Author: Rolf Tueschen
Date: 02:42:28 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). That is what I thought when I read that almost every single programmer suddenly was allowed to use that technique. And it's certainly a more revolutionary tool than the source code of Fruit. With all due respect for Fabien. > >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. Part I is when you take it and make it work in your own product. I want to say - without the least idea how the tech of such a process is being done - that this transfer problem can't be hypostated as the most important judicially relevant topic in computerchess. In a community someone has tried something with so and so success. If another one would be stupid and thought that this were the top of what he could perform at the end of his days - then be it. But normally we have the case that there is always something to improve. And that is the endless process I am interested in. What importance has the implementation I made last year? I did either improve or fall back on my back and I plan to leave this. However what I won't do in any phase of the proces, I would NEVER claim that all what I had in my program were original stuff invented by me myself! That is the little difference. You write as if the two parts of the process belonged together. I take some stuff and at the same moment I publish a bragging nonsense about my new inventions. Of course that would be fraud. But who's so stupid to do that? (Note that I don't even need the argument of the uncontrolled professional programs for that chapter. But this would make it even clearer.) > >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? Lance, there is no harm except that I never read someone writing such a statement. That is my sarcastic answer. I know that I will never read the like. So IMO your question must be wrong. > >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. Let us concentrate on my earlier question: who's controlling that process. Taking - implementing - confessing or NOT? Do you think that all professionals who would never open their code to the public won't give all these open sources a single look? If you could prove it I would rest my case. :) Let's take Dann into our debate. He's judicially right. IF it comes to court cases and you MUST open your code the truth would come out. But this is what I say: Prior to such cases, the org of computerchess has no rights to pretend eternal control over free amateur progs and professionals have a sort of elite, untouchable status. Like I read months ago - after Graz - that the reason for the org's actions was suspicions among participants. During the next Wch I offer 1000 € for some participant to ask about the clinical cleanness of SHREDDER, just to begin with the possible winner of the tournament. Either Stefan opens his source or he will be thrown out of the tournament not before the last four rounds, just to make it suspense for the event. Just joking of course. Stefan is an honorable man and all in his code was invented by Stefan!
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.