Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: What constitutes a clone?

Author: Pallav Nawani

Date: 21:36:30 02/15/05

Go up one level in this thread


On February 15, 2005 at 20:48:56, Charles Roberson wrote:

>On February 15, 2005 at 19:31:58, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On February 15, 2005 at 18:38:43, John Merlino wrote:
>>
>>
>>However, you can use the algorithms.  Just not the code.  What that means
>>exactly will differ somewhat (perhaps) due to personal opinions.
>>
>

>    Years ago, there was what some would call legal corporate theft.
>   I suppose it still happens but I heard about in the 1980's far more

If I recall correctly, this is not necessary. You can take an oppenents product
and take it apart to learn how it works, and then use the knowledge in your
products. I think this is legal in USA, and it is called 'reverse engineering'.
This is how IBM's original chip design for motherboards was copied and the PCs
spread like wildfire.


>    the web. So, maybe open source should be reconsidered. I've heard of
>    people trying to sale open source code off as their own work for money.

People can't claim that they've made those open source programs, but they can
still sell them for $. The Licenses allow it. For example if someone wants to
sell Natwarlal, he/she can, and I can't do a thing about it, since I have
released it with MIT license. Of course, I still have the option of not
releasing the future versions as open source.

Pallav



>
>    If one is going to actually have "their own" program, then stay away
>    from open source code.
>
>      Not to mention, it gets dull seeing freshman questions here from people
>     that have a program as strong as Crafty.
>
>     Charles



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.