A new development in the Zeta legality issue: BeOSFrance says to have written confirmation from Jean-Louis Gassee that to JLG’s knowledge, YellowTAB did not have an agreement with Palmsource [French]. My French isn’t exactly what it should be (I should’ve paid more attention during high school), but with the help of Adam and others we managed to translate the most important bit: “The impropriety and absence of an agreement between yellowTAB and PalmSource (at the time, still the owner of the BeOS IP) had been confirmed to me in writing by the person best-placed to talk about it in those circumstances: Jean-Louis Gassee.”
So what happens now?
I’m guessing the safest thing to do is to stick with Haiku. I really don’t think there was any really transfer to Yellowtab of any rights, but maybe I’m wrong. I really, really liked BEOS. It’s as shame to see what has happened to it.
One thing I wonder though is if PalmSource or Access (or whoever) really cares. I can’t imagine Zeta is any threat to any of them. They might not really care, or maybe they could give the rights to them to use the Beos source for $20! Unless of course some of it wound up in the Palm code.
looks like we get ready for a barbecue. anyone for some roast bernd?
You reap what you sow.
I hope the full weight of the law is thrown at Bernd Korz.
What is the maximum jail term in Germany for selling stolen goods?
Is there a “mail fraud” law in Germany too?
“What is the maximum jail term in Germany for selling stolen goods?”
Selling stolen good, in german “Hehlerei”, may be punished by law with a maximum of 5 years imprisonment. Alternatively, a fine can be imposed.
See § 259 StGB: http://dejure.org/gesetze/StGB/259.html
Even the try is accusable (clause 3 op. cit.).
“Is there a “mail fraud” law in Germany too?”
Can you be more specific? Fraud seems to mean “Unterschlagung”, fraud of mail? This is two delicts in one: First the fraud itself (§ 246 StGB), second the breakup of the sanctity of the mail (maybe § 206 StGB).
(Note: StGB means “Strafgesetzbuch”: criminal code.)
Edited 2007-04-10 22:13
Fraud means Betrug in German, Unterschlagung is embezzlement.
I’m not sure if mail fraud is their biggest problem since they actually soled Zeta on a German Shopping network and since YellowTAB would have knowingly involved the network they might take some legal action against YellowTAB to potentially protect themselves.
Anyway, IANAL and don’t really care, but personally I believe that if YellowTAB did this people should stop supporting them since supporting companies with dubious morals is definitely sending the wrong signal.
“Fraud means Betrug in German, Unterschlagung is embezzlement.”
Thanks for correction. Mail fraud would then be something like “Postbetrug”. I’ve never heared of a legal definition fitting this construct. Maybe Scheckbetrug…?
Edited 2007-04-10 22:32
Well, I’ll give the short version.
It looks like Zeta is illegal, from all the information that has been gathered ( though this still has to be proven in court ).
Leszek mentioned that Bernd will not be releasing any statements this week. Instead the insolvency administrator of yT will give an official statement.
In other words, Bernd is saying the deals were made with yT and he is not responsible, but yT is instead ( yT is bankrupt, so lawsuit would do nothing to them ). And I’m guessing yT must have just ran itself to be solely responsible? And yT also negotiated the non-existent license agreements too?
#1 Magnussoft may never be allowed to sell Zeta ever again ( & got stuck paying development costs for 1.21 & 1.5 – took losses).
#2 Access claims Zeta is rightful theirs, but has to go to court to get it given to them. ( otherwise Bernd holds onto Zeta ).
#3 Bernd holds onto Zeta code and if no legal action against him, then he walks away “Scott Free” – gets to keep the small fortune he made off Zeta.
Access and Magnussoft are within their rights to take legal action against Bernd ( and/or yT ). Whether they will is another question altogether and will reveal itself in the coming months.
Access and Magnussoft are within their rights to take legal action against Bernd ( and/or yT ). Whether they will is another question altogether and will reveal itself in the coming months.
Depends on the amount of that “small fortune” you were referring to.
(quickly translated from french)
Worse, and it’s not secret anymore, when I had been trying to know, YellowTab answered that they will sue me if some informations were about to become public. The non property and the lack of agreement between YellowTab and PalmSource (at this time, the BEOS’s IP rights owner ) had been writtenly confirmed by the best person allowed to talk in these conditions : Jean louis Gassé.
This informations raises two questions :
1) how come they dared threatening someone about something they didn’t have the right to sell at the first place ?
2) why the Jean Louis Gassé’s letter has not been made public, at least now ?
Djamé
That’s impossible!!!
The FAQ “clearly” stated that YT has the source!!
Having the source and being legally entitled to use it are two different things!
Of course yT has the source, that is how they were able to make some changes to Zeta.
But, how did they get it? ( From Be, Palm or leaked on the Net? ).
And, just having the source does not mean they have the right to use it ( or to make & sell Zeta ) – requires proper license agreements. Which apparently do not exist.
The contract in question pre-dates the PalmSource buyout so PalmSource had nothing to do with the original agreement. And it was originally with Koch Media, not YellowTab. So hypothetically, Be’s end of the contract transfered to PalmSource then to Access, and Koch’s end transfered to Yt.
If PalmSource knows nothing about the distribution contract, then that raises more questions:
* Perhaps there was no contract transfer from Koch to YellowTab?
* Perhaps the contract exists but PalmSource didn’t care and ignored it?
* Perhaps Be Inc’s copy of the contract was lost/destroyed?
* Even if it did exist, isn’t it likely that the contract would be expired by now? It’s been six years…
And of course the same question again, Where has Bernd been mailing the royalty checks for the last five years?!? If he’s been mailing checks to Access or PalmSource, and they’ve been cashing the checks, wouldn’t that legally indicate acceptance of the arrangement?
-Bob
Gassee denying any contract suggests there was never any agreement as Be Inc was his company before he sold up and joined the Palm board.
Just to add,
The entire issue is going to be a mess until someone follows the trail of paperwork, including:
1) The original contract between Koch and Be Inc
2) The contract transfer from Koch to YellowTab
3) The sale of Be Inc to Palm Source
4) The transfer of IP from PalmSource to Access
It’s going to take a few lawyers and accountants…
-Bob
Things were even more complicated.IIRC
3)Sale of Be Inc to PALM
4)Split of Palm to Palm and PalmSource
5)Transfer of what? Not sure that some old funny contract was transferred even from Palm to PalmSource.
Palm did not buy Be, Inc., just its intellectual property assets.
`Where has Bernd been mailing the royalty checks for the last five years?!?`
Switzerland maybe?
I thought the royalty cheques were going to the:
Bernd Trust Fund in Germany 🙂
Or maybe,
What royalty cheques? Didn’t you know that the negotiated license agreements were for Palm to get $0?
Afterall, Zeta wasn’t even profitable. 🙂
Ok, just a little humor.
[quote]Gassee denying any contract suggests there was never any agreement as Be Inc was his company before he sold up and joined the Palm board.[/quote]
Does he deny there was a contract between Koch and Be Inc? Or just that he isn’t familiar with the hypothetical transfer from Koch to YellowTab?
-Bob
It’s cursed, I mean. That must be the only explanation! Anyone who tries to use it dies. Be Inc. died, Palmsource died, yellowTAB died. Access has the code and it’s still alive because it didn’t look at the source, but beware!
I really hope Haiku didn’t take a look at it!
Edited 2007-04-10 22:45
> I really hope Haiku didn’t take a look at it!
I try my best since months to not look at any Haiku source code (the few of mine, in particular), at least!
😉
How come? Haiku’s code is not cursed. It’s a new born. You can and you should take a look at it
We try our best to keep the BeOS spirit in Haiku. If BeOS source, its spirit, is cursed, we may have cursed Haiku too.
Maybe we should change our license for a more esoteric-aware open source license, where we will refute any responsabilities regarding whatever esoteric damage Haiku could cause if you use it, code for it, look at it or even just talk about it.
😉
I think everyone must have a known this, or at least suspected Zeta wasn’t legit. Yet that many didn’t really want to think about it too much till it was gone, in the hope something worthwhile developed from yellowtab.
Correct you are.
With Palm & Access, there would be no Zeta or BeOS derivative. BeOS would have died off with Be and hopefully reborn again with Haiku.
The community is somewhat divided. Some people really like Zeta and think it is great and others wish it was never born ( or even started or should have died off sooner ).
I can say, that Zeta gave a larger presence to BeOS ( probably helped the community grow ) by getting more people to give it another or first look.
And though it has shortcomings and is overpriced, it is the best BeOS out there that is available today.
Can we put a gun up to the head of this tired broken down horse known as BeOS and its direct derivatives?
I’m sick of all this go nowhere commentary when we have a bright future in Haiku. It’s just not worth it. Stick to the living not the dead.
Zeta was destined to be done the moment Haiku reached feature parity (ie. NDIS, CUPS, SANE etc). yellowTab could have been a Haiku distributer, but they alienated too much of their potential user base with bad business practices. Bottom line – who cares anymore.
Zeta 1.2 user now, Haiku R1 user real soon now.
Bottom line – who care anymore
Well I care. Shouldn’t Bernd be held accountable for his actions and business activities?
If someone runs a business legally and profits from it, then I’m all for it. But doing it illegally and getting away with it sends out what type of message?
Next thing you know, there are businesses “popping” up all over the place doing illegal stuff, profiting from it and getting away with it.
Also, Zeta ( and even BeOS MAX ) are the present and Haiku is the future. I don’t believe Haiku R1 is coming out for 8 or more months. It is taking forever to get the release out ( and then it’ll only be as good as R5 – so I doubt you’ll use it much and most may stick with Zeta until Haiku R2 ).
I agree with tonestone57
If some one are doing something illegal they must pay (sorry Bernd but this are how it is)
But he did a great work with Zeta and his team took it big steps forward.
I tested BeOSMax the other day and man I was 7 years back. back then i didn’t like the changes YT made with the tracker, deskbar and Preference app but now I can’t be without it
Zeta feels like a commercial OS and not a hobby OS like BeOSR5.
I hade the same feeling for R5 in 2000 but I guess I have bigger demands on how an OS looks like OS today.
I hope that Access gets there hands on Zeta 1.5 so they later perhaps can do something with it.. feels like they listens.
Seems i am the best to translate this to english:
as far as i remember, it’s was now 3 years ago when i was worring about the legality of Zeta. Like everybody knows, i’m running http://www.beosfrance.com since 4 years now, and also promoting BeOS Dev Edition 2.2, a french remake of the old 1.1, a bit outdated.
A member of yT join me to say that if Bone and Real Player was not deleted from the devEd ISO, its maintener (not me) will get into problems. And that’s what its maintener did. Nevertheless, since i need to protect the website i decide to promote a different way this distribution, and split BeosFrance from this DevEd. A real pitty since we were thinking about a BeSync system between this BeOS and the website for updates, localisations and more… Thanks guys ! 🙁
Since promoting an illegal product came to me like something dangerous for the integrity of my website (so, my everyday “work” of 4 years now), i asked myself: “And if Zeta was not legal ??? Nothing has never been clean on this !”. Cause if it was not, it wouldn’t be normal that i support it (banners, articles, …). I decide to contact JLG, the best person to answer me on this topic. He was so kind to answer me and clearly told me that AT THIS TIME (OSNews, thanks not making me say what i didn’t say !!!), so at this time, the time we got this email discution, he told me that no agreement were took between PalmSource and yT.
I decide to ask back yT, and send an email to the person in charge of press relations (which everybody knows as a veru nice person). You can’t imagine how sad and surprise i was when i saw on this reply that if i publish any information that can hurt yT buziness, they would have no choise that “to sue” me (was the first time i saw this word in english… i remebered it at once).
And if those informations has never been publics, that’s simply because JLG never answered me when i asked him to write an article about all this, quoting him. End of story.
Today, with public annoncements of ACCESS public relation peoples, it definitly seems clear that Zeta was an illegal product to sell, at least at the beginning (i didn’t say anything about the quality of the product itself, neither about additionnal software and work that have been done by the yT team !), and is still the case, since ACCESS do not seems to have one.
When this ACCESS guy post a comment on the mr Korz blog, asking him to get in contact with him to make all this story clear, his blog close its doors the day after… is that a normal thing for someone who have nothing to worry about ??? You decide…
ps: I also want to thanks OSNews for being so kind not sending me an email before publishing this article !
ps²: People involved here already have my gmail, and so my phone number, can reach me whenever they want.
I note the following:
1. YellowTab Zeta was talked about for a few years on the net (even I read about it!) and was then openly sold. Was Palm management so out of touch that they didn’t know about it?
2. If I read the story correctly, JLG only says that there is no agreement between Palm and YT. No mention of contracts involving Koch, or contracts involving Be.
This is pretty thin stuff to base accusations of fraud, embezzlement, or any other criminal activity on.
Nobody can say what happened with Palm ( or why they kept quiet ), except Senior Officials that worked @ Palm during that timeframe.
Right now, Access is saying they have no license agreements. They’ve tried to get in contact with Bernd; he hasn’t responded to them.
David S, from Access, left a post on Bernd’s blog trying to get in touch with Bernd. Bernd’s blog disappears the next day. What do you make of that?
Bernd is not making any effort to contact Access and sort this out. What does that tell you?
If I run company “C” and Company “X” accuses me of using their technology (ie: source code), wouldn’t the first step be to get in touch with them to sort it out? Or would I ignore them and hope they just go away ( so I continue on, business as usual )?
If the proper license agreements exist, why doesn’t Bernd get in touch with Access to show them? Why no offical statement from Bernd? Has Bernd even denied the illegal accusation from Access? What else has Bernd said, other than saying he’ll talk to his lawyer & release an official statement this week? ( which I hear he won’t do now ).
Staying quiet and not trying to resolve this with Access makes him look guilty. (ie: Bernd knows Access won’t take legal action against him – which is the only way to prove the illegal claim by Access – so staying quiet and disappearing may be in his best interests – hoping that it’ll blow over).
On the basis of previous suspicions and the latest round of information, it’s clear to me that Bernd Korz doesn’t have the legal right to distribute Zeta or use the sorce code, and he is responsible for his actions as CEO during his time at YellowTab. He has lied, stolen, and committed fraud. I want to see him criminally prosecuted and face jail time and severe fines.
The lessons of the Barlow Clowes, Robert Maxwell, and Polly Peck scandals are ringing loudly in my ears. The theft, vanity, and negligence these people commit is a shabby breach of trust that can do real harm. Smooth talking rule breakers can get away with it for years, but their huge egos usually get the better of them. It may be a sad ending but the good news is it clears the deck for Haiku.
Edited 2007-04-11 00:07
Perhaps when the Be employees were so busy chucking Monitors and “other” stuff over the top of the Menlo HQ building, some “important things” went flying too, watch the videos, lots of loose ends hit the sidewalk:)
Okay, April 1 was awhile back!
Since YT/Zeta started there were lots of people in the community who had doubted Zetas legality, now it seems like all those people were right about it.
[quote]Since YT/Zeta started there were lots of people in the community who had doubted Zetas legality, now it seems like all those people were right about it.[/quote]
They weren’t ‘right’ because they knew anything more than anyone else, they were ‘right’ because that’s the way it turned out. Similar to flipping a coin. If someone calls “heads” and that’s the way it lands, do you really think they knew which way it would land? It’s cetainly no cause to jump around yelling “I Told You So!”
Also, there are still a lot of unanswered questions. I don’t think the final verdict is out yet, nor all of the details revealed. Nor do I think any of the right people care enough to follow through and find all of the answers.
If Zeta was illegal, lots of people took it in the shorts. But the people who owned the code and could have stopped it sooner lost nothing.
The entire episode is a self-limiting “cease and desist” action.
-Bob
Edited 2007-04-11 01:16
They weren’t ‘right’ because they knew anything more than anyone else, they were ‘right’ because that’s the way it turned out. Similar to flipping a coin. … If Zeta was illegal, lots of people took it in the shorts. But the people who owned the code and could have stopped it sooner lost nothing.
Reasonable cause for suspicion was there from the beginning and just mounted as time went by. Now clearer doubt has been cast on Bernd Korz claims more people are coming forward and joining the dots.
Who are you to say whether the people who own the code lost nothing? Bernd Korz took money off investors and customers that didn’t belong to him, and may have damaged Jean-Louis Gassée and Access reputations.
Bernd Korz is no Robin Hood, and this is not a victimless crime. The only unanswered questions are caused by Bernd Korz lack of providing proof. He should be held accountable for that, preferably in a criminal court.
I’m tired of this getting regurgitated over and over. It was very obvious this was a sham to a lot of people, based on how things were handled. You call it “flipping a coin” as if it was pure luck – you’re off the mark.
A business not asserting it has legal rights to sell the product it is pushing even to its financial detriment makes a pretty clear statement, that being “no legal rights”. I’m sorry that a few people were absolutely blind to this, but it’s been clear from the beginning that yT was “shady” based on this and numerous other happenings in its existence. You’d have to be blind or blindly supportive of the company/Bernd not to have seen this. I, like many others did. There was no coin flip involved.
What more do you need? The company that owns the IP (fact) says Bernd doesn’t have legal rights. JLG now says yT didn’t have rights from Palmsource either. What more could you possibly want? Do you need a sworn statement from Bernd that he ripped off a bunch of people selling a product that he didn’t legally have rights to sell? There is plenty of information available now to damn Zeta, the only question is Bernd’s intent (which is also fairly clear but not absolute.)
Are you nuts? “If”? Wow. Some people are loyal until the very end. Sounds like you’ll believe Zeta was legally sold even if they toss Bernd in jail.
What?
[Edit: Spelling correction]
Edited 2007-04-11 01:44 UTC
Are you nuts? “If”? Wow. Some people are loyal until the very end. Sounds like you’ll believe Zeta was legally sold even if they toss Bernd in jail.
You seem to get that a lot with these charismatic cults and dictators. It seems people buy into a dream and questioning it upsets that. It’s like some of those old ladies getting sucked in by some charmer. Maybe Bernd Korz had a vision and got sucked in beyond his depth but when it turned to lies and stealing it became something else.
“They weren’t ‘right’ because they knew anything more than anyone else, they were ‘right’ because that’s the way it turned out.”
or they were right because they didn’t blindly trust someone who made ridiculous claims and used common sense?
“Similar to flipping a coin.”
No, not at all like flipping a coin.
[quote]Reasonable cause for suspicion was there from the beginning and just mounted as time went by.[/quote]
I agree with that. And although suspicion is a good reason to stay clear of a product or business, it’s not the same as ‘evidence’. If people had Evidence or Proof instead of Suspicion, they kept it to themselves.
[quote]Who are you to say whether the people who own the code lost nothing? Bernd Korz took money off investors and customers that didn’t belong to him, and may have damaged Jean-Louis Gassée and Access reputations.[/quote]
I called it like I see it. As I said, plenty of people took it in the shorts, consumers and investors specifically. But by letting Zeta self-destruct, the owners of the code risked nothing and lost nothing. Palm and Access didn’t lose sales, no one confused their products with Zeta, and didn’t lose contracts as a result. Instead they sat on the sidelines watching, probably with a puzzled grin.
[quote]The entire episode is a self-limiting “cease and desist” action.[/quote]
I mean it petered out all on it’s own. No legal action was undertaken, neither by PalmSource or Access. And every company associated with Bernd bit the dust. A Self-correcting problem.
[quote]Some people are loyal until the very end. Sounds like you’ll believe Zeta was legally sold even if they toss Bernd in jail.[/quote]
Not hardly. I didn’t support Bernd or buy Zeta. The Shady cloud hanging over the business was one factor, but the sky-high price and lack of hardware support were bigger reasons.
Best Wishes,
-Bob
edited to add: beats the heck out of me why [quote] tags don’t work on this forum…
Edited 2007-04-11 02:25
I didn’t support Bernd or buy Zeta. The Shady cloud hanging over the business was one factor, but the sky-high price and lack of hardware support were bigger reasons.
Fair play. With Zeta imploding and Access going in another direction, it removes a distraction and stops people treading on each others toes. If Haiku keeps itself together something legal, cheaper, and better should emerge out the other side.
Forbidden
You don’t have permission to access / on this server.
Apache/1.3 Server at http://www.berndsworld.com Port 80
It looks to me like the guy has left the building… 😉
It looks to me like the guy has left the building… 😉
Grabbed this off Google’s cache:
http://66.102.9.104/search?q=cache:kjVMYhLNU8gJ:www.berndsworld.com…
“When you care about that 7 steps you have a 100% ZETA compatible software. You can mail me your software to control it and if all steps work well. I will also make a stress test with it and you get then a Logo you can add to your AboutWindow. It will let the user see that this software will work flawlessly on his ZETA installation and not destroy anything. Both parties will really only benefit from it. You are NOT allowed to use the Logo without my permissions.”
It looks like Bernd Korz was really touchy about people using his intellectual property when it suited him. If someone “borrowed” the logo his comments and prior legal threats suggest he’d be very quick to do something, but it’s interesting how quickly he shut down when someone stood up to him.
Well simply try this on Linux:
$ whois berndsworld.com
There’s an address and phone number, if you wish to talk to him.
I would like to say Bernd should not pay fines or jailed. He `should` be shunned by the Haiku (BeOS) community for a breach of trust.
“I would like to say Bernd should not pay fines or jailed.”
Uh, what? Of course he should pay. As I said before, I don’t long for him to become bankrupt, but come on; if you break the law you get to pay.
Why should he be treated differently?
Procedure v. Justice. There is no justice in the law since it is all procedural. Shunning is an extremely effective form of punishment and would not punish his family – just Bernd.
I submit the entire Haiku (BeOS) community knew, to one degree or another, Zeta was an illegal hack. I never bought into it and questioned its legality way back.
…when I saw a BMW parked with its windows open. I looked in out of curiosity and saw two passports on the passenger seat. Both had the same picture in them, but one said “Bernd” and the other said “Johan”. Weird. There was a locked briefcase on the floor too, it was very heavy… like it was full of lead or something. Huh.
I wonder what it all means?
😛
…when I saw a BMW parked with its windows open. I looked in out of curiosity and saw two passports on the passenger seat. Both had the same picture in them, but one said “Bernd” and the other said “Johan”. Weird.
This guy?
http://www.copperlily.com/AboutRayWinstone/Images/bricklane.jpg
Edited 2007-04-11 05:28
So Mr. Bernd Korz was probably never able to get a contract. Might be so that he got an unofficial “We don’t care” statement from Palm. And from that, and with the leaked BeOS source code, started to work towards his dream to continue the BeOS. Access seemed to care more, but not enough to take it to the law. But then, of course they cared enough not to want their IP open sourced by an outside party.
Mr. Bernd Korz probably wanted to incorporate Haiku into Zeta as quick as possible, not relying on IP that officially does not belong to him. So he ignored the letters for Access, hoping they would not take action in the near future. Or better, taking action before he was able to integrate Haiku into Zeta instead.
I’m almost sure his motive was not to make money by stealing, but continue his favorite operating system.
Too bad, he took a risk that ended up bad for everyone involved. But he took a chance, to take BeOS further and probably praying that something like this would never happen.
Personally, I never been interested in Zeta much because I felt Yellowtab and Zeta differed to much from the Be inc and BeOS approach. But I don’t blame or bash Bernd Korz for taking risks to continue BeOS and his dream.
Edited 2007-04-11 06:42
This seems highly unlikely: Palm had paid $11 million for that IP, why would they effectively give it away, royalty-free, no less, in such a fashion? From a shareholder’s point of view, this is called “corporate malfeasance”,and US securities laws take quite a dim view of it.
I’m not sure why I should be the one reminding people that Palm turned down a petition from BeUnited right around the time this magical undocumented transaction is purportedly supposed to have happened, and they did it in no uncertain terms: “…we have made a firm decision NOT to license any part of this technology other than that which we incorporate into the Palm OS”.
So why would they then give a “nod and a wink” allowing Mr. Korz or yellowTAB to make Zeta? If Palm made that declaration, and then turned around and did license it (royalty-free and without disclosing that they had done so, dodging their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders), then we’re right back to corporate malfeasance again.
I don’t buy it. I can imagine much more likely theories.
Moreover, who would possibly think it a good idea to base a business on an arrangement like that?
Let me say it again:
Palm bought the intellectual property of Be, Inc. in 2001. They didn’t buy Be, and they didn’t buy Be’s obligations. There were no source licensees at the time of this sale. There have been no source licensees since that sale.
Even if (strictly hypothetically, purely for the sake of the argument) Koch’s contract had included source access–and I want to stress that there’s nothing whatsoever to indicate that it did–since it wasn’t disclosed to Palm at the time of the purchase, any agreement between Koch and Be immediately would have become null and void when the sale was completed.
This would be not only because the obligation was undisclosed, but also because the intellectual property was no longer Be’s to dispose of at that point. Koch didn’t have a contract with Palm; nor did they have a contract with Be, which ceased to exist shortly after the sale. I’d say that the absolute limits of such a contract, at best, would be to allow them to dispose of whatever copies of BeOS (not Zeta!) they had in hand at the time and then to call it a day. Period.
Let’s say you and I have had an agreement that you can drive my car on Saturdays, and I then sell the car. If you go and drive that very car the following Saturday, without bothering yourself to ask the new owner if he minds, you’re a car thief, pure and simple, and the fact that someone who no longer owns the car said you could drive it is immaterial.
Too bad he seems to have “probably” taken in a bunch of money “relying on IP that officially does not belong to him.”
Lefty: just for the sake of argument, it’s pretty clear at this point that Access hasn’t cared about BeOS’s intellectual property for some time. Palm originally bought it for PalmOS “Cobalt,” which nobody actually built devices with. We’ve gone through several regime changes by this time, and while PalmOS 5 lives on as Access’s “Garnet OS,” Cobalt is very clearly dead. There’s really no business reason for Access not to give it away for peanuts… now. At this point it’s not much better than being the legal owners of WordStar’s code base.
Of course, your real point is absolutely correct. Back when Palm actually bought BeOS, they did have such a business reason, and they explicitly stated that they would not license it. David Nagel, PalmSource CEO, wrote to BeUnited back in January 2002: “We have fully discussed the possibility of licensing the BeOS operating system. At this time we have made a firm decision NOT to license any part of this technology other than that which we incorporate into the Palm OS.”
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2002/01/15/palm_scuppers_beos_coop_hop…
The most plausible theory is that yellowTAB did a deal with Koch Media, the German BeOS Pro distributor, and inherited Koch’s contracts; JLG might not know those details. It was hard not to miss that whenever yT was asked for details about what those legal rights were, they essentially just said, “Trust us, we can do what we’re doing.” This didn’t engender a lot of confidence. I suspect that as a distributor they had rights to do whatever they wanted to with everything around BeOS, i.e., all the bundled applications, and likely even replacing system components as long as they could do them “clean room” (or with an open source license, i.e., OpenTracker).
I’m not sure Bernd ever claimed they had the rights to the source code; as I recall, he got very weaselly when pressed, making hand-waving claims about having “enough” rights and that nobody should worry their pretty little heads over it. Can any former yT employee confirm that they actually did have the source code?
I’m a little disappointed that things ended this way, but in some ways I’m disappointed that, if this was really illegal, it wasn’t stomped on from the get-go.
I suspect that as a distributor they had rights to do whatever they wanted to with everything around BeOS, i.e., all the bundled applications, and likely even replacing system components as long as they could do them “clean room” (or with an open source license, i.e., OpenTracker).
BeOS as an entirety would constitute a copyrighted work and any modification that wasn’t expressly laid down any license agreement would be an infringement. Looking from the outside it’s possible but unlikely this level of customisation would be allowable.
Koch Media was merely a distributor, and the best reading of what I remember about what was said about the contract was that was as far as it went. Going from this to it being a license for a developer to push their own brand is a stretch too far.
This is incorrect if contracts were null and void by selling the business then this would be done on a daily basis. I am not saying Bernd had one or not only that selling the company doesn’t void the current contracts. Now in this case Be wasn’t sold the IP in question was that still wouldn’t negate any current contracts it would have been up to Be to disclose them but failing to do that does not nullify the original agreement. Take your car analogy if I sell you a car that has a bank loan my failing to tell you doesn’t mean the bank no longer gets it’s money.
This is incorrect if contracts were null and void by selling the business then this would be done on a daily basis. … Take your car analogy if I sell you a car that has a bank loan my failing to tell you doesn’t mean the bank no longer gets it’s money.
This is my understanding. While Bernd Korz has yet to provide anything worth showing, if Be intellectual property was misrepresented this would put JLG & Co in a very difficult position.
Personally, I don’t believe Bernd Korz does have anything showing. Documentation that valuable would be stored somewhere very safe and have multiple working copies easily at hand. So far, no show.
I have suspected this for years but lacked the proof. Good to know that i was right almost 6 years later.
Come’on, nobody has been making any money here! In this chapter everybody looses, except the users and competition.
Loosers: who may sue.
License owners of BeOS source
yT employees
yT investors
yT distributors/partners
yT third party developers
Winners: who should shut up and reframe the situation.
Haiku developers
Zeta users
Bernd may be a poker player, and he litterally lost more than most. For what, to cater a few people who just couldn’t live without a different OS. And then he gets the wraps from those who benefitted. Amazing!
It is possible that Access, PalmSource, etc. didn’t stop them, because of the limited success. Had there been money, perhaps they would have sued. Or maybe he coudl aquired some rights.
BeOS was a dead cat, and every source owner wanted to burry it. So for users, including Bernd,…
…the idea seems to have been keeping BeOS alive.
If you don’t see, if nothing else than in end effect, that yT did just that. Take off your shades.
Let the financial stake holders do their thing.
Let the customers (private) cont. using Zeta.
(Who’s going to stop them?)
Let the rest focus on Haiku OS, or stick to BeOS.
-Jake
I am still not believing that !
It might be a little bit suspecious but I don’t think that Bernd had no license for selling and producing ZETA.
What JLG can’t denie is that there was an contact between YT and Palm.
Did Beosfrance asked about the meeting between JLG and Bernd where Bernd showed him ZETA 1.0 ?
Why did Palm / Palmsource did nothing against ZETA ?
So many questions.
I know that ZETA until version 1.2 is legal for sure
Afterwards (Magnussoft era) it might be different.
I don’t want to go into much detail.
I don’t think that anybody can build up an illegal business and can keep it for 7 years running in public.
I think Bernd knew exactly what he is doing and has to do before he started his business running. For me it is impossible to start something like this with no license.
But let’s stop speculations and guesses.
BTW: Bernds Blog is only blocked for now. It has not been deleted (see wordpress.com for details) and Bernd is still around in IRC and in forums (see beusergroup.de).
Bernd told me that more information and a statement will be released on his blog this week.
But for sure we will get to know this tomorrow or the day after tommorrow.
So stay tuned !
Edited 2007-04-11 09:31
So, at some unspecified time during the existence of PalmSource, yellowTab didn’t have an agreement to distribute a BeOS-derived OS, according to JLG.
What we can assume is that at some time around BeOS’ famed change of focus, Koch Media did acquire the rights, and the source code; and since Be, Inc did have proper paperwork (samples of their marvellous distributor agreement are online) Koch Media most likely did that agreement correctly.
But what JLG mentions in this communication with BeOSFrance happened one point removed from Koch Media, and two points removed from Be, Inc. No, nobody lost the paperwork. More likely it was seen as irrelevant from both sides.
A small side story here:
At one time I spent a large amount of my hard-earned cash aquiring the rights from Pacific Microsonics, Inc. to produce HDCD products using their PMI-100 decoder chip. I developed a D-to-A converter and bought 20 sample parts for a small run of products. While in development the market changed and DVD took the focus as the “next big thing”, and HDCD didn’t ever really take centre stage as a product.
So I waited, meanwhile enjoying my nice hi-tech DAC. Eventually Microsoft acquired the rights, and started demanding monthly paperwork reports on part usage, marketing and so on (and per-part license fees). They also jacked up the price of product certifications, removed the 20-bit PMI-100 from the market and launched the newer 24-bit PMI-200 SMT chip. My design was effectively dead.
While no-one could stop me from building DACs from the original parts, my original license requires they be tested for conformance, yet the new license owner would no longer certify products containing that part, effectively making me an outlaw if I sold them.
So, back to the subject:
The solution to the BeOS dilemma is obvious: Access need to make a 64-bit version, which they could launch as, say, BeOS Vista. Then they could denounce and fail to support all prior versions.
Oh wait, that’s been done already.
I’ll get out of your way now, seeya later. 🙂
haiqu
@Kochise:
Is this the hitman forum or what ?
I don’t think it is right to publish Bernds personal information here, even if they are accessable in some way in the internet.
There is a borderline been crossing here I think.
I would advice the admin to close the comments or forum for this topic.
Even if Bernd did something wrong it is not our right to sue him. Everyone deserves a decent respect.
You misread my intention, just to show that he’s still named “Bernd” and *NOT* “Johan”, and haven’t left Germany as he’s still living in Obrigheim
<sarcasm on>
And you’re right, there’s no IP infringement and/or this information does *NOT* comes from leaked source code. At least until proven otherwise
Neither ACCESS not Palmsource (or Be Inc. or Koch Media) would recognize having signed any sort of contract with me about these rights. I hold none and state about it publicly.
<sarcasm off>
I wish no harm to Bernd by ‘open-sourcing’ these informations, that you can also find here :
http://whois.domaintools.com/berndsworld.com
Kochise
@kochise:
Sry I missunderstand your intention.
>>Zeta feels like a commercial OS and not a hobby OS like BeOSR5.
Get a life. Thats the worst insult i’ve read.
Then you can’t have reed much
What I mend was the feeling of the tracker, desk bar and the Preference app.
Yes they are slower and I was against the changes YT did but I must say I will miss the preference app the most..
PS hard du testat Zeta 1.21 eller 1.5?
IMO “Preferences” is worst part of Zeta regarding usability and sometimes stability. And that was not only my opinion.
And Zeta’s Tracker features are available now in third-party trackers, independently on Zeta.
I _really_ hope that Bernd goes to jail. After lying to us for so long, it’s the least he deserves!
Nope, Bernd made his business, and what you call lying is NOTHING beside what other people in the computer industry have ever lied (follow my eye-sight). So why would you like HIM to go to jail, forgetting all the others ? At least I agree with what’s some other folks said : BeOS lived for another 7 years…
And why Palm/ACCESS have not sued him, that’s exactly why Bernd wouldn’t have sued anyone abroad, even stating otherwise : the fee/time involved for little if no revenue at all. Better focus on something more constructive !
Kochise
You say “BeOS lived for another 7 years…”. I say it was in a profound coma. I used BeOS R5 for 2 years straight, as my main OS. Zeta is a joke. I still think Bernd should go to jail. Trust me, I met the guy.
Even if this story results in nothing, in legal terms, it seems all that story will be one of the funniest affaire louche in OS/IT history!
So, get all remaining Zeta-CD (and books, if any) stocks – and then it can be sold on related auctions with good margin profit:)
(Proud owner of several Zeta-CDs/boxes)
Edited 2007-04-11 14:35
I kid, I kid!
But seriously – if Zeta is illegal – why pay for it? 😉
Off topic, but I saw Bernd’s photos from a few posts above, he reminds me of Ricky Gervais’ character in the office :p
The resemblance between Bernd Korz, Ray Winstone, and Ricky Gervais is amazing.
http://www.blachford.info/computer/begeistert012/S_IMG_3316.jpg
http://www.kinho.com/kin-ho-photographer-famous/images-famous/RayWi…
http://www.nndb.com/people/761/000044629/gervais-7176_512_crop.jpg
They were a lot of us that felt that there was no agreement with BeOS or Palm and that Yellowtab and Zeta were illegal.
I knew it all along and as far as Zeta dying I personally think that it died because more people didn’t trust the product.
I bought and purchased BeOS 5 Pro and I know others that did as well and loved the product but I was not about to invest money into Yellowtab and Zeta. The biggest complaint I have to this date after finding out this information is through all those years OSNews stood up to Zeta and made claims that it was ridiculous that we even think that the product is illegal.
OSNews has to responsibility to report the news accordingly and ask the questions we all asked and receive the mail accurately. OSNews failed to do this and stood up to Zeta and what it stood for and they were a lot of us that were against it and felt it was illegal and jumped boat to believing and saying it was legal with not evidence. Now that we know it’s illegal I feel OSNews should post an apology to us as a community for sponsoring Zeta and sending propaganda that it was legal.
OSNews reported the news, and since there wasn’t anyone with proof that the OS was illegal this wasn’t news. Once there was an official statement it was reported as news too. You can’t hold OSNews responsible for what it didn’t predict.
Personally I invested in BeOS, Zeta and Haiku, and I don’t see why I should follow other people claims on what I should or shouldn’t invest into based on hunches or predictions or feelings. If you had any proof of yellowTabs wrongdoings (or anyone else for that matter) you should of come out. But you didn’t. So blaming OSNews is kind of a Null point.
I don’t see anyone blaming the German government for giving yellowTab a license to operate…
Edited 2007-04-11 18:45
Personally I invested in BeOS, Zeta and Haiku, and I don’t see why I should follow other people claims on what I should or shouldn’t invest into based on hunches or predictions or feelings. If you had any proof of yellowTabs wrongdoings (or anyone else for that matter) you should of come out. But you didn’t. So blaming OSNews is kind of a Null point.
Crap. There were plenty of reasons for reasonable suspicion and OS News could have asked for proof from Bernd Korz. They didn’t. Not only that, they published topics which misrepresented the reality of copyright law, and personally attacked people who disagreed.
Lets face it, Vasper, you’re not exactly Mr. Clean with your illegal distribution of copyrighted material and advocacy of views on copyright that don’t accord with reality. You’re as dirty as anyone and should learn from Bernd Korz’s mistake and quit before something really stupid happens.
Edited 2007-04-11 19:33
Never claimed I am mr clean. I just claimed the truth, and I made no profit. I even agreed with you when you were right about the legal status of Max. Now however you are dead wrong.
Also if you don’t like OSNews, you shouldn’t make your self “unclean” by participating and attacking people on a personal level.
I suspect you are a troll, but I don’t have definite proof, so I won’t blame OSNews for allowing you to comment here!!! 🙂
Edited 2007-04-11 20:19
In beginning, OsNews editor-in-chief Eugenia was rather very very sceptial about all that Zeta affair.
But then changed her mind sometimes. And then OsNews tried to push Zeta’s logo for all BeOS-related news, be it BeOS itself or HaikuOS/OpeneOS or whatelse.
But then again they took more safe and moderate position.
A decision about a group logo is hardly any… strong position..
As I remember, BeOS was long dead and Haiku didn’t have a name yet and news were scarce from the OpenBeOS camp while Zeta seemed promising.
This is the down side as I see it. It is most unfortunate that any code written for Zeta is at best tainted now, even things that don’t use original BeOS code, but are completely new like the SATA drivers.
I’m curious what will happen if someone inside Germany files suit against either Bernd or yT seeking to recover any monies spent on a possibly ‘fraudulently’ sold product. Wouldn’t someone be legally liable for damages on any fees collected (ie: stolen) for a product under false pretenses?
Another reason they might have been so determined to have customers return their previous version CD when upgrading.
Quote of the day: “License? We don’t need no stinking license!”
Everyone who bought into Zeta, pardon the `double sens`, just got Bernd!
If Access and/or Magnussoft don’t take this to the next level – pursue legal action against Mr Korz., then this “illegal” issue will never get resolved. And Bernd walks away.
What bothers me the most is the lesson I’m taking away from all of this:
“CRIME DOES PAY!”
Well, at least for those that can get away with it.
Except that he put a lot of money and work into Zeta but lost all of it. So you can wipe out the “pay” part. But apart from that: “CRIME DOES!”.
> Except that he put a lot of money and work into
> Zeta but lost all of it.
Do you know that for a fact? Because yT claimed sales of 100K CDs at one point in time, and at the price Zeta was being sold, that translates into several million dollars/euros. Where did all that money go?
Except that he put a lot of money and work into Zeta but lost all of it. So you can wipe out the “pay” part.
Let me educate you how small ( and smaller mid size ) businesses work. Look at the example below. I seperated owner’s salary from expenses to make my point.
Company A
Sales: $1 Million
Expenses: $500,000
Owner’s (CEO) salary: $450,000
Profit: $ 50,000
This business doesn’t look all that profitable if you only look at the $50,000 profit. But if you take out owner’s salary of $450,000, then the profit was $500,000. And if the owner took a more reasonable salary of $100,000, then profits would’ve been $400,000 – quite a different story.
Small ( and smaller mid size ones too ), take out the profits from the business unless they expect to expand. Otherwise, why keep all this money in the business? Better for the owner to take it out?
And you hear that, oh this business was not profitable because it only made $50,000 profit. But, if the owner is “milking” the profits from the business then you’re not seeing the whole story.
I believe Bernd did the same as the example above, but the only way to prove it is to see payroll records or Bernd’s income tax returns, because it may not show up in other financial documents ( ie: all yT salaries may be grouped together ).
So, just because yT went bankrupt, does not necessarily mean Bernd did not make a “small” fortune off of it. He could have drained out the excess profits with his personal salary and so killed off yT. How else do you explain him getting a deal with Magnussoft (ie: if yT was so unprofitable, then why was Magnussoft so quick to jump on board? Didn’t they realize there were no profits in Zeta? ).
Without knowing Bernd’s salary; it is impossible to really know if got tons of money on Zeta ( which I believe ) or nothing at all. Was his salary $50,000, $100,000, $500,000, $2 Million, etc. per year? None of us know.
And I recall Bernd saying in an interview that he sold over 100,000 cds of Zeta 1.0. At $100 Euros a cd, that is $10 Million Euros Revenue. And if he had a team of 10 developers each getting $50,000 Euros per year, then that would account for $500,000 Euros per year. So, where did the other Millions disappear to? Was creating the cds, packaging and ditribution that much money? And I haven’t even included figures for people buying the upgrades.
And as for yT going bankrupt, Bernd could have taken so much of the profits and left yT with very little money to work with. And so yT was bound to go out of business sooner or later.
Bernd also bought himself a 2,700 sq meter ( 24,000 sq. feet) house, which is a very big home and this would be expensive – even though the house is very old ( the size alone makes it worth lots of money ), within the last year. I guess you’re right and he didn’t really make anything off Zeta ( come on, go get a clue ).
http://www.berndsworld.com/?m=200609
Edited 2007-04-12 19:20
So, where did the other Millions disappear to?
I understand yellowTab had a couple of million Euros of investment money pumped into it. One of his investors must have got nervous because that’s what triggered the bankruptcy proceedings. Then there’s his claim to have invested his own money. How much was this capital in total?
I’m finding it a bit difficult to believe he burned through that much capital producing Zeta, and that the millions of Euros of revenue just evaporated. The cost of employing developers, office space and running costs aren’t too hard to work out, and no royalties were ever paid to the IP owners.
Apart from whatever he may have milked Zeta for, I’m a bit puzzled about his huge house and restoration project. This isn’t cheap in time or money. Most scam artists tend to fall for the usual big houses, cars, and champagne lifestyle. In any case his “real passion” would take his eye off the ball of running the company. Neither of these is what I’d want to see as an investor or customer.
Edited 2007-04-12 20:00
I understand yellowTab had a couple of million Euros of investment money pumped into it.
And who told you this? I think it would have been $1 Million in investment capital maximum ( but maybe even $2 Million ); don’t think it would be any higher than this.
One of his investors must have got nervous because that’s what triggered the bankruptcy proceedings.
Yes, probably noticed that yT was not making money because profits appeared on the low side, because of what I said in my previous post.
Even with rent of $2,000, $3,000 or $4,000 per month. Say $4,000 x 12 months = $48,000 per year. Plus $500,000 for the devlopers. That is $550,000. And there will be a couple of other costs, but still, I can’t understand what happened to the rest of the millions from selling Zeta 1.0.
In Canada – The average home owner has a house of 1,200 to 2,000 sq feet. CEOs here have 4,000 up to 10,000 sq feet ( and CEOs get paid in the Millions, $2M + ). Bernd recently bought 24,000 sq feet which is a Castle, not a house, and then people say he lost money on Zeta. Man, I wish I had done Zeta instead, because then I could’ve lost money too 🙂
The losers & winners are listed below:
LOSERS:
yT investors, Access, Magnussoft
WINNER(S):
Bernd Korz
Unfortunately I can’t verify any of this, because I’d have to look at yT’s financial statements and payroll records, but if his “big” Castle isn’t evidence enough, then what else can I say. Everybody can decide for themselves. Enough said.
Edited 2007-04-12 21:20
And I recall Bernd saying in an interview that he sold over 100,000 cds of Zeta 1.0. At $100 Euros a cd, that is $10 Million Euros Revenue. And if he had a team of 10 developers each getting $50,000 Euros per year, then that would account for $500,000 Euros per year. So, where did the other Millions disappear to? Was creating the cds, packaging and ditribution that much money? And I haven’t even included figures for people buying the upgrades.
Well, he had more than 10 developers. Let’s say 21 developers at 50 000 euros (why are you putting a dollar sign before the euro value?). That’s 1 050 000 euros per year.
Add that for 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 and we get 6 300 000. At a tax rate of 25% that leaves 7 500 000 for for the wages.
Subtract the wages and we have 1 200 000 euros to pay for office rent, CD production, webserver costs and last but not least promotion.
Edited 2007-04-12 21:23
> Add that for 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006…
Sorry to disappoint you, but your numbers are way blown out of proportion. yT did not have that many engineers over such a long period of time. It was in 2005 (when they started selling Zeta over RTL) that they claimed to have around 20 or so engineers, and not all of them were full time. That peak did not last long, as their sales on RTL lasted only a few months, and before the end of the year 2005, there were already rumors of engineers leaving the company for lack of payment.
So, at most, they may have had 20 engineers in the year 2005, but certainly not in 2006, and during the period 2001 – 2004 yT was obviously operating with a very small crew (before they moved to their biggers offices).
If yT did in fact sell 100K licenses as they have once claimed, then one has to wonder what the heck they did with the all that revenue.
Thanks Sogabe. You got it right on.
It was later on that they claimed to have lots of developers and some would have been part time workers. And, doesn’t mean all were receiving a salary either; some might have been free, just working to help move Zeta along ( and included in the count to make yT look big ).
As for the dollar sign. In Canada & USA that is how we do values that represent currency ( money value ), but I just checked and noticed that with the Euro, no dollar sign is used at all. ( ie: we say $10,000 or sometimes to make it more clear $10,000 CDN, $10,000 US, etc, but now I realize that Europe does not utilize the dollar sign, ie: 10,000 Euro ).
And still, I haven’t heard any explanation for Bernd’s Castle ( or maybe that was just a coincidence after all and not related to the money he made off Zeta??? ).
Edited 2007-04-12 22:51
As a matter of fact, does not 2001 count either. YellowTab appeared in the scene on 2002 as *distributors* of BeOS; you can see their first press release from early 2002 on the web archive:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020114173651/www.yellowtab.com/pressre…
Interestingly, the company was called yellowTAB i.G., and not yellowTAB GmbH (could this be the company the Bernd claims has rights to ZETA?). Also take a look at this post from July 31, 2002:
http://web.archive.org/web/20020802153708/http://www.yellowtab.com/
Here, yellowTAB i.G. is described as “the leading commercial distributor of BeOS in Germany” and this is where the *code name* “Zeta” first appeared, IIRC.
Scroll down, and note the *roadmap* where the “BeOS Home- and Developeredition” were to be ready for Nov. 2002, and the DeluxeEdition for January of 2003. Ah, and the Developeredition was going to include GCC 3.xx.
In the end, there was only one version of Zeta (not three), and the first official (non-RC) release was only shipped in July of 2005:
http://web.archive.org/web/20051020074348/www.yellowtab.com/news/ar…
In the meantime, yT had been selling buggy release candidates at 99 euros a pop to unsuspecting TV shopping viewers in German as a replacement for Windows.
Looking at the history of yellowTAB, is it quite easy to tell that the company had a very short period of prosperity and fast growth (late 2004 – 2005), mainly driven by sales on TV and the RTL shop, and that it was only during this short period that they probably had to sustain considerable engineering resources. So, Mr. Invincible Cow, saying that they had to pay a full staff of 20 or more engineers for six years is quite a stretch, to say the least.
but now I realize that Europe does not utilize the dollar sign, ie: 10,000 Euro ).
… or rather 10,000 €. I also stumbled over your euro-dollars, because I (as probably most Europeans) percive the $ as the symbol of a specific currency, not a universal sign for “money”, just as the “£” means “pound sterling” and, well the € for Euros.
the JLG interview is more then 4 years old.
So 4 years ago Palm splitted up and PalmSource got the BeOS License.
It might be sure that in this little amount of time YT didn’t had an contract between Palm Source.
But I am sure that they made an contract shortly after this interview.
David Limp might be the person who can say more about it i think. He was the one that had an contact with YT.
And he might be the person to talk to
Edited 2007-04-12 07:36
I keep hearing a lot of speculation that YT struck a deal with Koch Media, inheriting Koch’s distribution rights for BeOS.
To me this seems far fetched. Distribution contracts are seldom transferable. It is unlike Koch would be able to transfer their distribution contract with Be to another company. Afterall, if this were allowed, a company would have no control over who represents them and their products. To keep tight control over who distributes products, companies usually do not allow the contracted distributor to assign distribution rights to someone else.
Thus, I do not buy into the theory that YT may be within rights through contracts/licenses they obtained through Koch.
…online
Bernd Korz’s last comment on this issue:
“I’m aware of the recent allegations and I have taken note of them. I will be consulting with my lawyer on next Thursday and will follow up with a clear statement regarding this issue of legality.”
It’s Thursday. Hello? We’re waiting…
and read few postings around yellowtab and Zeta. They reminded me of BeOS NG (pre-ZETA) which supposed to be developed based on the BeOS 5 PE with many other additions, and Bernd claimed that he got the rights to distribute (maybe he thought that way from the unofficial we-dont-care comments from Palm or ACCESS or something, i guess) But suddenly, he started to work on BeOS Dano instead of BeOS PE and claimed that he got the rights to do it. funny, isn’t it? any idea?
Is it Thursday yet?
haiqu