AmigaOS 3.1.4 withdrawn from market after Amiga - Page 36

grond · 06 February 2019, 12:48

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minuous

It's no secret that the work on OS3.1.4 was done on a voluntary basis, that doesn't mean there was any fraudulent behaviour involved.

It doesn't mean either that Hyperion is to credit for the improvement of OS3 which was the starting point of this little sub-discussion.

enigma776 · 06 February 2019, 13:01

Quote:

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

@Gorf

Can you try www.ppaint.com and tell me if the Personal Paint website is working for you now?

Many thanks for your feedback!

Yup all running fine now.

amigakit.com · 06 February 2019, 13:15

Quote:

Originally Posted by enigma776

Yup all running fine now.

That's great news. DNS changes may take a while to propagate around the world since we moved PPaint servers.

Gorf · 06 February 2019, 13:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

@Gorf

Can you try www.ppaint.com and tell me if the Personal Paint website is working for you now?

Many thanks for your feedback!

It is working again!
Thanks for the prompt reaction and fixing!

Gorf · 06 February 2019, 13:31

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minuous

It's no secret that the work on OS3.1.4 was done on a voluntary basis, that doesn't mean there was any fraudulent behaviour involved.

Probably not in this particular case.
But even here: claiming to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars with 3.1.4 while getting the work done on a voluntary basis leaves a bad after taste ... at least for me.

amigakit.com · 06 February 2019, 13:32

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorf

It is working again!
Thanks for the prompt reaction and fixing!

You are most welcome

I appreciate you pointing it out.

Mr.Flibble · 06 February 2019, 18:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorf

Probably not in this particular case.
But even here: claiming to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars with 3.1.4 while getting the work done on a voluntary basis leaves a bad after taste ... at least for me.

That and there's a history of shady actions when you read through the legal documents, including through the OS4.x development period.

There was also chatter about stealing of code from developers through bogus NDA agreements, but I've not read much into it so far.

malko · 06 February 2019, 19:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by utri007

[...]Sarkastic way to say that you are just one of bullshitters.

No, not sarcastic at all andI leave you the kinship of this (even it it made me laugh

) .

Quote:

Originally Posted by utri007

Not sure, but it is most likely - > What makes you certified to say something like that? What have you done, when youo got nothing to little back? What is you personal experience with Hyperion?
[...]

It's well rephrased.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minuous

It's no secret that the work on OS3.1.4 was done on a voluntary basis, that doesn't mean there was any fraudulent behaviour involved.

+1

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gorf

Probably not in this particular case.
But even here: claiming to earn hundreds of thousands of dollars with 3.1.4 while getting the work done on a voluntary basis leaves a bad after taste ... at least for me.

Hyperion's assertion could be verified if the documents are going to be made available. Must admit I am a little bit curious about such statement.

SpeedGeek · 06 February 2019, 19:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Minuous

It's no secret that the work on OS3.1.4 was done on a voluntary basis, that doesn't mean there was any fraudulent behaviour involved.

The fraudulent behavior is not related to the developer's work on OS 3.1.4.
Rather, it's the claims made by Hyperion:

Finally, Hyperion’s claim that if a Preliminary Injunction were issued “Hyperion would conservatively lose sales of between $240,000 - $360,000 USD annually” is sheer fantasy, completely unsupported by any facts.

gulliver · 06 February 2019, 19:29

This is just part of the show, and litigations are like that:

Hyperion claims huge potential losses of revenue, and Cloanto said they had nothing to do with trying to get 3.1.4 sales out of the market.

Just pick your favorite pop corn and watch them.

It will be sad to see how will they both justify either selling aprons or physical roms and floppies in a court room.

Now, the winner takes all.

spudje · 06 February 2019, 20:57

Other fraudulent behaviour is, depending on how you interpret the original settlement, Hyperion had no rights whatsoever to further develop AOS 3.x. Only for using the source to develop NG AOS4+

duga · 06 February 2019, 21:16

Quote:

Originally Posted by amigakit.com

@Gorf

Can you try www.ppaint.com and tell me if the Personal Paint website is working for you now?

Many thanks for your feedback!

Required Hardware:
? Amiga 500, 500+, 1500, 2000, 3000, 4000, 4000T

Recommended Hardware:
? AGA capable Amiga computer: 1200 or 4000

It doesn't work on Amiga 600?

indigolemon · 06 February 2019, 21:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by duga

It doesn't work on Amiga 600?

Nope, blacklisted as the programmers must have had a bad Christmas with one, all their mates got 1200's

And whatever you do, don't ask about the CD32

Mr.Flibble · 06 February 2019, 21:46

Quote:

Originally Posted by spudje

Other fraudulent behaviour is, depending on how you interpret the original settlement, Hyperion had no rights whatsoever to further develop AOS 3.x. Only for using the source to develop NG AOS4+

Including registering trademarks they had no rights to.

malko · 06 February 2019, 22:12

Quote:

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

[...] Last but not least: I am really tired of this "Hyperion has no licence" discussion. Go into the settlement agreement, check what it says, and note that "AmigaOs 4" is defined as "The operating system developed by Hyperion, irrespectively its version number". Hence, as far as the legal issues are concerned, "Os 3.1.4" is "Amiga Os 4". That Cloanto makes a big rumble about it is quite natural - their sales are going down, and it is part of the "dirty play" that is going on in the market - actually from both sides. [...]

If the guy having given his time and knowledge to improve the OS says it, some people (follow my eyes

) should stop repeating the opposite.

Quote:

Originally Posted by gulliver

This is just part of the show, [...]
Just pick your favorite pop corn and watch them. [...]

yep.

Gorf · 06 February 2019, 22:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by malko

If the guy having given his time and knowledge to improve the OS says it, some people (follow my eyes

) should stop repeating the opposite.

I did not know that good coding skills do make one a legal expert.
Is the opposite also true? Are lawyers also automatically good coders?
If so, why does Hyperion outsource all real work?

What are you trying to say? Argument by authority? Should we ask the pope?

gulliver · 07 February 2019, 03:17

Both sides are throwing wild arguments against each other to see if something sticks.

Reality is harsh IMHO:

It will be difficult for Hyperion to justify some trademark uses. And the use of AmigaOS 1.3 is a stretch which remains to be seen if it will tolerated in court.

On the other hand, it will be difficult for Cloanto to justify how physical kickstart roms and floppies relate to the amiga forever emulation. And their 3.x development line is certainly not valid under the settlement agreement and the exclusivity it granted.

Everything else is smoke and mirrors.

They should have both stayed in their respective corners doing their own thing: Cloanto selling amiga retro emulation products up to 3.1, and Hyperion selling AmigaOS 3.1 sucesors.

And even then they could have cooperated both to increment their earnings: Hyperion could for example come to a monetary agreement to submit their discontinued products to Cloanto, which could in turn include them in their retro emulation amiga products to increase their customer appeal and sales. An example of this could be AmigaOS 4.0, that is now discontinued by Hyperion and has aparently lost its commercial venue.

Both will certainly earn money this way. It could have been a productive partnership...

But then they just fight against each other.

kolla · 07 February 2019, 07:17

Wasn't the problem with 3.X that it was _not_ development, but rather "brewed" from already existing patches and updates, very much something anyone can do.

gulliver · 07 February 2019, 11:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by kolla

Wasn't the problem with 3.X that it was _not_ development, but rather "brewed" from already existing patches and updates, very much something anyone can do.

You can of course patch your own OS the way you like it. No one can stop you from doing that, and that is not illegal (well, it might be under some draconian law in some countries). But the point is, that what you personally do in your own home as a private individual is your own matter (unless you want to make it public).

The issue is that 3.x contains code that delivers functionality which was not in 3.1. And that it was sold with that added functionality explicitly.

Note that some of its applied patches are not public. Not that it matters to the end result. What matters is that the product 3.x was sold and marketed with that added functionality (development) already included.

kolla · 07 February 2019, 11:58

Which patches were/are not public?
But yes, it's rather beside the point, Cloanto had license to sell original 3.1 and authors of patches allowed Cloanto to use them. Most of all, the 3.X kickstarts are an offer to licensed custom ROMs.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[Withdrawn] FS Blizzard 1230 50 MHz 32 MB RAM	Amiga030	MarketPlace	1	06 September 2016 08:50
Is E3B done in the Amiga market?	source	Hardware mods	3	16 February 2015 18:59
The AMIGA Market value and your collection values	Gordon	Amiga scene	12	11 September 2009 17:25
Sky News: 3.5" floppies to be withdrawn from shelves	Dastardly	News	11	01 February 2007 12:26
Market Place or Amiga Stuff for Free?	martin-flash	MarketPlace	2	02 November 2005 17:14

06 February 2019, 19:29	#710
gulliver BoingBagged Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The South of nowhere Age: 46 Posts: 2,358	This is just part of the show, and litigations are like that: Hyperion claims huge potential losses of revenue, and Cloanto said they had nothing to do with trying to get 3.1.4 sales out of the market. Just pick your favorite pop corn and watch them. It will be sad to see how will they both justify either selling aprons or physical roms and floppies in a court room. Now, the winner takes all.

06 February 2019, 20:57	#711
spudje Registered User Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Netherlands Posts: 1,406	Other fraudulent behaviour is, depending on how you interpret the original settlement, Hyperion had no rights whatsoever to further develop AOS 3.x. Only for using the source to develop NG AOS4+

07 February 2019, 03:17	#717
gulliver BoingBagged Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: The South of nowhere Age: 46 Posts: 2,358	Both sides are throwing wild arguments against each other to see if something sticks. Reality is harsh IMHO: It will be difficult for Hyperion to justify some trademark uses. And the use of AmigaOS 1.3 is a stretch which remains to be seen if it will tolerated in court. On the other hand, it will be difficult for Cloanto to justify how physical kickstart roms and floppies relate to the amiga forever emulation. And their 3.x development line is certainly not valid under the settlement agreement and the exclusivity it granted. Everything else is smoke and mirrors. They should have both stayed in their respective corners doing their own thing: Cloanto selling amiga retro emulation products up to 3.1, and Hyperion selling AmigaOS 3.1 sucesors. And even then they could have cooperated both to increment their earnings: Hyperion could for example come to a monetary agreement to submit their discontinued products to Cloanto, which could in turn include them in their retro emulation amiga products to increase their customer appeal and sales. An example of this could be AmigaOS 4.0, that is now discontinued by Hyperion and has aparently lost its commercial venue. Both will certainly earn money this way. It could have been a productive partnership... But then they just fight against each other.

07 February 2019, 07:17	#718
kolla Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Trondheim, Norway Posts: 1,893	Wasn't the problem with 3.X that it was _not_ development, but rather "brewed" from already existing patches and updates, very much something anyone can do.

07 February 2019, 11:58	#720
kolla Banned Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: Trondheim, Norway Posts: 1,893	Which patches were/are not public? But yes, it's rather beside the point, Cloanto had license to sell original 3.1 and authors of patches allowed Cloanto to use them. Most of all, the 3.X kickstarts are an offer to licensed custom ROMs.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)