Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 16:32:20 05/12/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2005 at 19:11:47, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >On May 12, 2005 at 18:09:14, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On May 12, 2005 at 15:41:11, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >> >>>This was coming from the thread Re: A Critic against Public Burning of young >>>Talents in Computerchess >>> +++++++++++++++++++++ >>> >>>On May 12, 2005 at 10:51:38, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>On May 12, 2005 at 10:40:30, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>> >>>>>On May 12, 2005 at 06:16:29, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On May 11, 2005 at 22:29:40, Mike Byrne wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Enjoy life and just read what you want to read and enjoy the people that you you >>>>>>>like to be with. Life is too short for anything else. >>>>>> >>>>>>Mike, you are a very wise man. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Best, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Michael >>>>>>> >>>>>>>ps Thank you and Martin for Arena - the best free chess product made thus far >>>>>>>in this century! >>>>>> >>>>>>I must say this to the benefit of science. Nobody ever has researched the source >>>>>>code of ARENA. >>>>> >>>>>Not so. I have gone through the string table for Arena. It is written in >>>>>Delphi, so it could port to UNIX using Kylix. >>>>>Here is the list of dlls and binaries referenced: >>>>>\pifmgr.dll >>>>>\system32\pifmgr.dll >>>>>_isdel.exe >>>>>accuclck.exe >>>>>advapi32.dll >>>>>arena.exe >>>>>Av_BookBuilder.exe >>>>>BLDINDEX.exe >>>>>BookBuilder.exe >>>>>BookEdit.exe >>>>>cb3dviewer.exe >>>>>comctl32.dll >>>>>comdlg32.dll >>>>>CTL3D32.DLL >>>>>DGTEBDLL.DLL >>>>>dos4gw.exe >>>>>ELOStat.exe >>>>>explorer.exe >>>>>gdi32.dll >>>>>gnuchesr.exe >>>>>GradualTest.exe >>>>>HolmesCfg.exe >>>>>IMM32.DLL >>>>>install.exe >>>>>InstallCC.exe >>>>>kernel32.dll >>>>>notepad.exe >>>>>oleaut32.dll >>>>>PSAPI.dll >>>>>regedit.exe /s >>>>>Restarter.exe >>>>>RICHED32.DLL >>>>>setup.exe >>>>>shell32.dll >>>>>Speedtest\gtest.exe >>>>>start MSINFO32.exe >>>>>tail.exe >>>>>timeseal.exe >>>>>timestamp.exe >>>>>uninstall.exe >>>>>user32.dll >>>>>vcltest3.dll >>>>>winboard.exe >>>>>winmm.dll >>>>>winmsd.exe >>>>>wsock32.dll >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>You can see all the custom controls and the formats and pretty much everything >>>>>about the organization. Arena does not contain amazing new algorithms or >>>>>anything like that. What Arena represents is thousands and thousands of >>>>>man-hours of incredibly tedious GUI work. >>> >>> >>>Dann, I have some questions for you. >>> >>>The "tools" above - they could be used, and it wasn't "cloning" in your view. >> >>I do not understand your question. > >I was surprised that you can use dozens of programs and you could still claim >that you've created your own program? There is no law against learning. There is no law against absorbing ideas. What I cannot do is steal what someone else has done. I can read his program, understand what he did, and then do it myself. There is nothing wrong with that. What I cannot do is take his code and use it without permission. To do so would be morally and legally wrong. >>>Now I have a missing part in my understanding as non-expert for programming. Do >>>you say (with others or all) that say - someone has a final product before his >>>eyes (a product from the leading company) that IF you are clever enough to write >>>down several thousands of lines in your own style (how could that be if >>>programming is using a specific language? What is the important thing in >>>programming? Knowing the language and then describe the orders or is it >>>important to solve thousands of problems to express what the program should do? >>>Excuses to all for my naive questions, but they are important for me to >>>understand where abilities reign or where simple cloning is taking place.) >> >>If the source code for a software product is available, cloning means to take >>that code, add a few tweaks, and say that you did it. > >Yes, I see, but if you say anything at all, is it still cloning? There are fair use laws that may make it OK to use certain small fragments. I do not know what the limits are and I would not try to test that law. >In almost all >of your statements you claim sort of judicial law while I am talking about the >creative process similar to a science. Do you really believe that in science >certain public findings would be ignored if that is actually a helpful key for >your own work? There is a difference between stealing and learning. I think it should be obvious to an intelligent person such as yourself. >Think about politically or militarily research... > > > >> >>A similar thing is to take part of it and put it into your program. That is not >>cloning but might be a copyright violation depending upon the restrictions of >>the original source code. >> >>If you say nothing then your project is copyright. That means it CANNOT be used >>without written permission. > >I don't understand. You mean you can copyright an idea? No. You can patent an idea. If I do not have patent protection, then the idea belongs to everyone. But my implementation (e.g. my "code base") belongs to me if I wrote it. >> >>If you say GPL, then anyone can use it, but their project must also become open >>source. >> >>If you say Public Domain, then the project can be used by anyone for any purpose >>that they like. There are many other license types. > >Let's think that someone doesn't inform the public at all, where is the guilt? There are special exemptions from copyright law for purely academic purposes >I >see two situations where guilt could become relevant. a) championships and b) >business. The relevant copyright laws apply. There are (of course) other areas of infringment. >>>I understood you until now as if the mere expressing of code is already a >>>creative performance. However I say that if I look at ChessBase 8 or 9 and ask >>>myself, well, how should I state my code so that the result is similar to >>>ChessBase, is it still authentical performance? I doubt that. >> >>You are mistaken. The interface to a program is not copyrightable. This has >>been established worldwide through many court cases. I can write a program that >>does the same thing as your program. It can even look extremely similar to your >>program. The violation occurs if you take my code and do not follow the rules >>associated with the thing that you took. > >And all the creative inventions of chessBase could be stolen? Or copied? This is >IMO a bad practice. But that is the way that it is. They can protect themselves via: 1. Copyright 2. Patent 3. Trade secret. It is the same for any industry. >So, I don't understand why Arena is the best that was >created in computerchess, something Mike has declared. I simply can't understand >it. I do not understand this statement. > >> >>>IMO the >>>autheticity of a creative performance would ONLY exist IF the whole presentation >>>would be DIFFERENT to that of ChessBase 8 or 9. >> >>This understanding is definitely not correct. > > >Ok, maybe, but what Vladimir did, that was wrong? If he took the ideas he did nothing wrong. If he took the code, then he broke the law (unless he follows the license agreement which is GPL). So far, he is denying it. >>>But if in the end all features >>>and menues are the same (with meaningless changes by chance) then it's a clone >>>IMO. >> >>No. > >Let's debate without getting into justice and law. On what grounds will we discuss a legal and moral issue without using justice and law? >>>Could you explain exactly where I may be wrong in the above? Or anybody else >>>please. I can only say that I almost smell that something is totally wrong in >>>the debates. And therefore I was already in opposition in the famous LIST case. >>>It's ridiculous in my eyes if a program is so good, much better than the model, >>>to then search for similarities (sic!) which couldn't explain why then the new >>>product is much better than its model. >> >>Making a program much stronger might be one or two lines of code, or even less >>-- to repair a bug it might be one character changed. > >Yes, and why should that be forbidden? In sports? Because it is against the law. If you write a book, and I find a typographical error in it and then republish the book after adding a missing period, I broke the law. Similarly, you cannot steal a computer program that I wrote. >>>How important is it then to debate a >>>possible "cloning"? As Fabien expressed, we all base on former models and it >>>makes no sense to force people to always invent new the old models. >> >>I agree. But if you use Fabian's code, your project must be open sourced and >>also GPL licensed. Otherwise, it is actually illegal. > >As I asked you, who could ever prove a famous program to contain forbidden code? A court of law. It has been done. >>>Could you try to explain where it becomes a crime or fraud or where it's simply >>>a learning process on the base of former creative products? >> >>When you violate the license agreement of the tool that you are using. > >Are ALL other programs except Patriot checked on such a problem? No. >>>I would be very thankful to all input. >>> >>>That is not a topic in favor of Vladimir Velin; no, it's the analysis that could >>>constitute a new beginning of creative chess programming, where young talents >>>can concentrate themselves on NEW tasks and challenges without losing time with >>>always doing the same what already had been done by former collegues. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>> >>>>>>So far. I just want to mention that during the Patriot debate in >>>>>>other fora there were opinions that the authenticity of many other software was >>>>>>never analysed. Simply because nobody had access to the specific products. This >>>>>>is the same for professional products in computerchess and also for such FREE >>>>>>works like Arena. What we do know is that the main pieces of computerchess >>>>>>programming have been used by almost all prtogrammers. There nobody would claim >>>>>>the term fraud. >>>>>> >>>>>>I finish this message with the hint, that in Franks Quisinsky's News pages he >>>>>>presents an interview with the programmer Fabien T. of the alleged original of >>>>>>Patriot 2. The interview was led shortly before the Patriot 2 debate came up. I >>>>>>can only say that Fabien gave very interesting comments on that topic of copying >>>>>>certain contents of programming a chess software! He can't see the problem...! >>>>>>But we here produce a public withch-burning. I'm still against such public >>>>>>attacks against young talents, no matter how wrong they are. Criticising Hsu, a >>>>>>veritable academic, or attacking Bob, a veritable Professor in Computer >>>>>>Sciences, this is a completely different thing like to bury the young man from >>>>>>Bela-Russia. Please excuse my emotional appeal. >>>>> >>>>>Patriot has NOT been proven a clone. There is compelling evidence to suggest >>>>>that it MIGHT be. >>> >>>Dann, how does that confirm with what you wrote one or two days ago? I can find >>>the exact URL if you want. You were the highest expert (to my knowledge) who >>>made a clear verdict. Why? If it's not clear? >> >>There is clear evidence that Patriot is PROBABLY a clone. It is not proven. I >>have never said that it is proven. It is (however) quite likely. > > >Thanks for this clarification. But if that is the case so far, not proven, I >would prefer not having read the ironical, sarcastic questions to Vladimir >Yelin. Just a surprise in such a community. > >> >>>>>In the case of Patriot, I think that there is special concern since it is sold >>> >>> >>>You mean Patriot 2? >>> >>>If Vladimir is able to program on his own a machine with 2500, how then would it >>>be a fault if he now tried to enter a higher class by simply basing his program >>>on a already stronger model? With open source? >> >>If he uses an open source program then he must abide by the open source license. > >And in computerchess we have police officers who control all programs on such >violations? It is the same as anything else. Probably, lots of ideas have been stolen in life without proper permissions. Sometimes the thieves get caught and sometimes they do not. Someone might patent a special door hinge. Someone else might steal his idea and sell it. Whether he gets caught or not, he still did something wrong. We do not check every seller of a door hinge on earth for the methods of making door hinges. So, as with anything else, the thief might get away with it. He might also get caught. >>In the same way that I cannot copy a book and change a few lines and say that >>the new book is mine (despite the public nature of the book) I cannot do that >>with a program either. So if I want to use it, I must obey the restrictions >>that are attached to the project. > >But Nullmove and all these tricks could be taken into your program... There is nothing at all (legally or morally) with using these ideas. >Interesting. Sorry for the sarcasm from my side. Just to initiate a lively >debate. The sarcasm misses me completely >>>>I think that patriot was proven to be illegal because there is too much >>>>similiarity to have reasonable doubt. >>> >>> >>>Uri, could you try to answer the above questions I have? Where is the limitation >>>of similarities? >>> >>> >>>> >>>>I will not discuss the meaning of the word clone but it is clear that the >>>>programmer did not take ideas from fruit(it is legal) but simply copied the code >>>>and made small changes. >>> >>> >>>Yes, Uri, maybe, but why do you argue as if this collegue had decided to stop >>>programming now? As if he now would want to stop with a copy of another program? >>>Wasn't he a good collegue before with the 2500 program? Wasn't that already a >>>good performance? >>> >>>Excuses if such questions could sound like insults to programmers because these >>>questions do come from a naive lay like me! >>> >>>Rolf >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>Uri
This page took 0.01 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.