Author: Francesco Di Tolla
Date: 08:20:34 11/28/03
Go up one level in this thread
>>“Each program must be the original work of the entering developers. >>Programming teams whose code is derived from or including game-playing >>code written by others must name all other authors, or the source of >>such code, in their application details. Programs which are discovered >>to be close derivatives of others (e.g., by playing nearly all moves >>the same), may be declared invalid by the Tournament Director after >>seeking expert advice. For this purpose a listing of all game-related >>code running on the system must be available on demand to the Tournament >>Director.” >Read the letter, they are _not_ in violation of their own charter, that's >nonsense. I read to the letter and see an incomplete law: 1)it does not state the conditions under which the Tournament Director may ask to see the source code: e.g if tomorrow I call and say Shredder is a Fritz clone: will they ask to the author of Shredder to show the code? Will they ask Fritz authors to show the code as well? Or will they first ask me some argument and veify it with an expert? 2)it does state that a program may be banned if found to be a clone (cause it produces similar moves (which seems to be not true for list and crafty) or beacuse it can be established that the code is derived from the code of another program 3)it does state that for the investigation the source code should be available, but it absolutely does NOT state what happens if the code is not presented. At least not in the snipped quoted at ChessBase. That's why I call the law incomplete. The rule is quite clear "Programs which are discovered to be close derivatives of others ... may be declared invalid" Since this is not the case this is clearly an abuse. Note that step 2 is NOT a consequence of failing to apply step 3. Furthermore step 3 comes after step 1 for whitch there no explanation was given. So what they did is to apply a rule (3) as consequence of another rule (2) to which it was NOT related after following another rule (1) whose application was not motivated. All in all this is just a very bad example of bad use of power by the organizers of the tournament. On top of that it was enough to wait the end and possibly disqualify the program at the end. The abuse is then stronger cause they don't want to listen. regards Franz
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.