Author: Duncan Stanley
Date: 15:34:48 04/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On April 21, 2001 at 17:24:37, Thorsten Czub wrote: >On April 21, 2001 at 16:31:03, Duncan Stanley wrote: > >>*If* the programmers were 'united'. *If* the programmers had an organisation >>that was in their interests. *If* the programmers had the confidence. >> >>*Then* they, as a group, could exploit potential lucrative situations to their >>cumulative benefit and to the benefit of computer chess. >> >>But all they want is to 'win', individually. So they let a bunch of charlatans >>exploit them. >> >>This won't change. >> >>End of story. > >so all the chess-programmers need is a chess-programmer trade union. I wonder if publishers have explicit exhibition-match rights on those engines? You know that one programmer, for example, still has his own exhibition match rights, in that he is able to enter his experimental engine into tournaments when he wants. It would be seriously funny if publishers forgot to get the rights, no? And before anyone starts jumping up and down with legalese; rights are very strange things. Let me give an example: you licence your engine for PC in 1985 or so. Then they invent the CD. You didn't licence the publisher CD rights, believe it or not, since it was a distribution medium not known in 1985 (or whenever). The publisher needs a specific extension on the contract to distribute on CD. Likewise, specific extension needed for DVD or wireless (mobile phone) games, et cetera et cetera. This tends to be got round nowadays with clauses like "all formats and delivery systems, known or unknown"; but exhibition match rights? Hmmmm?
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.