Author: Kim Hvarre
Date: 03:20:39 06/16/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 16, 1998 at 04:17:38, Amir Ban wrote: >On June 15, 1998 at 12:33:06, Thorsten Czub wrote: > >>On June 15, 1998 at 08:18:06, Kim Hvarre wrote: >>>In the future - I think - SSDF will have do buy e.g. Rebel, if they >>>wants to incklude it on the list, but let's see! (I hope they settle >>>with that solution, then nobody can "withdraw" from the list! >>> >>>kim >> >>The discussion was held in paderborn. >>Is rebel ED's or are the ssdf-allowed to publish results about ed's baby if he >>does not want. >>It could e.g. be that ed can stop publishing the list in magazines IF his rebel >>is still in the list although he forbid it. Thats the question. >>Lawyers will find out. I guess the customer can do what he wants, as long as he >>is not doing it in public. > >Ed has no legal means to stop the SSDF from including Rebel in their list. Ed >has a copyright and trademark on Rebel, that's all. A copyright means that only >he can make copies, but publishing match results doesn't infringe on that. A >trademark means that no one can use the name "Rebel" in a competing or related >product, but if you publish something where you use the name "Rebel" to mean >"Ed's program" you are not disputing the trademark but agreeing with it. > >Here's an analogy: Can GM stop auto magazines from doing comparative reviews of >Oldsmobile ? No. Can they keep Oldsmobile out of used-car pricelists ? No. > >Ed can perhaps change his license agreement for Rebel, but he cannot >discriminate against the SSDF. He will have to make everybody sign to keep all >Rebel results private. > >In any case, I believe Ed has already dropped this issue. >SNIP Not quite, I think - quoting from ED's homepage: "The Consequences After 12 years (with great joy!) competing on SSDF we unfortunately have to announce the following measures: We will give SSDF NO permission to test any new released Rebel. From September 1998 we want SSDF to remove all games played with Rebel6,7,8 and Rebel9 from their rating list. However we want to give Fritz5 the credit and the benefit of the doubt of their gained first place sofar as we don't want to be unsportsmanlike but when in September 1998 new programs are released we want all Rebel versions out of the SSDF list. What about the Future? We sincerely hope that the SSDF organization will go back to their original goals of testing chess programs for playing strength which means, testing on equal platforms, no special privileges to others and last but not least don't allow secret, hidden, unknown, not public AUTO232 software nobody can check. When this all is solved it will be our pleasure to compete with REBEL again on SSDF. Some final remarks It's our fear that since the SSDF has allowed secret, not public available AUTO232 software to compete on SSDF other competitors either ARE FORCED to follow this newest fashion or like REBEL will also resign from SSDF. Both options are a loss for the chess community. But it is our opinion joining this new development of NON STANDARD AUTO232 software hidden for everybody is no option at all! We from Rebel are very disappointed by the attitude of both the SSDF and the Fritz5 producers. They both have created a big problem and we hope that they will solve the problem. As already mentioned also other competitors on SSDF have complained. Recognizable names like Richard Lang (Genius), Chrilly Donninger (Nimzo and author of the accepted AUTO232), Stefan Meyer-Kahlen (Shredder) have complained too in an open letter to SSDF. If you are interested in their views too then click here to read the Open Letter to SSDF. Please be aware that we from REBEL do not share all points mentioned in this open letter."
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.