#Escom Buys Commodore
26 messages in this thread
Thanks. No, I don't own an Amiga. Many years ago, I bought a Commodore 64 but
it has been out of use for a long time. I use a Compaq. I started using
IBM-compatibles at work about 12 years ago and have been using them ever since.
— Dan
Well, given your significant contributions in very trying times, I believe we
could consider you an honorary member of the Amiga community anyway. 🙂
Why did you decided to follow up on the Amiga? I though it might it been
because you have the same problem most of us got into when we bought the system
(we fell in love with it). But this story seems hard to follow, very twisted,
and it does not seem to have an end. Specially for a Compaq guy.
But anyways, for whatever the reasons. THANKS a lot for comming out with
INFO!!! 🙂
Eduard Joseph
I'm a newspaper reporter and it's a good story. Also, the enthusiasm of Amiga
users intrigued me. I thought that if the computer was as good as its users
said, there must be some other reason the company failed. That curiosity has
sustained my interest.
— Dan
Dan, We miss you on the Sunday night conference.
Could you please recap what the current situation is?
Thanks, Gary
Dan,
Have you thought about writing a book on the Commodore situation. I think it
might make interesting reading.
._ _ _ INTERNET: mshea@math.arizona.edu
| | |ichael _>hea COMPUSERVE: 76665,3360
Dan, it would be worth noting that your paper had a special local interest in
Commodore, since it was headquartered nearby. I don't think many folks realize
that.
Dan,
Thanks for following this story to the possibly very sad and bitter end. What
you have mentioned about Escom does suggest as someone else has said that they
are "… the perfect successors to C=…"
Some might say that someone who has stuck with the Amiga and still has a 1000
around is rooting for a loser…
They may be right 😉
–Gabe
Gabe –
> Some might say that someone who has stuck with the Amiga and still has a
> 1000 around is rooting for a loser…
On a very important level, it isn't ABOUT winners and losers. My wife and I
decided to get an Amiga (not an Atari, also considered in 1985) because it
appeared to be the right technology for us at the time.
In this house, there are now one A4000 with/Warp-4040/Emplant, one
A2000/Zeus-040, one plain A2000, 2 non-used A1000's, a couple of non-used PC
laptops, a 386DX40. We have not regretted getting any of them.
I plan to use my A4k as long as it keeps working, whether there is a support
company or none.
jsaklad@welchlink.welch.jhu.edu . . JimDoc, on AutoPilot
My Amigas are also going strong and will do until 'the tires fall off' – at
which time I will try to repair the tires and keep going.
So does anyone know if ESCOM plans to make Amigas?
Daniel,
At this point, ESCOM has only bought the trademarks, not the
technology. Some unless something has changed….they couldn't build Amigas.
In fact, if my information is correct, the trademark they bought was the
Commodore name and trademark, not the Amiga name and trademark.
Don
p.s. IF something new has come up…someone else will jump in and correct me
I'm sure.
Don,
I thought Dan Stets said the after initially trying to buy just the trademark
and coming up against legal opposition, they bid on and won the whole ball of
wax, subject to the results of the auction.
._ _ _ INTERNET: mshea@math.arizona.edu
| | |ichael _>hea COMPUSERVE: 76665,3360
Michael,
That wasn't my understanding…but I could be wrong.
My understanding was they bought the trademarks but were willing to
give them up if they recovered their 1.6 million.
Don
They bid on the whole ball of wax. There is no sense in which they've won,
they are just the default (if no higher bidder).
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
>They bid on the whole ball of wax. There is no sense in which they've won,
>they are just the default (if no higher bidder).
Thats what I meant to say. Don't you know you are supposed to listen to what I
mean not what I say?
8^)….
._ _ _ INTERNET: mshea@math.arizona.edu
| | |ichael _>hea COMPUSERVE: 76665,3360
Sorry, I'm not part-betazoid.
If I was, I'd probably be much nicer-looking.
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
Yeh, and you would also be entirely too politically correct.
8^)…
._ _ _ INTERNET: mshea@math.arizona.edu
| | |ichael _>hea COMPUSERVE: 76665,3360
Dale,
You said and I quote, "Sorry, I'm not part-betazoid. If I was, I'd probably be
much nicer-looking."
Yeah, right now you look like a nice-looking Ferengi. ;-} I'm kidding! I'M
KIDDING!
Regards,
John Chang
As I don't really understand why Escom only bought the TM, I guess that's yet
another financial big swindle… Could it be something like Escom will tell the
Amiga buyer (if there's one) that, since the C= logo is still on the hardware
circuitry plans, a license fee is needed to use them?
Fred.
Frederic Botton from Paris, France
fbotton@cix.compulink.co.uk
Escom wants to sell C= branded PC's.
dale@iam.com http://www.iam.com
Intangible Assets Manufacturing
Frederic,
In Europe…the name Commodore is valuable.
Don
Wonder what the situation is in Canada?
The Commodore trademark has been licensed (sold? I dunno) for use on PC
computers. If it's a license, Commodore Canada still have a source of revenue
of sorts. It it was a sale, then the purchaser would be in the same situation
as ESCOM.
Oddly enough, a local computer journal recently did a product comparison of
MS-DOS/Windows platforms currently available. It was something of a shock to
read that the Commodore machine was rated as a best buy – fine workmanship and
a good price. Must puzzle the heck out of people who don't know the story.
–Jim
I understand that the TM rights purchased would only be good in Europe (may
even not in UK). The company that sold the rights to the TM definately did NOT
have the rights to the TM in the US.
-bill