Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 19:30:42 12/17/03
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Mike, >> I don't know whether making such a claim is legal in >> Germany, but I will certainly find out soon, because I >> am getting highly annoyed at your bullshits. > Estimations of expected performances are legal in europe. No manufacturer > will provide you with a written guarantee of a certain match or tournament > performance though, in the license. But it is not legal to claim something strongest without clear proof. I did some research on that, the term is called "Alleinstellungswerbung" in german. Some sites may be interesting for you and others to read (everything in german) http://medialine.focus.de/PM1D/PM1DB/PM1DBF/pm1dbf.htm?snr=271 http://www.news-vnr.de/archiv/2003/10/newsletter_2003_10_01.html http://www.praxishandbuch-werbung.de/1000/wrg_a.html#6 I may quote also some of the additional infos about Ruffian given at http://www.playwitharena.com: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ruffian 2.0.0 by Per-Ola Valfridsson (Sweden) is the strongest Winboard compatible engine in the world today. The freely available and downloadable version of Ruffian (ver. 1.0.5) is placed first on the Winboard Engines Rating List. Its successor, coming more than one year later, with improved features and much higher playing strength, compared with 1.0.5. <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< To hold this way of advertising you must proof it. I am quite sure that the statement about Ruffian 2.0 is correct, but it is very hard to proof... The next statement about v1.0.5 is really problematic - there are several tourney results which see either Deep Sjeng or The King ahead of Ruffian 1.0.5. I don't think I must give you a list here, e.g. I have the 4th Edition of WBEC-Ridderkerk in mind where Deep Sjeng did end up in front of Ruffian or tourneys of Kurt Utzinger where The King clearly ends higher rated then v1.0.5. The problematic thing is, that when you do "Alleinstellungswerbung" and it is unclear then the advertise must proof that you are correct, which seems to me not possible. Because you must proof that it is way (!) ahead of the competitors since a long time and this may not change for a long time. The word "today" does not help in that respect. Such things are unpredictable and I am quite sure that is the reason why no company in the computer chess business has tried it yet. I did read many decisions at german courts where such advertisings were forbidden. > But I guess they could guarantee 60% against deep sjeng anytime and risk > nothing :-)) Even that is very unclear - give both engines a quad operton and let them play... can you predict the outcome ? I can't. Or think about the result at the Dutch Open - yes, Ruffian did win it, but with the same amount of points as The King, a well known winboard engine. Does that show superiority ? Or the result of CCT5 - yes, again Ruffian wins it, but in the final result table it was only third with lower Buchholz... again, to use "Alleinstellungswerbung" I think this is not enough. It did win finally the playoffs and for that fully deserve the 1st place... But again, does that show superiority ? >Btw. on this occasion, it is not legal in europe to make public wrong >accusations of fraud against a person, by which his reputation is harmed. Nothing was made in public - someone was just suspicious about some things and contacted the TD... They reacted according to the rules after looking carefully over the given facts. Anotherone did not follow the rules. So he was disqualified because of disrespect to the rules and NOT for any fraud. Greets, Thomas
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.