What's the status of the Cloanto / Hyperion lawsuit?

[Debvgger]

Are there any news regarding the legal battle between Cloanto and Hyperion? I can't seem to be able to find anything regarding that. So much time has passed. Does anyone know anything?

[tygre]

Hi Debvgger!

It's still "in progress", if that can be called "progress"

https://amigaworld.net/modules/newbb...=25979&forum=2

Take care!

[QuikSanz]

Hyperion Press release on http://www.hyperion-entertainment.com/

[Magic]

Soooo - what does that mean to end Amiga users?

[grelbfarlk]

We get more Amigas.

[TCD]

Originally Posted by Magic

Soooo - what does that mean to end Amiga users?

Pretty much nothing. But it might mean more development for OS 3 & 4.

[klx300r]

Originally Posted by TCD

Pretty much nothing. But it might mean more development for OS 3 & 4.

IF the lawsuits are FINALLY over then it’s about time both parties start working together for the sake of the community and move forward with rather than wasting time and money on lawyers

[TCD]

Originally Posted by klx300r

IF the lawsuits are FINALLY over then it’s about time both parties start working together for the sake of the community and move forward with rather than wasting time and money on lawyers

That's a very optimistic point of view, but it would be of course the best solution More realistically they just stop wasting time and money in court.

[jbenam]

It means that nothing has been decided yet - it was all legal shenanigans done by Ben Hermans to waste Cloanto’s money and hope that they desist.

Full explanation here: http://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2023-04-00011-EN.html

tl;dr: Hyperion didn’t win anything but Ben Hermans wants to pass this as a huge win for them. He added more plaintiffs just to prolong this lawsuit as long as possible while also obtaining the benefit of blocking the real lawsuit - which is frozen until this one is resolved. Real scummy behaviour on his part but I don’t expect anything less from him by now.

Only advice I can give right now is to not purchase any of the new AmigaOS (3.1.4, 3.2.x, 4.x) since nothing of your purchase reaches the real developers and it only gives Ben Hermans more fuel for this frivolous lawsuit.

Hyperion just hopes that Cloanto/Mike will lose enough money and time on this and will drop the lawsuit, making him the only (unlawful) owner of AmigaOS.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by jbenam

It means that nothing has been decided yet - it was all legal shenanigans done by Ben Hermans to waste Cloanto’s money and hope that they desist.

Err, wait. It was Cloanto that filed the lawsuite, not Hyperion. So please get your facts straight.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Full explanation here: http://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2023-04-00011-EN.html

"Amiga-news" has unfortunately a certain byas in the matter. You should probably read the original judgement.

Originally Posted by jbenam

tl;dr: Hyperion didn’t win anything but Ben Hermans wants to pass this as a huge win for them.

Hyperion did win this judgement, and unlike what you know, C-A (just another company under Michele's control) filed the second, not Hyperion. So, with all the necessary respect, please state facts correctly.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Only advice I can give right now is to not purchase any of the new AmigaOS (3.1.4, 3.2.x, 4.x) since nothing of your purchase reaches the real developers and it only gives Ben Hermans more fuel for this frivolous lawsuit.

And, in return, you should probably also say that you should not buy AmigaForever either, because that just spills more money in Michele's company.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Hyperion just hopes that Cloanto/Mike will lose enough money and time on this and will drop the lawsuit, making him the only (unlawful) owner of AmigaOS.

Whether that is unlawful or not is exactly the question. Actually, Hyperion does not even claim to be the "owner", and that was exactly the reason why the initial first release of 3.1.4 was withdrawn. Hyperion holds a development license.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

"Amiga-news" has unfortunately a certain byas in the matter. You should probably read the original judgement.

The news article links to the judgement. I have read the original judgement and find the news article correct. The most relevant parts seem to be page 4, lines 21 through 25 (no summary judgement), page 6, lines 9 through 19 (no right to sue), page 7, line 28, through page 8, line 3 (no right to sue), page 9, lines 1 thourgh 5 (Cloanto not owner of trademarks but CA Acquisition Corp.), page 9, lines 28, through page 19, line 3 (no right to sue), page 10, lines 19 through 21 (Hyperion has withdrawn opposition).

[Seiya]

Hyperion 3.2 that run also in emulation, for Cloanto not more sell Amigaforever and not more sell old kickstart and workbennch.
The best solution is to free kickstart and workbench to community

The alternative is: goodbay Amigaforever and Cloanto

[Thomas Richter]

The best outcome would be if these parties would simply stick their heads together and sell jointly, sharing IP. But that's just a pipe dream, I afraid.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by grond

The news article links to the judgement. I have read the original judgement and find the news article correct. The most relevant parts seem to be page 4, lines 21 through 25 (no summary judgement), page 6, lines 9 through 19 (no right to sue), page 7, line 28, through page 8, line 3 (no right to sue), page 9, lines 1 thourgh 5 (Cloanto not owner of trademarks but CA Acquisition Corp.), page 9, lines 28, through page 19, line 3 (no right to sue), page 10, lines 19 through 21 (Hyperion has withdrawn opposition).

Yes, thanks, I have read it. The short summary is that Cloanto did great to shoot themselves into the foot by first sueing, and then passing over to C-A.

That is then, sigh, just another court action.


What a useless waste of money and time.

[jbenam]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Err, wait. It was Cloanto that filed the lawsuite, not Hyperion. So please get your facts straight.

Yes, but Ben Hermans added more plaintiffs to it as a stall tactic. Reference: "The lawsuit was later merged with another one inititated by Hyperion, which also added Amino, Itec and Amiga Inc. as additional parties".

The second one, made by Hyperion, clearly was only done to muddle things and halt the subsequent (real) lawsuit by C-A Acquisition Corp, fully knowing that it would be merged with the other one. Ben Hermans is (was? IIRC he was disbarred?) a lawyer and it shows in his techniques.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

"Amiga-news" has unfortunately a certain byas in the matter. You should probably read the original judgement.

I have read it and it seems to summarize it pretty well. They also don't seem biased to me - Hyperion is clearly in the wrong here.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Hyperion did win this judgement, and unlike what you know, C-A (just another company under Michele's control) filed the second, not Hyperion. So, with all the necessary respect, please state facts correctly.

This judgement doesn't really change anything, and as such even if they have "won" it (and that's debatable as well) it's pretty much just a judge that is fed with Hyperion's BS and just wanted to move on with the real lawsuit. Obviously Ben Hermans needs to pass this as a great victory in order to discourage Mike in following through with the other lawsuit - where it's very likely that they will lose on all counts.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

And, in return, you should probably also say that you should not buy AmigaForever either, because that just spills more money in Michele's company.

Well, Cloanto's is Amiga's rightful owner right now, so I don't see any reason to boycott them yet - if they renege on their promise of making AmigaOS and Kickstarts open-source (or at least free) you will see me saying the same about them as I currently do with Hyperion.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Whether that is unlawful or not is exactly the question. Actually, Hyperion does not even claim to be the "owner", and that was exactly the reason why the initial first release of 3.1.4 was withdrawn. Hyperion holds a development license.

Hyperion has changed every copyright notice in AmigaOS and Kickstarts to say "(c) Hyperion Entertainment CVBA. Developed under license" and NOT "(c) Amiga Corp. Developed by Hyperion Entertainment CVBA under license". Law is very specific when it comes to wording and such a simple "omission" like that completely changes what it means in a court of law.

They are unlawfully trying to pass something as theirs when it isn't.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

The best outcome would be if these parties would simply stick their heads together and sell jointly, sharing IP. But that's just a pipe dream, I afraid.

Honestly Hyperion has no legal standing at all in this - that's why they are trying to bleed Cloanto out of money and time. I don't see why Cloanto should give part of their lawfully-earned money to a sleazebag.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

Yes, thanks, I have read it. The short summary is that Cloanto did great to shoot themselves into the foot by first sueing, and then passing over to C-A.

That is then, sigh, just another court action.


What a useless waste of money and time.

Yes, that was a rookie mistake on Cloanto's part - one Ben Herman's immediately took advantage of.

[grond]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

The short summary is that Cloanto did great to shoot themselves into the foot by first sueing, and then passing over to C-A.

Yes, but the summary shouldn't be so short as to be silent about the fact that Hyperion didn't really win anything either as Ben Hermans claimed. As was explained in the Amiga News article, the decision on the core aspects of the fight has been postponed (roughly speaking).

[TCD]

This whole mess surely makes me so happy that the Amiga never 'died' and that loving caring companies who only have the best interests in mind continue to support it. /s

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by jbenam

Yes, but Ben Hermans added more plaintiffs to it as a stall tactic. Reference: "The lawsuit was later merged with another one inititated by Hyperion, which also added Amino, Itec and Amiga Inc. as additional parties".

But you did get the point that Cloanto is the plaintiff, right?

Originally Posted by jbenam

This judgement doesn't really change anything, and as such even if they have "won" it (and that's debatable as well) it's pretty much just a judge that is fed with Hyperion's BS and just wanted to move on with the real lawsuit.

But you did get the point that Cloanto is the plaintiff, right? So it is "Cloanto's "BS"" the court is kept busy with.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Obviously Ben Hermans needs to pass this as a great victory in order to discourage Mike in following through with the other lawsuit - where it's very likely that they will lose on all counts.

I would rather keep this to the judge. If you read the ruling, you would find that the judge also considers it "not amusing" that this action is again brought to court despite the settlement agreement, so I don't think I quite agree with your "judgement" on what the judge may think. We will find out later.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Well, Cloanto's is Amiga's rightful owner right now, so I don't see any reason to boycott them yet

But that's not the point. The point is not "who is the owner", but "who has an exclusive development license", and that is Hyperion.


As I said before, maybe Cloanto is the owner, but that doesn't help them as the exclusive development rights have been passed over, so they cannot do much with what they own, at least they cannot advance AmigaOs. They cannot develop - thus, more or less a body without arms and legs.


As said before, if you read carefully what the AmigaOs "About" box says is that it was "developped under license of Hyperion", not that they own it.

Originally Posted by jbenam

They are unlawfully trying to pass something as theirs when it isn't.

I don't think they say it's "their's", but "developed under their license", which is an exclusive right that goes back to the settlement agreement.

Originally Posted by jbenam

Honestly Hyperion has no legal standing at all in this - that's why they are trying to bleed Cloanto out of money and time.

But you do get the point that Cloanto is the plaintiff, right? So you accuse Hyperion that they had the guts for getting sued by Cloanto? Like, "You hit my first with your stomache"? Is that what you are saying? That's a rather strange way of looking at it, really.

Originally Posted by jbenam

I don't see why Cloanto should give part of their lawfully-earned money to a sleazebag.

"Earned" by exactly what? By bringing this nonsense to court? I do not have a problem with Cloanto selling their AmigaForever, really, but I do not really see anything that "earns" them AmigaOs.


But anyhow, that's not on what the court has to decide upon. What the court has to decide is whether or not Hyperion had the rights to develop.

[jbenam]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

But you did get the point that Cloanto is the plaintiff, right?

But you did get the point that Cloanto is the plaintiff, right? So it is "Cloanto's "BS"" the court is kept busy with.

You missed the part in my post where I explained that this lawsuit was merged with another (frivolous) one with Hyperion. Many of the points you took issue with were added by Hyperion and then merged. Again, as a stall tactic.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

But that's not the point. The point is not "who is the owner", but "who has an exclusive development license", and that is Hyperion.

The point of these lawsuits is *exactly* to establish "who is the owner" and what they can do as such. Cloanto is saying that the agreement Hyperion is working on is not valid anymore since Hyperion tried to copyright (which is a fact!) almost everything Amiga-related and as such they tried to take over the brand.

This is the core of the *other* lawsuit. This one was dismissed since Cloanto doesn't own anything, but Amiga Corp. (previously C-A Acquisition Corp.) does. Still, it doesn't mean that anything that Cloanto has said until now was fake.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

As said before, if you read carefully what the AmigaOs "About" box says is that it was "developped under license of Hyperion", not that they own it.

See above.

Hyperion also tried to sell 3.1, that was never covered under the original agreement.

http://www.generationamiga.com/2018/...economic-area/

This is ground enough to cancel the entire agreement.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

"Earned" by exactly what? By bringing this nonsense to court? I do not have a problem with Cloanto selling their AmigaForever, really, but I do not really see anything that "earns" them AmigaOs.

They purchased the rights, so they own it: https://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2019-02-00009-EN.html

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

But anyhow, that's not on what the court has to decide upon. What the court has to decide is whether or not Hyperion had the rights to develop.

The matter is definitely more broad - it isn't just a question of "development rights" - Ben Hermans is clearly trying to take over the AmigaOS brand along with the development rights.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by jbenam

They purchased the rights, so they own it: https://amiga-news.de/en/news/AN-2019-02-00009-EN.html

Things are not quite that simple. They might have paid for something, but the development rights were handed over to Hyperion before, and that agreement continues, regardless of who owns the brand. That's as if you buy an appartment the previous owner has rented out to somebody else. The contract for the rent remains untouched, despite the change of the owner - or at least this is how it works in Germany. You cannot get the renter "out" just by passing the ownership to another party. Thus, if you buy such an appartment, you still cannot move in. You can collect the rent, yes, but that's as far as it goes.



Thus, what Cloanto bought wasn't probably not worth much - they cannot do a lot with what they accquired.