Author: Fernando Villegas
Date: 05:46:51 01/27/99
Go up one level in this thread
Hi both: Well, you ask me a document or fact of any kind about Bob willingness, about his attitude respect Crafty. Simple: just take a look at the posts he has done about this issue. Sorry, I am not going to do the search for you, as maybe I should: no time for that. But If you can put faith in my memory and good will, what Bob has said is that the very nature of his Crafty proyect is to live it open to use and be changed or altered from any person interested and he only ask to receive a feedback about how good or bad the changes were. And if my meorya does not fail, what bothers Bob -and me- is the fact that clones of Crafty can be used and compete. I agree with him in that in the degree the sons of Crafty are no more than clones. Bionic is still a case to examine. We have now a downloadable Bionic so we can see that for ourselves. Of course I understand what All rights reserved means. Nevertheless, "reserved" has not an absolute and unique meaning. What you reserve depoends of what you want to reserve. Bill gates reserves something very different for Windows that what Bob reserves for himself. Bob has said: do what you want but send me the feedbakc, recognizee my autorship in the original product, etc. The authors os Bionic has complied with art laest one of those petitions. maybe they are failing in sending back to Bob the entire source code of Bionic. Conclusion: In my view the sin of bionic people is something to be examined in facts and not something to be stablished from now on, a priori, on legal or moral terms. We must see the bowells of Bionic to see how much they really putted new into it. Even some people believes the version that played in the first half of the tournament was just a Crafty. Greetings for all of you. Fernando writting now from Spaceship Babylon
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.