Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 11:05:53 01/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
>>Whatever you put in the newspaper is public domain information. You >>can't complain when somebody uses this information for his own good. >>That's what the GNU and Crafty sources are. It is spread on multiple >>ftp servers on the Internet free downloadable for everybody. >> >>And *if* you can proof you have spend a reasonable amount of time >>and energy (such as an own GUI and engine) you even have full right >>to sell it. > >This is wrong. But to understand why, I'd like to suggest that you go >download a copy of Linux, and then _sell_ it to some companies where you >live. _then_ you will find out just how wrong your interpretation of the >GPL agreement really is. > > > > >>Sofar the legal part. >> >>The "license agreement" of the Crafty sources is simply wrong. Bob >>distributes the Crafty sources as freeware but apparently you have >>to stick to a lot of exceptions uncommon to freeware. It's like putting >>something in the newspaper and say, "You may not use this information >>in the following cases..." That is not how it works. >You do know that you can't copy something verbatim from a newspaper and >use it as though _you_ wrote it? Ie 'plagarism'??? >>If Bob wants to distribute his sources including special wishes then >>the freeware label isn't a correct one. He might consider that people >>who want the Crafty sources contact him and after they have agreed >>to his special rules Bob simply reveals how to get the sources. >> >>I like to emphasize that I am a supporter of the Crafty-sources approach >>as it is good for the progress of computer chess but I mainly jumped in >>the discussion because I feel that injustice is done to Bionic putting them >>on a public trial for no other reason than a flawed license agreement. > > >the license agreement isn't flawed. _huge_ corporations around the world are >using linux now. Some computer companies (gateway, dell, IBM, Compaq) are >distributing linux on high-end server platforms. And they abide by the strict >GPL everyone uses, because it is most definitely a legally binding contract.. >you use it, you must abide by the complete GNU GPL. You don't like the GNU >GPL agreement, you remove Linux and find something else. >And this GPL has stood the test of time, _and_ the test of courts in several >cases... Then make such a thing so that every chess programmer knows what your intentions are and what is allowed or not. Kind regards, Ed Schroder
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.