Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 18:46:41 05/02/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 2002 at 19:02:31, Ricardo Gibert wrote:
>On May 02, 2002 at 11:44:53, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On May 02, 2002 at 11:30:53, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>
>>>On May 02, 2002 at 11:15:44, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote:
>>>
>>>>Is it 'my' book then?
>>>
>>>Sorry for the rhetorical question, I'll restate.
>>>
>>>>>So if you for example play 1000 of automated games in one opening against
>>>>>Rebel, and create a book from that, thats ok.
>>>
>>>I would assume it is. I'll assume it as a basic right to compile an
>>>opening book from a set of games from other players for the rest of
>>>this discussion.
>>>
>>>>>But a book is a lot more. It is a collection of openings, the weight of
>>>>>different lines, the ? and !s.
>>>
>>>Now, the problem is that there is an equivalence between the book and a
>>>large enough set of games played by a program with that book. Given the
>>>latter, I can determine the former. Saying I can do one and not the other
>>>makes no sense.
>>>
>>>>>A lot of people seem to fail to understand the difference between holding
>>>>>copyright over an opening and a book. You obviously cant copyright an opening.
>>>
>>>I would think the same, i.e. an opening cannot be copyrighted. But Jeroen
>>>is claiming exactly that in this thread, namely that people should not
>>>be allowed to copy ('steal') lines from the Rebel book.
>>>
>>>--
>>>GCP
>>
>>He says that you have the right to buy books, analyze the theory lines and use
>>your analysis in the book(this is what he did if I understand correctly).
>>
>>I see no difference between it and buying Rebel,analyze the lines in rebel's
>>book and decide based on analysis which lines are good to copy to your book.
>>
>>I see no reason to assume that Rebel's book should be more protected than other
>>books that are not chess software.
>>
>>Uri
>
>I think Noomen's position can be distilled to this:
>
>The purpose of a chess playing program is to benefit its human users. This
>purpose does _not_ include benefiting other chess playing programs. A human can
>learn and use the lines from the software as this constitutes "fair use" and
>this is in fact a major purpose of the program, but a program cannot as it is
>diametrically opposed to intent and therefore does not constitute "fair use".
>This intent on the part of the programmers is unambiguously clear and therefore
>the use of Rebel's opening lines by other chess playing program is a violation
>of their copyright.
It is not clear if this is Noomen's position. Maybe it is, but then I do not
understand why he is going to complain to ICCA. I do not think that organization
has nothing to do with copyright issues. I guessed that it was more of a
sporting issue. I asked something to understand more his position but I got no
answer yet. I cannot understand how cannot be "fair use" to use a commercial
book with any engine when some GUI's are sold with the feature to use any engine
and plug it with a book. That is no hack! it is a feature of the package. Maybe
Rebel does not support this (I do not know) but his complain seemed to be more
general.
We really have to separate the copyright issues with the sport. The discussion
is completely different.
Regards,
Miguel
>I should hasten to add that I disagree with this. To me a chessplayer, whether
>human or computer program are equivalent as far as playing chess is concerned. A
>reasonable feature for any program to have is the ability to learn and this
>includes the learning of opening lines whether they originate from Rebels book
>or otherwise. It is unreasonable to expect either the program or a human to
>determine whether an opening line played by Rebel is specially created for Rebel
>and therefore protected by copyright or is a line that is derivative of someone
>elses work and is not.
>
>Rebel itself does not provide this information. It uses other peoples work
>without atribution. Moreover, the same argument can be applied to its use of
>other peoples works in forming its book. If it is valid that it is a violation
>of Rebels copyright to use lines from its book in other programs, then it is
>also a violation of copyright when Rebel uses lines from other works too. You
>can't have it both ways.
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.