Author: Uri Blass
Date: 16:27:09 06/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 21, 2004 at 19:21:34, Ed Trice wrote: >On June 21, 2004 at 19:19:28, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On June 21, 2004 at 19:14:45, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On June 21, 2004 at 17:59:02, Ed Trice wrote: >>> >>>>On June 21, 2004 at 17:44:51, Richard Pijl wrote: >>>> >>>>>However, after deletion of two messages (that only contained one-liner personal >>>>>attacks on other members) Ed Trice let me know that he might include our sponsor >>>>>and host in future legal battles if we would allow the patent discussions. >>>> >>>> >>>>And my exact words were: >>>> >>>>======== >>>> >>>>"Recall Tord was advising everyone on how to circumvent my patent rights. If >>>>people did follow his advise, which was illegal on 6 different grounds according >>>>to my attorney, what do you think the result would be? >>>> >>>>As long as you permit such postings, there is a risk that the media provider >>>>will be pulled into such a fight, if one ever errupts. >>>> >>>>Be smart about it. Advise others to leave the topic of the Gothic Chess Patent >>>>to individual discussions off of the main board. It is good advise." >>>> >>>>======== >>>> >>>>I was being amiable about this Richard, your post might lead others to an >>>>incorrect conclusion. >>> >>>I think that it may be enough to forbid only discussions about the legal >>>question. >>> >>>I will not discuss the legal question but I believe that most people consider >>>it as immoral to have patent about opening position and this behaviour attract >>>less people to gothic chess. >>> >>>It is possible that people that otherwise could be interested in the game will >>>escape from this game because they do not want to support you after you decide >>>to forbid not only commercial programs but also free programs without spacial >>>license. >>> >>>The fact that modifying the opening position makes the game more interesting is >>>not something that convince most posters here. >>> >>>Uri >> >>In a second thought it may be enough for Ed but this forum is about computer >>chess so the decision to forbid discussions about gothic chess in this forum is >>logical. >> >>Uri > >So Reinhard should stop discussing Capablanca Random Chess, and all of its >variants, and all of his S.M.I.R.F. research since it is not 100% releated to >chess. > >Correct? Yes If discussions about Gothic chess is stopped in this board then by the same logic discussion about Capablanca Random chess should be stopped in this board Uri
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.