03-Dec-2022 05:37 GMT.
UNDER CONSTRUCTION
Anonymous, there are 52 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 52]
[News] Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIEDANN.lu
Posted on 26-Jul-2004 02:21 GMT by Sammy Nordström52 comments
View flat
View list

The court has finally responed to Amiga Inc.'s motion for relief from judgement; the motion is DENIED. Furthermore, the court clarifies the specific performance granted to the plaintiff.

As always, the court documents are available at:
http://www.mindrelease.net/amiga-thendic

According to a recent interview with Garry Hare, CEO of KMOS, this should conclude this case and KMOS intend to comply with the court ruling.
Quote from http://www.swaug.org.uk/amiwest2004-ghi.php:

Q: On the subject of the law suite, anything to say?

THe law suite is no longer pending, the final ruling was 10 days ago and the judge said that the original agreement stands and all clauses enforced and enforcable. There are a number of implications. We haven't heard anything since from Genesis, Bplan or Pegasos.

The lawyers theory: took so long because court was taking it seriously
My theory: the court forgot about it!

Q: You intend to comply fully?

Judge has been clear, Yes.

Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 1 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 26-Jul-2004 02:06 GMT
You know, this is rather a relief. Maybe we can get this whole thing behind us and get to the serious issues, like MAKING A WEB BROWSER THAT CAN SUPPORT CSS!
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 2 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by JKD on 26-Jul-2004 04:11 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Nate Downes):
AMEN!
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 3 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Golem on 26-Jul-2004 04:40 GMT
In reply to Comment 1 (Nate Downes):
Yeah, if it hadn't been for this whole legal mess we would have had Open Office ported by now.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 4 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 05:27 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Golem):
Ironicly enough, the clarification from the judge is putting them right back at square one. I mean, the specific performance granted to Genesi is now nothing more than what is already in paragraph 5.1 of the original agreement, which makes the whole lawsuit a complete waste of time and money. No winner, everyone loose. Go figure...
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 5 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by hooligan/dcs on 26-Jul-2004 06:38 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Sammy Nordström):
As always, lawyers won.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 6 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 06:41 GMT
In reply to Comment 5 (hooligan/dcs):
Right you are, in the wrong profession I am. :-P
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 7 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Ronald St-Maurice on 26-Jul-2004 06:54 GMT
What happened to Rich? Isn't this his kind of news?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 8 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 07:09 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Ronald St-Maurice):
I guess he found another dumpster to go through, or maybe it turns out that he has a life after all... who cares?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 9 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by John Q Public on 26-Jul-2004 07:20 GMT
In reply to Comment 8 (Sammy Nordström):
"I guess he found another dumpster to go through, or maybe it turns out that he has a life after all... who cares?"

Or, as noted some time ago, he's dealing with his own eviction. Guess all that stalking and other bad karma finally caught up with him. Sucks when Life comes along and says, "Mind your own business, pal," eh?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 10 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Darrin on 26-Jul-2004 07:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (John Q Public):
What I want to know is when Rich's landlord plans to aution off Rich's stuff to raise the back rent. Perhaps we can bid on all the old Amiga Inc stuff that Rich bought at that previous auction...

Now Bill McEwen has sold Amiga Inc to KMOS then perhaps he can buy his old stuff back. Hmmmm....
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 11 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 07:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 9 (John Q Public):
Hmmm... A quick search on Rich Woods in the PACER gave me three search results, all three refering to guys named Richard Woods, involved in various different cases... Anything else I could go on? I would *love* to give this guy a taste of his own medicine... ;-)
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 12 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 08:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 11 (Sammy Nordström):
None of those cases involved stalking, BTW.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 13 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 26-Jul-2004 09:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 12 (Sammy Nordström):
Just don't go overboard.. there are probably more than one "Rich
Woods" out there. In fact, I don't even know if the letter posted
involving unpaid rent is for the Rich Woods that has posted here, or
if it could be something completely unrelated.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 14 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 26-Jul-2004 09:18 GMT
In reply to Comment 4 (Sammy Nordström):
Ironicly enough, the clarification from the judge is putting them right back at square one.

Yes, Amiga, Inc. is compelled to provide what they agreed to provide. It took this long to force their cooperation.

No winner, everyone loose.

Really? I thought Genesi has an AmigaDE port on the way now and, no doubt, AmigaOS4 users will probably get it, too, since Amiga, Inc. (now KMOS) has been "persuaded" to create it.

-- gary_c
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 15 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jul-2004 10:32 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (gary_c):
Do they have to make the AmigaDE port within 30 days?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 16 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 26-Jul-2004 10:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 15 (Anonymous):
I have no idea. But at least KMOS apparently has the funds.

-- gary_c
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 17 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 10:57 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (gary_c):
When I said square one, I really meant square one. Read paragraph 5.1 of the agreement, it makes it perfectly clear that "Thendic" must provide Amiga Inc. with technical schematics and documentation for the hardware first. AFAIK, "Thendic" has not done this part and we will not see any version of the AmigaDE running on the Pegasos until they do.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 18 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 11:00 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Johan Rönnblom):
Don't worry, it's not like you will ever see me going through other people's trash or something. Besides, if that's what I really wanted, I would have picked a completely different target... :-P
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 19 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 26-Jul-2004 11:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 17 (Sammy Nordström):
and IIRC Garry said KMOS office location will be coming public soon... then Genesi has a (real) address to send peg2 + specs to. :-)
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 20 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 11:23 GMT
In reply to Comment 19 (priest):
They don't have to make any address public for Genesi's sake. Genesi's lawyers has the address to KMOS lawyers. That's all they need.

Genesi's earlier claims to not been able to deliver is complete and utter rubbish. If they would have wanted to send those documents to Amiga Inc., I'm quite certain those documents would have arrived just fine.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 21 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jul-2004 11:33 GMT
In reply to Comment 7 (Ronald St-Maurice):
>>What happened to Rich? Isn't this his kind of news?


He is homeless right now and has no internet access:

re:
http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2004-6/760347/woodseviction2.jpg
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 22 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jul-2004 11:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 20 (Sammy Nordström):
Who says AInc wouldn't have passed the schematics round like the contract/letter-of-intent with bplan which arrived in the hands of Ben Hermans at one point and was rewritten...
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 23 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 11:44 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Anonymous):
If Genesi would really want to send those documents to Amiga Inc. and make sure they get it, all they have to do is send it to their lawyers as a registered letter. That's how the court summoned them and it works prefectly every time.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 24 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 11:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 22 (Anonymous):
Furthermore, the contract is legally binding Amiga Inc. to not make use of the technical documents for any other purpose than what has been oulined in the contract. Genesi has once again the right to sue if they as much as suspect that Amiga Inc. would have violated these terms.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 25 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 11:55 GMT
In reply to Comment 21 (Anonymous):
As they say, what comes around goes around... :-P
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 26 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by priest on 26-Jul-2004 12:01 GMT
In reply to Comment 23 (Sammy Nordström):
"If Genesi would really want to send those documents to Amiga Inc. and make sure they get it, all they have to do is send it to their lawyers as a registered letter."

Hmmm... I wonder what is the roundtrip delay in such a message passing system. I bet more than 4u seconds. :)

People being too bold caused a perverted sandbox design with lawyer assisted DMA, and of course CRC check is used as well. :)

(ok, ok, I'm too bored again...)
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 27 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 26-Jul-2004 12:12 GMT
In reply to Comment 26 (priest):
A better comparison is probably "https://" vs "http://", ie each method has it's advantages depending on the given situation.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 28 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Ketzer on 26-Jul-2004 12:49 GMT
In reply to Comment 14 (gary_c):
> Really? I thought Genesi has an AmigaDE port on the way now and, no doubt, AmigaOS4 users will probably get it, too, since Amiga, Inc. (now KMOS) has been "persuaded" to create it.
> -- gary_c

1) First Genesi would have to get in contact with Amiga Inc./KMOS (which they didnt).
2) Then they would have to provide the needed hardware (several pegasos I, not 2).
3) Then Tao would have to provide the Intent port (to pegasos linux for example).
4) Then Amiga Inc. would have an undetermined timeframe to actually do the port of AmigaDE (which should be no work at all as thats the goal of Intent).

As Genesi have never did 2) before, and after the ruling didnt do 1) either, and ofcourse arent even interested in AmigaDE at all as they brought this law suite for a different purpose ... I agree though that AmigaOS will probably see a DE port.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 29 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jul-2004 13:09 GMT
Law suits of mass destraction ;)

To me this whole legal bollocks was nothing more than a way to try and milk money dry and keep people away from the real issues.

I mean, as said, as if they really cared about DE. What's DE anyhow? Not much that is all that viable right now. And surely there are more important development/support issues than worrying about some partially completed VM/OE
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 30 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 26-Jul-2004 13:52 GMT
Clause 5.1 of the contract only refers to "schematics" which are
"reasonably necessary, in Thendic's discretion, for Amiga to integrate
the Licensed Software into Thendic's products." Thus, there's no need
to provide anything beyond the OpenFirmware specs, as it is not
necessary.

Also, as the clause clearly says: "However, Amiga is, and at all
times shall remain, responsible for integrating its DE Operating
System, which may include, but is not limited to, a Java enabled
browser, MP3, and a mail client, into any of Thendic's products."

So, Genesi can clearly request a port to the Pegasos 2, no problem. As
for the alleged failure of Genesi to provide this information until
now, well, that's of course debatable. But it seems that to pursue
this further, Genesi need to provide undisputable proof that they have
taken the steps necessary. Perhaps it would have been a good idea to
deliver the information and request to Garry Hare personally at
AmiWest. Seems like a missed opportunity, really.


KMOS/AInc's problem, which I'm not really sure if Genesi intend to
pursue further, is of course that this won't provide Genesi with an
"operating system". And that's what the contract expressly specifies,
and also what the judge refers to now. So even if KMOS/AInc would
deliver AmigaDE, it seems there's still room for Genesi to complain
further when what they are delivered turns out not to be any operating
system at all.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 31 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by MIKE on 26-Jul-2004 14:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 13 (Johan Rönnblom):
The First name Richard, and the last name Woods are common names, probably thousands in the US alone.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 32 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Elwood on 26-Jul-2004 14:41 GMT
Could you tell us what "The court has finally responed to Amiga Inc.'s motion for relief from judgement; the motion is DENIED" means ?
Who won ? AI or Genesi ?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 33 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 26-Jul-2004 14:42 GMT
In reply to Comment 3 (Golem):
Häh ??????

What has OOorg to do with this ? And why should a law-suit not happening help get it ported ?

OO never happened because there were faaaaaaar to little people interested AND capable to help in the porting-effort.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 34 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by hooligan/dcs on 26-Jul-2004 15:34 GMT
In reply to Comment 33 (Kronos):
I think he was being sarcastic.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 35 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Darth_X on 26-Jul-2004 16:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 18 (Sammy Nordström):
> Don't worry, it's not like you will ever see me going through other people's trash or something. Besides, if that's what I really wanted, I would have picked a completely different target... :-P

Who? ;)
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 36 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Nate Downes on 26-Jul-2004 17:47 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Elwood):
Genesi, which ironically means that now AInc/KMOS now gets money per each pegasos sold.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 37 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Kronos on 26-Jul-2004 18:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Elwood):
>Who won ? AI or Genesi ?

The lawyers, as allways .....


..... asuming they got paid that is .....
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 38 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 26-Jul-2004 23:58 GMT
In reply to Comment 37 (Kronos):
Oh, THEY got paid, don't ever doubt that. Lawyers never lose out, even if they have to force you into bankruptcy they WILL get their fees.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 39 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-Jul-2004 06:24 GMT
Who cares anymore about genesi?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 40 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 27-Jul-2004 08:52 GMT
In reply to Comment 39 (Anonymous):
That's right. The laugh focus is definitely moving west. I really do hope Bill & Fleecy think KMOS is keeping them on the payroll because they were doing things right. I can't wait to see the "on schedule and rockin'" duo powered by that new self-confidence.

-- gary_c
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 41 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 27-Jul-2004 09:53 GMT
In reply to Comment 30 (Johan Rönnblom):
Sigh... More "neutral information" from our own "Ami-Sverker"...

>Clause 5.1 of the contract only refers to "schematics" which are
>"reasonably necessary, in Thendic's discretion, for Amiga to integrate
>the Licensed Software into Thendic's products."

This I agree with, but then you continue...

>Thus, there's no need
>to provide anything beyond the OpenFirmware specs, as it is not
>necessary.

What in god's name got you to this conclusion? You think that all you need for writing hardware drivers for a specific hardware device is a specification of the firmware? You think that firmware specifications classifies as "hardware schematics"? Oh my...

>Also, as the clause clearly says: "However, Amiga is, and at all
>times shall remain, responsible for integrating its DE Operating
>System, which may include, but is not limited to, a Java enabled
>browser, MP3, and a mail client, into any of Thendic's products."

Yes, but there is a specific clause in the agreement, which is just as enforceable, that specifies the conditions that "Thendic" must comply with when requesting support for a new device that is not on the list of supported devices.

>So, Genesi can clearly request a port to the Pegasos 2, no problem. As
>for the alleged failure of Genesi to provide this information until
>now, well, that's of course debatable. But it seems that to pursue
>this further, Genesi need to provide undisputable proof that they have
>taken the steps necessary. Perhaps it would have been a good idea to
>deliver the information and request to Garry Hare personally at
>AmiWest. Seems like a missed opportunity, really.

Again, a registered letter should do the job just fine.

>KMOS/AInc's problem, which I'm not really sure if Genesi intend to
>pursue further, is of course that this won't provide Genesi with an
>"operating system". And that's what the contract expressly specifies,
>and also what the judge refers to now. So even if KMOS/AInc would
>deliver AmigaDE, it seems there's still room for Genesi to complain
>further when what they are delivered turns out not to be any operating
>system at all.

The contract specified the AmigaDE as an operating system. Wether it from a technical standpoint actually is an operating system on it's own or not is irrelevant. "Thendic" agreed to the terminology used in the agreement when they signed it.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 42 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Anonymous on 27-Jul-2004 10:21 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Nate Downes):
>Genesi, which ironically means that now AInc/KMOS now gets money per each pegasos sold.

???
Do I also get money per each pegasos sold? :)
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 43 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 27-Jul-2004 10:25 GMT
In reply to Comment 32 (Elwood):
It means that Amiga Inc.'s motion for relief from judgement did not pass and that the judgement granting "Thendic" specific permormance against Amiga Inc. stands. However, it's also important to note that the judge clarified the specific performance granted to "Thendic" as described in paragraph 5.1 of the agreement, which means that they gained nothing more than what is already included in the agreement. The sum of it all is basicly that noone but the lawyers actually gained something out of this whole mess.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 44 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 27-Jul-2004 12:07 GMT
In reply to Comment 43 (Sammy Nordström):
However, it's also important to note that the judge clarified the specific performance granted to "Thendic" as described in paragraph 5.1 of the agreement, which means that they gained nothing more than what is already included in the agreement.

But that is what Genesi (or "Thendic" as the original contract states) initially wanted; they were only denied the expanded interpretation of AmigaDE as an operating system. Can we agree that Genesi gained the AmigaDE port for the Pegasos, and Amiga, Inc. gained a paying customer for AmigaDE?

The sum of it all is basicly that noone but the lawyers actually gained something out of this whole mess.

I still don't know how you can conclude that. What Genesi gained was Amiga, Inc.'s compliance with the original agreement. True, nothing more than that, but the original goal in itself is something, isn't it? Or is AmigaDE really worthless?

-- gary_c
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 45 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 27-Jul-2004 12:50 GMT
In reply to Comment 44 (gary_c):
>>However, it's also important to note that the judge clarified the specific
>>performance granted to "Thendic" as described in paragraph 5.1 of the
>>agreement, which means that they gained nothing more than what is already
>>included in the agreement.
>
>But that is what Genesi (or "Thendic" as the original contract states)
>initially wanted; they were only denied the expanded interpretation of AmigaDE
>as an operating system.

Nice try, Gary. However, you know just as well as I do that Genesi didn't go to court just because they wanted a port of the AmigaDE for the Pegasos. BBRV made it *perfectly* clear that their true intentions was to "shut Bill McEwan up" and because they wanted to gain control of the Amiga brand as well as the AmigaOS product line.

You can read more about what they had in mind here:
http://flyingmice.com/cgi-bin/squidcgi/mbmessage.pl/amiga/98063.shtml

>Can we agree that Genesi gained the AmigaDE port for
>the Pegasos, and Amiga, Inc. gained a paying customer for AmigaDE?

No. Read paragraph 5.1 of the original agreement again. There are still a few conditions that "Thendic" must comply with before they will have an integration of the AmigaDE into the Pegasos, like providing Amiga Inc. with the means neccessary, such as the hardware device and it's technical documentation, for example.

>>The sum of it all is basicly that noone but the lawyers actually gained >>something out of this whole mess.
>
>I still don't know how you can conclude that. What Genesi gained was Amiga,
>Inc.'s compliance with the original agreement.

No. They were granted specific performance as described in paragraph 5.1 of the agreement, nothing else.

>True, nothing more than that,
>but the original goal in itself is something, isn't it? Or is AmigaDE really
>worthless?

The license is worthless for as long as they don't comply with the terms themselves.
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 46 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by gary_c on 28-Jul-2004 01:17 GMT
In reply to Comment 45 (Sammy Nordström):
>>However, it's also important to note that the judge clarified the specific
>>performance granted to "Thendic" as described in paragraph 5.1 of the
>>agreement, which means that they gained nothing more than what is already
>>included in the agreement.
>
>But that is what Genesi (or "Thendic" as the original contract states)
>initially wanted; they were only denied the expanded interpretation of AmigaDE
>as an operating system.

Nice try, Gary. However, you know just as well as I do that Genesi didn't go to court just because they wanted a port of the AmigaDE for the Pegasos. BBRV made it *perfectly* clear that their true intentions was to "shut Bill McEwan up" and because they wanted to gain control of the Amiga brand as well as the AmigaOS product line.


Well, BBRV said various things at different times about the purpose of the suit, but that's all irrelevant to this discussion. My point was simply that Genesi gained something by the suit, not that it gained everything that it ever wanted.

>Can we agree that Genesi gained the AmigaDE port for
>the Pegasos, and Amiga, Inc. gained a paying customer for AmigaDE?

No. Read paragraph 5.1 of the original agreement again. There are still a few conditions that "Thendic" must comply with before they will have an integration of the AmigaDE into the Pegasos, like providing Amiga Inc. with the means neccessary, such as the hardware device and it's technical documentation, for example.


Fine, that only indicates the steps Genesi must take on its side; if Genesi wants the AmigaDE port, it will meet these conditions. I could have said "Genesi has gained the AmigaDE port for the Pegasos if it provides what is specified by the original contract agreement." I didn't realize it was necessary to be so pedantic.

>>The sum of it all is basicly that noone but the lawyers actually gained >>something out of this whole mess.
>
>I still don't know how you can conclude that. What Genesi gained was Amiga,
>Inc.'s compliance with the original agreement.

No. They were granted specific performance as described in paragraph 5.1 of the agreement, nothing else.


Phrase it how you wish. Genesi can now meet the conditions on its side at its discretion, and Amiga is required by law to comply with the agreement. That's a materially different situation from what existed prior to the lawsuit.

>True, nothing more than that,
>but the original goal in itself is something, isn't it? Or is AmigaDE really
>worthless?

The license is worthless for as long as they don't comply with the terms themselves.


That's a truism. Anything is useless if you don't use it, or take the necessary steps for using it. Garry Hare's AmiWest talk revealed that big improvements are coming for AmigaDE. If this is true, Genesi may be more motivated to spend time on this, whereas AmigaDE earlier was thought by most people to be of rather dubious value. I suppose we'll see soon enough if there is more to the KMOS plan than just talk and, if so, if Genesi will consider the port important enough to bother with.

-- gary_c
-- gary_c
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 47 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Sammy Nordström on 28-Jul-2004 06:09 GMT
>Genesi can now meet the conditions on its side at its discretion, and Amiga is
>required by law to comply with the agreement. That's a materially different
>situation from what existed prior to the lawsuit.

No. "Thendic" could meet the conditions on its side at its discretion and Amiga Inc. was required by law to comply with the agreement already before the lawsuit. The specific permormance granted to Genesi is basicly nothing more than a confirmation of the license as valid and enforcable, but that's never what this lawsuit was about. If you really insist on arguing that Genesi actually gained something, then I could agree in the sense that Genesi has been declared as a valid licensee and that the Pegasos has been declared valid as a licensable product. But then, Amiga Inc. still haven't had the opportunity to deny Genesi and the Pegasos a license. So, what exactly did they achieve?
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 48 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Olegil on 28-Jul-2004 06:10 GMT
In reply to Comment 46 (gary_c):
Well, one thing that needs to be improved in DE is to actually release the player for something other than pocketpc, Windows and Linux-i386-ancient-edition

Expecting to see a market magically popping up if people can try it out seems a tad optimistic to me :-(
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 49 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Alfred Schwarz on 28-Jul-2004 06:37 GMT
In reply to Comment 36 (Nate Downes):
I think the funny thing is:
Genesi does not want to pay AInc/KMos money to get OS4 on the Peg, but they went to court to be allowed to pay money for AmigaDE on the Peg ;-)

Ciao, Alfred
Motion for Relief from Judgement: DENIED : Comment 50 of 52ANN.lu
Posted by Johan Rönnblom on 28-Jul-2004 08:01 GMT
Sammy, you have a short memory. Read those files you have on your site
again. In those, McEwen clearly states that there is *no* intent
whatsoever to comply with the contract and that AInc don't consider
themselves forced to do so, for various reasons.

Now it's clear that:

- Unlike what McEwen stated under oath, and many others repeated
everywhere, KMOS/AInc *must* comply with this license.

- Unlike what many people claimed here and elsewhere, Genesi *do* have
the right to use the Amiga Operating System trademark, for example on
their webpage. And they have had this right for as long as the
contract has existed.
Anonymous, there are 52 items in your selection [1 - 50] [51 - 52]
Back to Top