Author: Uri Blass
Date: 01:36:17 05/13/05
Go up one level in this thread
On May 12, 2005 at 23:21:03, Lance Perkins wrote: >You are right in that everyone is free to use these 'free ideas' (I say 'free >ideas' because if IBM had thought of 'null-move' first, they would have patented >it and we won't be able to use it unless we pay them). In that case I will support banning IBM and will support countries that decide about rules that forbid buying things from IBM. I think that this is the way that should be used by countries against every company that try to patent ideas. If they know that the result of their action is that nobody will buy from them they will stop it. > >Now the real issue with the source code is 'implementation'. There are many ways >to write a chess program that uses null-move, pvs-search, transposition tables, >etc. There are just so many componets you need to put together, and make them >right (this is the hard part). You just can't take someone else implentation and >claim it as your own. > >If you did use someone else's source code, why not just say so? What's the harm >in admitting that you copied and pasted code from someone else? > >The other story about open-source is the license. If the author says you can do >whatever you like with the code, then you are free to do so. If the author says >you can play with the code only if you also open your code (GPL), then you have >your limitation. In the case of Fruit, it is GPL, and so Toga, being based on >the Fruit source, also has to open its source. So really, no one is saying you >can't play with the Fruit/Toga source. But if you do so, you need to open your >source too. I think that it is a bad rule because unlike books it is not easy to prove that a program without source code copied source from other programs. I have 2 ideas for different rules: 1)Everybody is allowed to copy source code of free programs without opening their source. 2)Everybody has to open his source and releasing a program without releasing the source will be considered as illegal. People can claim that it will be hard to do programs commercial and there will be less progress in computer chess because programmers will have less motivation but I am not sure if possibility 2 means less progress in computer chess and considering the level of fruit/toga it may encourage other programmers to open their source code and help other. Note that even in case 2 commercial programs will not be illegal but programmers will need to give the source after they sell it. Of course people can copy the source from other people but people may still decide to buy the program in order to give the programmer motivation to release the thing and the programmer may decide that he release the source and the program only if at least 1000 people buy it first. The process may be as following. 1)people promise to buy the program in some date(say 31.12) in case that it is available. The programmer may make some promise about playing strength based on his tests and people can complain later if the playing strength is not high enough. 2)If there are at least 1000 buyers in 31.12 then they pay for the program and get the exe and the source. If there are less than 1000 buyers in 31.12 then they pay nothing and get nothing. 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.