Author: Jay Urbanski
Date: 11:23:38 02/22/06
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2006 at 13:48:07, David Dahlem wrote: >On February 22, 2006 at 13:19:12, Jay Urbanski wrote: > >>On February 22, 2006 at 03:06:03, Eelco de Groot wrote: >> >>>On February 21, 2006 at 23:12:35, Jay Urbanski wrote: >>> >>>>see previous message >>> >>>Hello Jay, I think a lot to be said for that but there may be practical and >>>commercial reasons for Jeroen and Vasik. I don't have any Chessbase programs and >>>also not bought Rybka, but I can believe that for Jeroen, Chessbase has the best >>>options for his bookediting work. That was why even Pro Deo ran in Chessbase GUI >>>in Leiden the last years, something almost amounting to blasphemy... If I may >>>use that word... So in fact we have a de facto industry standard for bookmakers >>>that is not free, and because it is not, converting a ctg book to another format >>>is not easy. Not much to be done about it I think... >>> >>> Regards, Eelco >> >>I wonder how much work it would be to reverse engineer the .CTG format? > >Is that legal? > >Regards >Dave I don't see why not. It's not documented, but neither is it protected by some type of rights-management that would make it illegal to bypass (DMCA). It would be similar to the Samba project, where some enterprising individuals reverse-engineered Microsoft's SMB file sharing protocol (now CIFS, and a published spec). It was the only way we got real file-sharing interoperability between Linux and Windows.
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.