Amiga and Hyperion agreement: full breakdown of AmigaOS rights

This is a deep dive into the official agreement between Amiga Corporation and Hyperion Entertainment. It explains who owns the different parts of AmigaOS, what Hyperion can continue developing and selling, how the Amiga trademarks may be used, and what happens if either company breaks the deal. The agreement takes effect from 5 June 2026. Representatives of both companies digitally signed it on 17 July 2026, and a copy was filed with the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington on 3 August 2026. At its centre, the settlement draws a detailed line between the original Amiga operating-system software and Hyperion’s later work. As between the two companies, Amiga controls the covered original software and the main trademarks. Hyperion owns qualifying AmigaOS 4 code and receives an exclusive licence to continue developing and selling AmigaOS 4 for PowerPC and other non-68K processors. The deal also gives Hyperion a limited period in which to continue selling AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 for 68K systems.

Amiga owns the covered original operating-system software

Under the settlement, Amiga Corporation is recognised as the exclusive owner of the original software covered by the agreement. That includes AmigaOS 3.1 and earlier versions, AmigaOS 3.1.3, AmigaOS 3.1.4, their fixes and updates, and relevant improvements later incorporated into AmigaOS 3.5 and AmigaOS 3.9. It also includes Kickstart firmware and the operating-system components stored in ROM.

Amiga owns the associated documentation too. The agreement treats the AmigaOS 3.1 source code as Amiga’s confidential information and trade secret. Hyperion may use that code only within the specific licences granted by the settlement.

This is an agreement between Amiga and Hyperion rather than a court ruling that settles every possible ownership question against third parties. The document also says Amiga doesn’t provide a general warranty covering title, encumbrances or non-infringement for every asset described as part of the wider Amiga Properties. For that reason, the most accurate reading is that the agreement establishes the ownership position between the two companies.

Hyperion owns the qualifying AmigaOS 4 code

Hyperion remains the exclusive owner of the AmigaOS 4 source code, apart from any Amiga-owned software incorporated into it. The same principle applies to certain code moved from AmigaOS 4 into AmigaOS 3.2 or AmigaOS 3.3. The agreement calls this Backported Code. Hyperion owns that backported material when it comes from AmigaOS 4 and doesn’t form part of the original software owned by Amiga.

Both the AmigaOS 4 source code and the qualifying Backported Code count as Hyperion’s confidential information and trade secrets. The ownership split is therefore specific rather than general. Under the agreement, Amiga owns the covered original operating-system software. Hyperion owns the AmigaOS 4 source code apart from Amiga-owned material included within it, along with the qualifying backported code defined by the settlement.

Hyperion can continue developing AmigaOS 4

Amiga grants Hyperion an exclusive, worldwide and royalty-free licence to use and modify AmigaOS 3.1 for AmigaOS 4 development. Hyperion may develop AmigaOS 4 for PowerPC processors. It may also target other processor architectures, provided they don’t belong to the 68K family.

This gives Hyperion room to support a non-PowerPC architecture later without first changing the basic licence structure. The rights cover development, advertising, marketing, sale and distribution. Hyperion may supply AmigaOS 4 as a download, on physical media or as software bundled with compatible hardware.

The agreement doesn’t lock these rights to one version number. A future product may still fall under the AmigaOS 4 definition even when Hyperion gives it another version number. There is a key condition. The operating system must remain based at least partly on the Amiga-owned software covered by the agreement. Hyperion can’t move the product to an independently developed or third-party operating-system codebase and continue relying on the same licence. ExecSG is specifically excluded from being treated as a third-party codebase for this purpose.

The AmigaOS 3.1 licence can’t be transferred without approval

The AmigaOS 3.1 rights granted to Hyperion are personal to the company. Hyperion can’t assign or transfer them without Amiga’s prior written consent. The restriction covers transfers through mechanisms such as a merger, consolidation, dissolution or operation of law. A transfer that breaks this rule is invalid and gives the receiving party no rights in the software.

The wider settlement also prevents either company from transferring the agreement, its rights or its obligations without written approval from the other company. This doesn’t necessarily mean that any purchase of Hyperion would automatically end the licence. For example, a straightforward purchase of shares could leave the same legal company holding the rights. The precise result would depend on the structure of the transaction and whether it legally transfers the licence or the agreement.

Hyperion can continue selling AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3

Hyperion may continue advertising, marketing, distributing and selling AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 for 68K systems. That includes digital downloads and boxed editions. Hyperion may also manufacture physical copies of AmigaOS 3.3 under the conditions set out in the agreement. These rights have an end date.

The normal sales period ends on 31 December 2026 or 16 months after the release of AmigaOS 3.3, whichever comes later. Even with that extension, the period can’t continue beyond 31 December 2027 unless Amiga and Hyperion agree to another date.

The wording gives Hyperion time to release and sell AmigaOS 3.3, but it doesn’t create an open-ended 68K product licence. When the agreed sales period ends, Hyperion may retain up to 1,000 physical copies of AmigaOS 3.3. It may sell those remaining units through its normal business operations.

The 68K products must be sold as upgrades or replacements

Hyperion can’t market AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 as unrestricted standalone operating systems for any computer. Each 68K product must be positioned as an upgrade to, or replacement for, a lawfully licensed AmigaOS installation. This applies to original Amiga computers and to other systems already running a legally licensed 68K version of AmigaOS.

Hyperion must include this restriction in the relevant sales terms and end-user licence agreements. The agreement also allows Hyperion to bundle AmigaOS 3.1 components with AmigaOS 4 for compatibility purposes.

Those AmigaOS 3.1 components may be licensed only for use within the AmigaOS 4 environment. Hyperion can’t license them for standalone operation or for use outside that environment. This is a contractual restriction. The agreement doesn’t say that Hyperion must impose a particular technical enforcement system.

Some AmigaOS 3.2 and 3.3 conditions remain confidential

The publicly available version of the settlement doesn’t show every condition attached to AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 sales. Several passages covering digital downloads, boxed editions and Hyperion’s reporting duties have been redacted. Their wording can’t be confirmed from the published copy.

The visible agreement does say that Hyperion must provide certain information to Amiga at least every two months when a specified event occurs. The event itself is hidden, so the exact reporting trigger isn’t publicly known. The main sales rights, product restrictions and final deadlines remain visible. The undisclosed clauses shouldn’t be characterised beyond that.

AmigaOne becomes the licensed hardware brand for AmigaOS 4

Amiga grants Hyperion an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free and sublicensable licence to use the AmigaOne mark in connection with AmigaOS 4. Hyperion and its partners may use the name when manufacturing, advertising, marketing, distributing or selling systems intended to run AmigaOS 4.

Hyperion must make commercially reasonable efforts to ensure that hardware promoted as capable of running AmigaOS 4 carries the AmigaOne brand. Product materials must also identify AmigaOne as a mark used under an exclusive licence from Amiga. Any new agreement allowing a third party to use a licensed mark for more than three years requires Amiga’s prior written approval.

Hyperion can use the AmigaOS name and Boing Ball

Hyperion receives a worldwide, royalty-free licence to use the AmigaOS name and Boing Ball logo for AmigaOS 4. This licence is non-exclusive, so Amiga may also use or license those marks. Hyperion may sublicense its rights when working with AmigaOS 4 partners.

The position is narrower for AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3. Hyperion may use the AmigaOS name and Boing Ball logo for those releases, but the licence is non-exclusive and non-sublicensable. It is tied to Hyperion’s authorised handling of the 68K products. Workbench and Kickstart receive separate treatment.

Hyperion may use those names to describe the AmigaOS desktop interface and the firmware or ROM-resident operating-system components. The agreement permits descriptive use rather than treating them as independently licensed product trademarks.

Hyperion must transfer Amiga trademark registrations

Hyperion must transfer its Amiga trademark registrations to Amiga Corporation or another party selected by Amiga. Amiga will pay the cost of completing those transfers.

Hyperion must also assign its applications for the AmigaOne and AmigaOS marks. Any future application involving the licensed marks must be filed in Amiga’s name, although Hyperion will cover the related filing costs.

This places formal ownership of the principal Amiga trademarks with Amiga Corporation while allowing Hyperion to continue using selected marks under the settlement licences. Hyperion keeps the product rights the agreement grants. It just doesn’t keep ownership of the trademark registrations themselves.

Both companies must agree on product notices

Amiga and Hyperion must jointly agree on the copyright and trademark notices used with Hyperion products. That includes notices printed on hardware, software, packaging and manuals, as well as material published online.

Hyperion must also provide Amiga with copies of new sublicensing agreements promptly after signing them. Hyperion may redact the financial terms. This allows Amiga to see which companies receive rights involving its software or marks without requiring Hyperion to reveal every commercial figure.

Hyperion must supply older AmigaOS source materials

Hyperion must deliver the complete source code for AmigaOS 3.1, AmigaOS 3.1.3 and AmigaOS 3.1.4. The delivery must include fixes, updates, revision histories and documentation.

The agreement says Amiga needs the material for copyright registration work. Hyperion doesn’t have to provide the source code for AmigaOS 3.2 or AmigaOS 3.3. Those releases include material covered by different ownership arrangements, including qualifying code owned by Hyperion. Within 60 days of the settlement’s effective date, Hyperion must also report the number of boxed AmigaOS 3.2 units it held on 23 March 2026.

Hyperion must remove security claims over Amiga assets

Hyperion must release any security interest it holds in the licensed software or trademarks. In practical terms, Hyperion can’t continue treating those Amiga assets as collateral or as property over which it holds a financial security claim. Hyperion must also provide Amiga with copies of its agreements with existing licensees.

These measures separate Amiga’s ownership from Hyperion’s licensed use of the software and trademarks. Hyperion keeps the rights granted by the settlement, but those rights don’t amount to ownership or financial control over the underlying Amiga assets.

Source-code access remains restricted

Hyperion may provide AmigaOS 3.1 source-code access only to contractors and developers who need it for authorised work. Those people must sign written confidentiality agreements containing protections at least as strong as those found in the settlement. Amiga has the right to review and reasonably approve the form of those confidentiality agreements.

Hyperion must also notify Amiga if it becomes aware of, or reasonably suspects, unauthorised access to or theft of the Amiga-owned source code. That duty can apply before Hyperion has complete proof. A reasonable suspicion is enough to trigger the notification requirement.

Developer contracts can’t leave ownership unresolved

New developer agreements connected with AmigaOS 4, bundled AmigaOS 3.1 components, AmigaOS 3.2 or AmigaOS 3.3 can’t allow developers or contractors to retain rights in the work they produce. Amiga may approve each new form of developer agreement before Hyperion starts using it.

There is a clear time limit. If Amiga doesn’t respond within 14 days, the proposed form counts as approved. Hyperion must also release contractors and developers from restrictions that would prevent them from working directly with Amiga under separate agreements.

A developer may therefore accept new work from Amiga and assign the resulting rights to Amiga. This doesn’t transfer Hyperion’s existing AmigaOS 4 ownership. It removes contractual barriers that might otherwise stop developers from accepting separate work.

Amiga’s use of the covered software is limited to 68K

Amiga agrees not to market, sell, modify, improve or otherwise exploit the covered software outside the 68K platform. It can’t authorise another company to do so either. The restriction protects Hyperion’s exclusive rights to develop AmigaOS 4 and other licensed non-68K versions based on the original Amiga software.

Amiga may continue using and developing the covered software for 68K systems. It may also use the AmigaOS name for a 68K operating system or in descriptive and historical references. It can’t commercially distribute or publicly release a non-68K operating system with an architecture substantially similar to the covered AmigaOS 3.1 architecture, to the extent that architecture qualifies for protection under United States copyright law. The restriction applies to source code, object code, free distribution, commercial distribution and sublicensing.

Amiga needs Hyperion’s agreement to sell AmigaOS 3.2 or 3.3

During the term of the settlement, Amiga can’t market, sell or otherwise exploit AmigaOS 3.2 or AmigaOS 3.3 unless both companies agree. This restriction is separate from Hyperion’s product sales deadline.

Hyperion’s normal right to sell the two releases ends on the agreed termination date. Amiga’s restriction, however, remains linked to the wider term of the settlement rather than the individual sales window for those products. That means the expiry of Hyperion’s normal AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 sales rights doesn’t automatically give Amiga an independent right to start selling the same releases.

Amiga must maintain its main trademarks

Amiga must use its best efforts to maintain and protect the Amiga trademark registrations in the United States and the European Union. That duty applies unless another trademark claimant prevents Amiga from doing so.

The agreement therefore places both ownership and the primary responsibility for maintaining the trademark portfolio with Amiga Corporation. Hyperion receives the licences required for its products but doesn’t take responsibility for the wider portfolio.

Bankruptcy can terminate the settlement automatically

The agreement terminates automatically if a final judgment declares Hyperion bankrupt. It may also terminate if the relevant Belgian commercial court removes Hyperion from control of all or part of its assets or activities under the legal provision identified in the settlement.

Not every financial restructuring triggers automatic termination. A judicial reorganisation intended to keep Hyperion operating doesn’t end the agreement by itself. This includes certain arrangements with creditors and comparable proceedings in other jurisdictions. Bankruptcy, liquidation and a court-controlled transfer of Hyperion’s business or assets receive different treatment and may trigger termination.

Hyperion must stop using the software after termination

When the agreement ends, Hyperion must stop using the licensed software and trademarks. It must permanently delete the covered Amiga source code from systems controlled by its employees, contractors and developers, except where the law requires retention.

Hyperion receives a six-month period in which to sell existing physical stock carrying the licensed marks. This clause applies to stock already in existence. It doesn’t grant an unlimited right to manufacture new products after termination.

Breach claims follow a fast two-stage process

If one of the companies believes the other side has broken the settlement must first send written notice describing the alleged breach. The recipient gets 15 days to dispute the claim. The companies must then attempt to resolve the matter directly. If that fails, a breach claim normally enters the expedited procedure set out in the agreement’s second appendix.

The Belgian Centre for Arbitration and Mediation, known as CEPANI, administers the case. One arbitrator handles the proceedings in English, with Brussels as the legal seat. Meetings and hearings normally take place by video unless the companies agree to attend in person. The procedure has two stages. The first decides whether a breach occurred. If the arbitrator finds no breach, the case ends. If a breach is found, the dispute moves to a separate remedy stage.

The main breach procedure has a 60-day target

The expedited process places firm limits on evidence gathering and written submissions. Each company may make up to eight targeted document requests. The agreement doesn’t provide for a wider discovery process. A hearing isn’t automatic. The arbitrator may permit one when there is good cause, but it can’t last longer than one day or eight hours.

The agreement aims to produce a final award within 60 days after the case file reaches the arbitrator. The companies may agree to an extension, or the arbitrator may grant one for good cause. Missing the deadline doesn’t invalidate the eventual decision.

The arbitrator chooses between two final offers

When the arbitrator finds a breach, each company submits a sealed final offer describing its proposed remedy. The offer may include financial compensation and certain non-financial measures allowed by the agreement. The arbitrator must select the proposal that most closely matches the evidence and applicable law. They can’t construct a different compromise between the two offers.

This gives both companies a reason to submit a measured proposal. An unrealistic demand could lose to the other side’s more proportionate offer. Under this expedited process, a final offer can’t ask for the settlement to be cancelled, rewritten or terminated. It also can’t demand the recall, withdrawal or destruction of physical products already in production or already supplied to a distributor or retailer.

Some disputes can enter a second arbitration process

The agreement contains a separate final arbitration route for certain situations. It may apply when a company fails to carry out a remedy ordered through the expedited process, doesn’t dispute an alleged breach within 15 days and then fails to cure it, or refuses to participate in the original arbitration.

It also covers claims that don’t allege a breach and ask only for a formal declaration about the interpretation of the settlement or ownership of rights addressed by it. CEPANI also administers this procedure under Belgian law.

It normally uses one arbitrator, although Amiga and Hyperion may agree to appoint a panel of three. Unlike the expedited breach procedure, the arbitrator in this second process may award remedies available under law or equity. The arbitrator may also require the unsuccessful party to pay the successful party’s reasonable legal costs. A claim seeking only declaratory relief remains limited to that type of remedy.

Legal costs depend on the arbitration route

The two arbitration procedures handle costs differently. In the expedited breach procedure, Amiga and Hyperion normally pay their own lawyers, experts and case-preparation expenses. The arbitrator may still divide the arbitration fees and administrative costs according to the result and other relevant circumstances.

The second arbitration procedure allows a broader cost award. There, the arbitrator may order the unsuccessful party to pay fees, costs and reasonable lawyers’ fees to the successful party. The distinction matters. The rule that each company covers its own legal bills doesn’t apply to every dispute under the settlement.

The companies release earlier claims

Amiga and Hyperion release each other from claims that existed on or before 5 June 2026. The release also covers the related companies and individuals identified in the agreement. There is an exception for a claim that one company couldn’t have known about because the other company concealed the relevant facts. The settlement also prevents both sides from making public statements that disparage the other party’s integrity, character or competence in connection with the released claims.

The 2009 settlement has been replaced

The new agreement replaces the settlement signed in September 2009 between Hyperion and the earlier Amiga parties. A separate agreement dated 15 March 2026 remains in force except where the final settlement expressly changes it. From 5 June 2026, the new document becomes the main contractual framework governing the relationship between Amiga Corporation and Hyperion.

What the Amiga and Hyperion settlement means

The agreement creates three main areas. As between Amiga and Hyperion, Amiga owns the covered original operating-system software, its documentation and the principal Amiga trademarks. Hyperion owns the qualifying AmigaOS 4 source code and the Backported Code defined by the agreement.

Hyperion also receives an exclusive licence to continue developing and selling AmigaOS 4 for PowerPC and other non-68K processors. Its right to sell AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 for 68K systems is narrower, subject to product conditions and limited by a final timetable. The agreement doesn’t announce new hardware, processor ports or operating-system releases. It doesn’t provide a technical roadmap.

Its purpose is contractual. It identifies ownership between the companies, defines which products each side may develop or sell, separates the 68K and non-68K markets, controls the use of Amiga trademarks and creates two procedures for handling future disputes.

The practical result is a clearer operating structure. Amiga controls the covered original software and trademark portfolio. Hyperion keeps a defined route for AmigaOS 4, while its AmigaOS 3.2 and AmigaOS 3.3 business continues under tighter conditions and a fixed sales timetable.