Author: Michael Williams
Date: 23:46:28 05/01/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 01, 2002 at 04:17:22, Slater Wold wrote: >On May 01, 2002 at 01:21:05, Michael Williams wrote: > >>On April 30, 2002 at 16:01:33, Slater Wold wrote: >> >>>On April 30, 2002 at 14:42:50, Jeroen Noomen wrote: >>> >>>>During the last 6 - 12 months I have noticed a trend that there are very clear >>>>indications that non-commercial programmers of chess programs make use of (parts >>>>of) commercially available books. As I was in Maastricht during the WMCCC in >>>>2001, lots of speculations and complaints were heard about this topic. From >>>>several sources I know that also the Rebel books have been ‘hacked’ by people (I >>>>will not mention their names, I am sure they know themselves whom I am talking >>>>about). As the Rebel books are my lifework I want to put a very clear statement >>>>in this forum. >>>> >>>>The Rebel books have been developped by me during a period of almost 14 years. >>>>Not only is it handmade, it also contains lots of stuff you will not find in >>>>other books. In the past it has happenend a few times that chess programs were >>>>caught as not being made by the programmer himself. Examples are Quick Step back >>>>in 1989, Greif, the several Crafty clones. As we can see from todays rules by >>>>the ICCA, such programs are not tolerated anymore. And in my view this is fully >>>>correct. >>>> >>>>Jeroen Noomen >>>>Bookauthor for Rebel and Chess Tiger >>> >>>I can understand your frustration. You've worked just as hard as Ed or >>>Christophe on Rebel/Tiger. No doubt your books add a considerable amount of Elo >>>to these programs, and I am sure Ed and Christophe are very appreciative of >>>that. >>> >>>However, I must warn you that laying claim to a series of chess opening moves is >>>not going to be easy to defend. You cannot copyright moves in chess, as you >>>cannot copyright dance moves. While you can copyright a mvs book, you are >>>actually only copyrighting the format. Again, you cannot copyright chess moves. >>> >>>I think anyone found 'hacking' a chess program, or its book, should face a >>>severe punishment. Anyone claiming something is their, when in fact it is not, >>>should be punished. >>> >>>I am not defending these people, I am simply stating the fact that it would be >>>easier to encrypt the books, than to go after those stealing it. >> >>You should be able to copyright chess moves in a specific context just as you >>should be able to copyright musical notes in a specific arrangement, sequence >>and context. Similar arguments exist for code. > >Not at all. You put musical notes together, and you have a song. You cannot >copyright musical notes, only songs. e4 e5 is not copyright protectable. >Sorry. Either you misunderstand or I didn't state it clearly enough, we are not talking about e4 e5, we are talking about 14 years of work. >>The difficulty in defending a position does not affect the justifiability of >>defending a position. > >Very true. But there is a point where you say, "Is this worth it?" That's a different issue altogether. You were incorrect on the initial issue.
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.