Author: David Mitchell
Date: 00:27:31 08/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 23, 2005 at 00:44:33, Cesar Contreras wrote: >"Clone" it's just a moral word. It seams to be intended to distinct "original" >from "not original" chess engines. Useless today in my opinion. Maybe a diferent >word can serve that good purpose for some more time. > >The fact it's that this diference don't exist anymore, most programs are pretty >unoriginal altought some have more original touches than others. > >So originality came in the form of some "touches of originality". > >I see some similarities with "moralily" or "good behavior": > >* Nobody really know what does "clone" means >* Every chess programmer is afraid being named a "cloner" >* If you defend a cloner be ready to be named a "cloner" >* If you discover a cloner, be ready to be named "X the just" >* Every programmer it's tempted to "clone" >* Everybody it's ready to punish the "clonner" >* Every new strong engine on town must "hide something" >* "Clone" meaned one thing 2 years ago, now means something diferent, it's like >a fashion thing. >* Things that some years ago meaned "to clone", now are bean threated with more >open mind. >* Everybody agree clonning it's bad (except some freaks out there). > > >My conclusion. > * Typical nonsense human behavior. > * Legality must be well defined, it's just wrong to punish someone for >something that undefinied. > >PD. I hope this is not copyrigthed. A "clone" is obviously just a coined word to mean "a copy or non-original" work. To actually research all about computer chess, you obviously would want to thoroughly inspect every strong (and some weak, as well), source code listing. But taking Fruit and "translating" it (and apparently Uri doesn't know that programs have been written that already do that, to varying degrees of success, so it's no big deal), into another language, and making an "alternate" evaluation, is much MORE than "fair use", by any legal term. Presenting such a program as your own work, is just plagerism, and copyright infringement. If Uri says it's "Movei based on Fruit", or "Movei, an enhanced Fruit chess program", then he might be OK, imo. But he wouldn't be eligible to compete in "no clones allowed" tournaments. Common sense tells us that just because lots of cars have 4 wheels and V-8 engines, that doesn't mean they're all "clones". (OK, some are pretty close, but that's beside the point, here)! But clearly, taking a Tom Clancy novel and adding your own "alternate ending", doesn't let you pass your "new book", off as your own book. No way. Uri seems to have an unlimited number of ways to rationalize his desire to produce a Fruit clone, but his arguments in favor of it, are just laundry out blowing in the breeze. There's not a whiff of sense to any of them. No matter WHAT he adds or subtracts from Fruit, his new program, will include code largely derived from, and based on, Fruit. As long as he knows that, and presents it as such (like Toga's author does), I have no problem with it - in fact I think it's a good thing. We might all learn what happens to Fruit with a little tinkering Movei-style. Fine! But please, don't call it an original program, because clearly it's not - it's a "clone". Of course, there are legal means of measuring such, but this is not a court, and no case is being presented, here. This is just a preliminary discussion, and I think common sense should come to the fore. Dave
This page took 0.01 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.