19-Apr-2024 22:39 GMT.		 UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 84 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 84]
[News] Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates!ANN.lu
Posted on 09-Apr-2004 16:49 GMT by Rich Woods84 comments
View flat
View list
The latest in the ongoing Thendic-Amiga case court files have been updated The latest in the ongoing Thendic-Amiga case court files have been updated. CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE by Defendants Amiga Inc, Amiga Inc re 66 Reply to Response to Motion (Shukis, Diana) (Entered: 04/08/2004)

REPLY to Response to Motion filed by Defendant Amiga Inc re 60 MOTION for Relief from Judgment (Shukis, Diana) (Entered: 04/08/2004)

Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 1 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Flutsch Korton on 09-Apr-2004 15:09 GMT
Flash - Ah - Saviour of the universe
Flash - Ah - He'll save ev'ry one of us
Seemingly there is no reason for these
Extraordinary intergalactical upsets (ha ha ha)
What's happening Flash?
Only Dr Hans Zarkov formerly at N A S A
Has provided any explanation
Flash - Ah - He's a miracle
This mornings unprecedented solar eclipse
Is no cause for alarm
Flash - Ah - King of the impossible
He's for ev'ry one of us
Stand for ev'ry one of us
He'll save with a mighty hand
Ev'ry man ev'ry woman ev'ry child
With a mighty Flash
General Kaka Flash Gordon approaching
What do you mean Flash Gordon approaching?
Open fire all weapons
Dispatch war rocket Ajax to bring back his body
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 2 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Ryu on 09-Apr-2004 16:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Flutsch Korton):
rotflol i love that tune
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 3 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by The_Editor... (Paul Hovell) on 09-Apr-2004 16:19 GMT
Hmm ..

Looks Like someones been perpetually prodding the Hibernating Bear...

Its just woke up !!

And looky who's standing right there...

Luncheon !!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 4 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by XraalE on 09-Apr-2004 17:12 GMT
Red troll plan of action for dealing with embarassing AInc info, must be carried out in this order, and if any step fails, move onto the next step.

1) Deny.

2) Blame Bill Buck for everything.

3) Deny, but this time call everyone an idiot.

4) Insult Rich Woods.

5) Try to make it sound less bad by deflecting attention on Genesi's latest dodgy dealings.

6) Trivialise.

Guess we've reached step six. :)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 5 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Flush Goddam on 09-Apr-2004 18:02 GMT
Fleecy - Ah - Saviour of the Amiverse
Fleecy - Ah - He'll save us from the pegasos
Seemingly there is no reason for these
Extraordinary litigational upsets (ha ha ha)
What's happening Fleecy?
Only Dr Hans off-amiga formerly at Viscorp
Has provided any explanation
Fleecy - Ah - He's a miracle
This mornings unprecedented lawyer outburst
Is no cause for alarm
Fleecy - Ah - King of the improbable
He's for ev'ry one of us
Stand for ev'ry one of us
He'll save amiga with a mighty hand
Ev'ry man ev'ry woman ev'ry child
With a mighty Fleecy
General BBRV Fleecy Moss approaching
What do you mean Fleecy Moss approaching?
Open fire all weapons
Dispatch a blue butterfly to bring back his body
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 6 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by The_Editor... (Paul Hovell) on 09-Apr-2004 18:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (Flush Goddam):
[shock mode on]

Fleecies ALIVE, alive, alive !!

Ahhhh ahhh !!

[/shock mode off]
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 7 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 09-Apr-2004 19:10 GMT
Hmm. Somehow it seems to me that AInc are a bit too fixated with
message boards. Yes, on those you can shift the focus by posting out
of subject and then accuse people of not answering your questions
when they insist being on-topic. But this hardly works in a court
case.

Let me guess:
a) The court probably does not care a lot about the forged
e-mail. Yes, it seems very likely they'll discard it, but aside from
that, it hardly affects the outcome of *this* case. Even if it had
been blatantly illegal (which would be somewhat problematic to prove),
that hardly affects the status of AInc's contract with Thendic/Genesi.

b) Likewise, I doubt the court cares a lot about BBRV's postings on
message boards, at least not posts made long after the contract was
signed. I mean, it doesn't matter if BBRV had some hidden agenda for
bringing this case up - as long as the case was brought for the court
for a proper purpose, who cares if they had a dozen additional
motives. It also doesn't matter if BBRV understand *now* that DE is
not a proper OS etc. What matters is what they thought when they
signed the contract. Genesi's lawyer appear to have understood this -
AInc's seem to have missed it completely.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 8 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Atheist2 on 09-Apr-2004 19:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Flutsch Korton):
I love the tune too, now I must get the movie!!! (It's so silly, but somehow amuses me.)


Anyhow, shouldn't count my chickens before they're hatched (or afterwards, we're losing 19 million due to avian bird-flu, here in the Vancouver B.C. region), but it looks REALLY bad for my pal bbrv.

Since you don't have anything to say about another current "situation", how about this one?

Seems to me that you'll be in courts for the next 3 years.

Have a nice day.


Amiga! You'll rue the day, you botch up playing with her!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 9 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by IanS on 09-Apr-2004 19:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (XraalE):
XRallE troll plan of action for dealing with info not embarassing to Amiga Inc, must be carried out in this order, and if any step fails, move onto the next step.

1) Ignore the information provided. Instead, moan about Amiga Inc for the umpteenth time.

2) Desperately blame red trolls for everything.

3) Deny, but this time call anyone who doesn't agree with you an idiot.

4) Insult anyone who doesn't scream "A Inc are embarassing idiots" in every ann thread.

5) Try to make it sound less bad (sp?) by deflecting attention onto Amiga Incs/red trolls dodgy dealings.

6) Finish any insults with a smiley in the vain hope of trivialising them.

Guess we've reached stage 6 eh, XrallE?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 10 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by XraalE on 09-Apr-2004 19:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (IanS):
And now seven for you is to use anonymizer to go and insult someone on moobunny? :)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 11 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Bobson on 09-Apr-2004 20:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (XraalE):
Are you KennyR? Just there seems to be a growth emerging of a similar sized chip, and weight upon your shoulder.

Amiga inc made bad choices - they were not very good when it came to buisness. However, they were not bullies. Furthermore they would have been doing a lot better had people not sought to go out of their way put obstacles in front of them. Is your loyality born out of a free board or because you genuinly agree with all that Gensi has done, and is doing?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 12 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 09-Apr-2004 20:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Bobson):
Tittybiscuits
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 13 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Bobson on 09-Apr-2004 20:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Anonymous):
Tittybiscuits? I think you may have hit add comment to soon :)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 14 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 09-Apr-2004 20:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Bobson):
Yes. It's my first day LOL!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 15 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 09-Apr-2004 21:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Johan Rönnblom):
b) Likewise, I doubt the court cares a lot about BBRV's postings on
message boards, at least not posts made long after the contract was
signed. I mean, it doesn't matter if BBRV had some hidden agenda for
bringing this case up - as long as the case was brought for the court
for a proper purpose, who cares if they had a dozen additional
motives. It also doesn't matter if BBRV understand *now* that DE is
not a proper OS etc. What matters is what they thought when they
signed the contract. Genesi's lawyer appear to have understood this -
AInc's seem to have missed it completely.

Which Federal Rule of Civil Procedure Are You?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 16 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by itix on 09-Apr-2004 21:43 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Bobson):
Or because he was cheated to buy an useless Amiga Inc voucher?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 17 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 09-Apr-2004 22:22 GMT
MMmmmmm... tittybiscuits.

Looks like Amiga Inc are building up their case by pointing out that bbrv's previous submission is a load of hot air and contains nothing relevant to the case.

I'll be interested when the judge makes a judgement.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 18 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 09-Apr-2004 22:53 GMT
I only see things listed which are irrelevant to the core of the case.This AInc party whines like little girls!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 19 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 09-Apr-2004 23:03 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Anonymous):
At least they don't have people who go around taking pictures of Amiga Inc employee's houses and placing them on their website! That is really really freaky.

Also look up what a vexatious litigant is. This is the sort of stuff you need to prove that someone is such a being.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 20 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Gregg on 09-Apr-2004 23:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Graham_nli):
I'll be interested when the judge makes a judgement.

Uhh... He already made a judgement; perhaps you missed it?

By the way, if this was an insignificant, trivial part of your post that nobody was supposed to pay attention to, do let me know, and I'll go and try to find something relevant...

Gregg
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 21 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by DaveP on 10-Apr-2004 04:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Gregg):
@Gregg.

Yes, he already has, and then he has to make further judgements on further motions that are submitted. Like the motion Genesi submitted to get the summary judgement extended to include AOSx.x which was denied. A further motion has been submitted by the Amiga lawyer which submits that the contract cannot be fulfilled as the judge originally ruled and the reasons are (x/y/z) explained in the submissions. The judge then has to "judge" on that - the judgement might be "you are too late, you still have to fulfil your obligations", the judgement might be "you are right, this whole suit has been voided" or it could be partial.

I thought you had more nonce than this, clearly not, just enough to go around the message boards adding more noise than signal in a smart sounding way eh? At least this time you are vaguely keeping on topic and not digging into peoples past lives in order to make some kind of point scoring hoopla.

Personally I don't think what Amiga Inc and its friends have submitted is enough, I think the judge will rule they still have to transfer what they have ( which is what a SED script for the Intent manual and an installer ) for DE and the judgement will be upheld. As to whether the judge finds the side issues of perjury and misrepresentation something that he can or should take into account is yet to be seen.

Whatever he rules now isn't going to matter, the PR disaster was done and dusted, Genesi tried to over-extend themselves and bundle the AOS IP/rights ( which is what most of us feared ) and lost that play. The stakes are low for the "Red" community - but seemingly still quite high for the "Blue" and "AmigaDE" community ( all 3000 of them ) I guess.

Dave.

@KennyR/xraale - go read the court documents, there is nothing embarrassing to red trolls in there - as they are submissions by Amiga's lawyer - I should know as according to you I am the biggest red troll out there. Then go and look at your comment in this thread, revealing eh? Reveals that you didn't read the court document before commenting.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 22 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 10-Apr-2004 04:04 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Anonymous):
Think again. They have just become serious. Buck's childish game is over.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 23 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 10-Apr-2004 04:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Graham_nli):
Also look up what a vexatious litigant is. This is the sort of stuff you need to prove that someone is such a being.

As far as I can tell, that's an English concept we haven't ported over, save in certain states that figure they can get away with it.

What we do have is these notes for a headache.

As always, it cuts both ways; the more 'novel' an argument one side brings (meant here in terms of raising the existence of such rules), the more likely the other is to return salvo... leading to an arms race that, one can hope, ends in one hell of a reasoned and equitable decision. (Given that this process can and does proceed ad infinitum, good counsel can claim its purpose is to keep you out of court in the first place.)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 24 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 10-Apr-2004 04:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Graham_nli):
I'm guilty again.

What we do have is
Rule 11
(as applies in the Federal domain here), and numerous state statutes that mimic it. See
here
for some discussion, and
these notes
for a headache.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 25 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by T_Bone on 10-Apr-2004 09:13 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Graham_nli):
> At least they don't have people who go around taking pictures of Amiga Inc employee's houses and placing them on their website!

Who's "They?"

Genesi doesn't have anyone doing that either.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 26 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Seer on 10-Apr-2004 12:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (T_Bone):
@T_Bone,

I suppose they = blue camp side.. Tho Rich isn't in any camp... (Well except his own..;-)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 27 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Rich Woods on 10-Apr-2004 12:30 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (Seer):
Posted by Seer (Trusted user) on 10-Apr-2004 14:01:13

In Reply to Comment 25 (T_Bone):
@T_Bone,

I suppose they = blue camp side.. Tho Rich isn't in any camp... (Well except his own..;-)
------------------
:-)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 28 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 10-Apr-2004 13:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Gregg):
I meant the judgement based upon the submissions since the previous judgement. You know, all those submissions from both sides in March? That the judge will have to make a ruling on at some point?

Sheesh, talk about missing the point quite deliberately.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 29 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 10-Apr-2004 13:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 25 (T_Bone):
Rich Wood.

Don't you find that really disturbing? What would you think if someone had photos of your house on their website taken sneakily? Maybe an ex-customer of yours who had a grudge for some reason?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 30 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 10-Apr-2004 14:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (Graham_nli):
Graham_nli wrote:
> Also look up what a vexatious litigant is. This is the sort of stuff
> you need to prove that someone is such a being.

Seems you have to look it up yourself. A vexatious litigant is someone
filing lots of silly lawsuits with no chance of winning. Thus far
Genesi have made three claims basically: One has been granted, one has
been in part granted and in part denied, and their last claim is yet
to be ruled upon. Anyway, the results thus far speak for themselves -
Genesi are not a vexatious litigant.

Proving that someone is a vexatious litigant is hardly interesting in
a case like this anyway, because if it is so, it is per definition
simple to counter the claim itself rather than targetting the
opponent.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 31 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 10-Apr-2004 14:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Johan Rönnblom):
Hush now! After getting bored with "orthogonal persistence", they were handed a shiny new word to play with over at The Portal, and you want to spoil their fun? It's even got an X in it, so it must be Important and Legal and Stuff!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 32 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Amon_Re on 10-Apr-2004 15:07 GMT
Come on guys, bitch,whine & troll, i can't enjoy my popcorn like this :P

Cheers
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 33 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by IanS on 10-Apr-2004 16:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 10 (XraalE):
Hmm... XraalE. Let's see.

Step 1. Swap the as for ns, giving

XrnnlE.

Step 2. Swap the x for a k, giving

KrnnlE.

Step 3. Swap the l for a y, giving

KrnnyE.

Step 4. Swap the r and the e, giving

KennyR.

Hmmm. Is that just coincidence, and me being paranoid?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 34 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Rich Woods on 10-Apr-2004 16:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 29 (Graham_nli):
 Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 29 of 33




Posted by Graham_nli (81.96.74.103) on 10-Apr-2004 15:32:26

In Reply to Comment 25 (T_Bone):
Rich Wood.

Don't you find that really disturbing? What would you think if someone had photos of your house on their website taken sneakily? Maybe an ex-customer of yours who had a grudge for some reason?
---------------------
No I don't find it disturbing - especially sisnce photos were taken from a PUBLIC ROAD! And what do you mean "sneakily"?

If someone wants to take a picture of my house from a public road there is nothing I can do about it - and so what?

And is or isn't peake an "amiga employee"? billyboy - who knows if he is an "employee" or "CEO" or whatever.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 35 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by IanS on 10-Apr-2004 16:26 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (IanS):
Even better, just shift each letter 13 places up the alphabet...

;-)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 36 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Joe "Floid" Kanowitz on 10-Apr-2004 16:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Johan Rönnblom):
I don't know what you guys are on about, unless I missed the venue teleporting to Australia or something.

Anyhow, here's one interpretation of Rule 11's 'reasonableness:'

The provisions of Rule 11 dictate that in presenting a motion to a court, an attorney represents that the "legal contentions therein are warranted by existing law or by a nonfrivolous argument for the extension, modification, or reversal of existing law or the establish- ment of new law." Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(2). An assertion of law vio- lates Rule 11(b)(2) when, applying a standard of objective reasonableness, it can be said that "a reasonable attorney in like cir- cumstances could [not have] believe[d] his actions to be ... legally jus- tified." Cabell v. Petty , 810 F.2d 463, 466 (4th Cir. 1987). A legal contention is unjustified when "a reasonable attorney would recognize [it] as frivolous." Forrest Creek Assocs. v. McLean Sav. & Loan Ass'n , 831 F.2d 1238, 1245 (4th Cir. 1987). Put differently, a legal position violates Rule 11 if it "has `absolutely no chance of success under the existing precedent.'" Brubaker v. City of Richmond , 943 F.2d 1363, 1373 (4th Cir. 1991) (quoting Cleveland Demolition Co. v. Azcon Scrap Corp. , 827 F.2d 984, 988 (4th Cir. 1987)); see also Robeson Defense Comm. v. Britt (In re Kunstler) , 914 F.2d 505, 514- 18 (4th Cir. 1990) (affirming Rule 11 sanctions because attorneys' arguments were not well grounded in fact or law).

Taken as such, that's pretty stringent, such that you'd have to be SCO to run afoul of it. However, if I'm not pulling this out of a sleep-deprived haze, the judge does have the option of invoking it per-motion, so I suppose he could wave it (or just consider it) if he wants, if it even comes to mind.

Now, if I get off my butt and play IANALJTSOO, a reference to Chambers v. NASCO amounts to a (thus-founded) argument of 'Screw Rule 11, are you going to let this slide?' It's also pretty amusing, because the dispute here has elements of both that case's issue and its inverse. (Of course, that's what helps it apply...)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 37 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 10-Apr-2004 16:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Johan Rönnblom):
Filing a lawsuit on behalf of a bankrupt company can most certainly be considered "vexatious litigation".

Failing to disclose the bankruptcy and pretending there is affiliation whilst there is none either in equity or in the form of the composition of the board of directors is most likely not only vexatious but borders on contempt of court.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 38 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 10-Apr-2004 17:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Ben Hermans: Can you then explain to me why AInc/KMOS did not point
this out in any of their earlier documents presented for the court?

Somehow, I find it unlikely you'd spend so much time on this case, if
you could kill it off for good with a two-page submission.

So my question is, will we see this theory being presented to the
court? Or is it just another 'deep FUD' attempt?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 39 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion on 10-Apr-2004 17:48 GMT
In reply to Comment 38 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Ben Hermans: Can you then explain to me why AInc/KMOS did not point
>this out in any of their earlier documents presented for the court?

Amiga Inc. had no legal representation and hence the judge already ruled against them by default.

This places severe procedural limits on what can be submitted to the judge at this stage.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 40 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Rich Woods on 10-Apr-2004 18:14 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 39 of 39




Posted by Ben Hermans/Hyperion (Trusted user) on 10-Apr-2004 19:48:06

In Reply to Comment 38 (Johan Rönnblom):
>Ben Hermans: Can you then explain to me why AInc/KMOS did not point
>this out in any of their earlier documents presented for the court?

Amiga Inc. had no legal representation and hence the judge already ruled against them by default.

This places severe procedural limits on what can be submitted to the judge at this stage.
-------------------
All of the rest of the filings and motions are just "fluff" - addressing NO substantial issues of the case (as originally present in briefs filed by lawyers).

If Amiga REALLY did feel anything was warranted their lawyers would be filing an appeal - although they are looking to do the motions things as a cheaper alternative.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 41 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 10-Apr-2004 18:15 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
Ben, you're talking so much bullshit - and you know it.

Well, this pretty much proves that you're just lying here, which is
quite sad. It's one thing to be part of a fanatical, unthinking crowd.
It's quite a bit worse to deliberately make up stories to mislead your
herd of sheep.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 42 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by The_Editor... (Paul Hovell) on 10-Apr-2004 18:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Johan Rönnblom):
Os4 install guide released.


Moneys gonna be rolling in soon !!
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 43 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Graham_nli on 10-Apr-2004 19:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Johan Rönnblom):
In what way is the stuff in comment 39 "bullshit"?

The first statement is true.

The second statement is probably true, I'm sure that there are limitation on what Amiga Inc can submit to the judge given the state of proceedings at the moment. I'm also sure that Amiga Inc won't be rolling in money - KMOS won't be interested in saving Amiga Inc, only in protecting AmigaOS, that is the only reason that Amiga Inc got to be able to submit anything that they did in March.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 44 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by %00 on 10-Apr-2004 19:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 41 (Johan Rönnblom):
Fine, suit yourself Johan.

Continue to live in your fantasy world where Thendic Eletronics GmbH did not file for bankruptcy on November 7 of 2002.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 45 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by smithy on 10-Apr-2004 19:45 GMT
In reply to Comment 35 (IanS):
>Even better, just shift each letter 13 places up the alphabet...

Shit.. I'll have to try a better encryption next time.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 46 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by IanS on 10-Apr-2004 19:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (smithy):
LOL!

You can't fool me Smithy - eyes like a hawk i tell you ;-)
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 47 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 10-Apr-2004 20:41 GMT
Oh please. Let's look at the proposition:

So, Ben says, the whole case is "moot", since the plaintiff is not a
party in the contract that is at question. Except, the defendant
cannot tell this to the judge, because there are some "restrictions".

And people believe in this? You really do?


So, AInc can argue about the wording of the contract, as they have
done only a few weeks ago. But they can't mention that the plaintiff
is not a party in the contract. Right. They can waste the courts time
by submitting endless web logs. But even a sentence saying the
plaintiff is not entitled to the contract, that would somehow be off
limits. And you believe in this?


So, the case is moot. Except it's not because the thing making it moot
is mysteriously disallowed. Ok Ben, which way do you want it? It's
moot, or it's not moot?


Well - I'll tell you what, I've heard a lot of silly claims, but this
one pretty much takes the prize.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 48 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Megol on 10-Apr-2004 23:29 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Ben Hermans/Hyperion):
It sure is nice to see you posting on Ann.lu again Mr. Hermans, maybe you could be kind and answer some questions that I thought about for some time:

. Does or does not the Articia chipset invalidate cache-blocks that is modified by PCI DMA?

. As we all know the Amiga market is shrinking, do you think this is caused by the Amithlon product as you earlier predicted?

. How come Hyperion can implement a "dongle" function for a PPC-based motherboard but can't do the same for a x86-based one?

. Why is it that one can target just one motherboard when writing a PPC OS, but being forced to support all existing motherboards when writing a x86 OS?

. Why is it that one can support just a limited set of hardware when writing a PPC-based OS but being forced to support all existing hardware when targeting a x86-based OS?

. Do you still think that Linux is just an add-on to Windows?

. Why do you think that an OS implemented on PPC can have unique applications while the same system implemented on x86 can't? Is it because x86 doesn't have Altivec?

. How well do you know Steve Jobs?

. How do Hyperion plan to isolate the remaining Amiga faithful from the Windows market?
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 49 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 10-Apr-2004 23:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (%00):
Might I point out that "bankrupcy" does not mean "out of business?" Many businesses have utilized bankrupcy for purposes of reorganization and even, dare I say it, used the period of bankrupcy to file suit against companies that, through their action or inaction, caused such a state as to force the bankrupcy upon the initial company. And in fact, to *not* file said suit while under the auspices of bankrupcy (a term applied to "the company needs cash in any way possible) when it can be judged that there is an opportunity at collecting funding and/or product that can then be sold to gain funding, then it can be found in violation of the rights of bankrupcy.
Thendic-Amiga Court Case Updates! : Comment 51 of 84ANN.lu
Posted by DaveP on 11-Apr-2004 00:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (smithy):
Funny I didn't think you went to Glasgow university or used cable blueyonder.
Anonymous, there are 84 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 84]
Back to Top