Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 13:44:44 08/17/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Robert, > You cannot suspect any new engine - even when strong - to be a clone. In my > view it always has to remain the inverse from what you state: it must be > proven that an engine is a clone, not the other way round, unless there is > already strong evidence present. Also in real life I do not have to prove > that I am not a criminal, unless there is strong evidence against me. well, the consequence of such stuff like Toga is, that every new engine is suspected. This is simply fact, as bad as it is... of course this did already started with older clones... > Why should any so-called clone - which is legal because it is GPL - not play > in a tournament officially, if BOTH/ALL authors support this. It is like a > joint venture. The legality does not really play a role here, I think. Rules of all official tournaments are quite clear, all have something like the following paragraph in it: (Cloning ICGA... :) Each program must be the original work of the entering developers. Programming teams whose code is derived from or including game-playing code written by others must name all other authors, or the source of such code, in their application details. Programs which are discovered to be close derivatives of others (e.g., by playing nearly all moves the same), may be declared invalid by the Tournament Director after seeking expert advice. For this purpose a listing of all game-related code running on the system must be available on demand to the Tournament Director. (End of clone... :) Even some private tournaments have included this rule, e.g. WBEC-Ridderkerk. Of course this would differ when Fabien accepts the Toga "author" as part of his team. It is clear that Toga can not participate itself according to this rule... Greets, Thomas
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.