_c):
Because the American law system does not allow for appeals.... ?

The case has been decided, but it isn't over, hence the latest submissions. There were 30 days for Amiga Inc to respond, and they are. I don't think that bbrv expected a response. The responses shape the final decision. Note that some of the newest submissions call for the case to be dismissed due to evidence of vexatious litigation.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 29 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Mar-2004 12:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 24 (Graham_nli):
> Whilst what you say is true ... 1) Amiga Inc. weren't provided with the hardware on which to port AmigaDE to

The Amiga side was repeatedly offered Pegasos boards. Maybe not Amiga Inc specifically, I don't know, but Hyperion was. Besides, no matter what is said publicly, I am confident that Amiga Inc. and Hyperion have access to a Pegasos, if only to see what they are up against (and vice versa). I find the complaints in the court papers that Amiga Inc didn't know the screen resultions etc. incredibly stupid for a company that is supposed to be in the OS writing business.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 30 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Peter Gordon on 20-Mar-2004 12:51 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Anonymous):
Ahh, but the contract is to port DE to Thendics handheld WindowsCE based device; which could have a very small screen requiring a reduced interface or such. Thus, in the context of the original contract, asking for information about the screen is very valid indeed.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 31 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 13:06 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Peter Gordon):
Sure, if you want to claim you're so stupid that you can't go and
read this on Genesi's website.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 32 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 13:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Anonymous):
> The Amiga side was repeatedly offered Pegasos boards. Maybe not Amiga Inc
> specifically, I don't know, but Hyperion was.

and Hyperion has what exactly to do with AmigaDE? Nothing.

Anyway, if "offered Pegasos boards" means on a web forum, then that isn't very professional. Hyperion were never offered boards by e-mail/phone call/letter as far as I recall.

Amiga Inc. weren't given the required information. Reasonable attempts to supply this information were not made by Thendic. The contract is between Amiga Inc and Thendic. That's it. No Hyperion involvement at all.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 33 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Bill Hoggett on 20-Mar-2004 13:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Cosmo):
History shows that it WOULD be a problem, because the product (AmigaDE) is still incomplete and effectively useless after years of "development".

Of course, that is pointless. You don't break a contract or refuse to comply with a judge's ruling because it might not be profitable to do otherwise.

The main reason why Amiga Inc don't WANT to do the port, as opposed to why they CAN'T, is because there is no AmigaDE to port in the first place.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 34 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by IanS on 20-Mar-2004 13:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 31 (Johan Rönnblom):
Well, you know, if the device actually existed in the first place...
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 35 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 13:56 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Bill Hoggett):
haha, so all those gamepacks and stuff didn't exist?

AmigaDE might not be all that much (at the moment) beyond intent, but it exists.

Not for PowerPC though. But yes for x86 and ARM.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 36 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Cosmo on 20-Mar-2004 14:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Bill Hoggett):
> History shows that it WOULD be a problem, because the product
> (AmigaDE) is still incomplete and effectively useless after
> years of "development".

There seems to be enough there for games. I don't think there's a specified minimum level of functionality anywhere in the disputed contract?

> Of course, that is pointless. You don't break a contract or
> refuse to comply with a judge's ruling because it might not
> be profitable to do otherwise.

That's true. Except, that is, when the applicability of the contract is in dispute; the prerequisites have not been met; and the court case to decide such matters is still ongoing.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 37 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 14:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 34 (IanS):
IanS: Huh? I've had mine since August 2002.

Come on. AInc have claimed for ages that they didn't want to port
AmigaDE and that they didn't have to. Only now that the court ordered
them to do it, they start claiming they didn't know how.

I don't claim to know the outcome of this case. But this "they never
told us the CPU involved" excuse is pathetic and I'm quite sure the
court will not take it.


Now, it's one thing that it's obvious *to us* that Thendic/Genesi
have in fact asked for a DE port. It's another matter to prove it to
the courts. If I was bbrv, I would have made sure I had secured
communication asking for DE integration long before starting this
case. IIRC I even recommended Bill Buck to do this when I met him in
person in August 2002. If they didn't do this they might have to rely
on public comments on web boards etc, and this might leave some wiggle
room for AInc.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 38 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Johan Rönnblom):
I think that IanS is referring to the Thendic WindowsCE based device that the contact mentions, not the Pegasos.

> AInc have claimed for ages that they didn't want to port
> AmigaDE and that they didn't have to.

Link?

> But this "they never told us the CPU involved" excuse is pathetic and I'm
> quite sure the court will not take it.

That isn't the argument. The argument is that Thendic never provided the hardware and specifications/schematics/API/whatever to them, so they couldn't even meet their part of the contract.

Anyway, it is kinda important to know what CPU is being used when you are writing software to run on a system!
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 39 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by smp266 on 20-Mar-2004 15:04 GMT
I thought they did supply them. But they got 'locked in' with all the other stuff.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 40 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 15:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Graham_nli):
Well, try

http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_3,16781,,,,1.pdf

Nothing about "we want to do it but we can't" only "we won't do it as
we don't have to".
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 41 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 15:06 GMT
Graham_nli: Oh, and do you really think it makes sense to claim you've
no way of knowing what CPU the Pegasos uses? You really expect anyone
to take such claims seriously?
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 42 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Johan Rönnblom):
See. More proof that what I say is always misrepresented.

Thendic never sent Amiga Inc the hardware. Are Amiga Inc suddenly meant to guess that Thendic want it made for Genesi's Pegasos? In addition, Thendic never sent Amiga Inc the technical specifications for the product. By "never sent", I mean "Amiga Inc didn't receive, and quite clearly no reasonable attempt was made by Thendic to send these items".

Thendic never sent Amiga Inc a note saying "Please write, as per the contract, the AmigaDE software application for MorphOS running on the hardware we provided."

The court case is about the contract. Not about what is obvious and what isn't.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 43 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 15:19 GMT
In reply to Comment 42 (Graham_nli):
You're claiming as a fact something which is *highly* contested.
Obviously Genesi claim they asked AInc several times.

I think it should be quite obvious for anyone here that they did. You
really think they started a big court case, without knowing whether
AInc would just say "ok, let's do it" if Genesi asked them?

Anyway I'm not going to argue with you anymore on this stupid point as
surely Genesi will provide the court with their arguments to prove
that they did ask AInc for especially that which you simply take for
granted that they did not ask.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 44 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 40 (Johan Rönnblom):
> Nothing about "we want to do it but we can't" only "we won't do it as
> we don't have to".

Hmm. Page 18 of http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic/show_case_doc_57,16781,3,MAGIC,0,1.pdf

Ooh, no they don't have to! Item 2 requires the consent of Amiga Inc! Item 1 shows the products they agreed to make AmigaDE for. Hah!
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 45 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:22 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Johan Rönnblom):
I can only imagine that this is what the Knockout Punch that bbrv has been wittering on about for a couple of days must be.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 46 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 20-Mar-2004 15:24 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Johan Rönnblom):
Not obvious at all, it needs to be proven as an essential axiom
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 47 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 15:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (Graham_nli):
Sorry, but the court decided otherwise. AInc are required to port
AmigaDE to the Pegasos, and the court has decided that the list in the
contract was not exclusive.

You may speculate that the court may change their order and that AInc
might not have to port AmigaDE. You're fully entitled to speculate
about that. In the same way, BBRV are fully entitled to speculate that
the court may change their order and force AInc to port OS4 as well.

However - the fact is that today, AInc are required to port AmigaDE
to the Pegasos, while they are not required to port OS4.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 48 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:39 GMT
In reply to Comment 47 (Johan Rönnblom):
> AInc are required to port
> AmigaDE to the Pegasos, and the court has decided that the list in the
> contract was not exclusive.

In my opinion, the court messed up then. Amiga Inc have the right to refuse (with good reason) to accept additional hardware to port to.

A different OS, architecture and platform in my opinion are certainly valid reasons to refuse to accept to extend the products covered by the contract.

However if Amiga Inc had refused to port to a (theoretical) "WinCEBoy" product that was a Smartboy with more RAM, faster processor, they wouldn't have been able to refuse to port.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 49 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 20-Mar-2004 15:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 48 (Graham_nli):
Your opinion is irrelevant. The court rules.
Amiga vs Thendic Update : Comment 50 of 113ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 20-Mar-2004 15:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 49 (Johan Rönnblom):
The court ruled to default because Amiga Inc had no money to pay for a lawyer at the time of ruling. The court essentially never considered the evidence, they just said "yeah, sure".

The only knock-out punch that Thendic can supply would be a modified contract signed by Amiga Inc and himself that adds "Pegasos" to the list of devices supported.

And I am still allowed an opinion, how ever little it counts.
Anonymous, there are 113 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 100] [101 - 113]
Back to Top