Official GPL webpage available?

[bhlangonijr]

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Thanks Robert,

I want to believe in you. I want to make a proposal which I think will settle all this suspicion regarding Holdini's origin.

Can you publish here at CCC part of the source code of Holdini? You don't need to publish parts which you think contains any secrets that makes it be the number one. I would be satisfied with the uci parser, move generation, hash tables, the main part of the search and evaluation function. You can strip out sections of code you want to protect your secrets from being undisclosed....

Of course, you are not obligated to do this. But in doing so you would settle all this mess for once and the people raising doubts on the origins of Houldini will move on...


Please?

Regards,

[rbarreira]

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Thanks Robert,

I want to believe in you. I want to make a proposal which I think will settle all this suspicion regarding Holdini's origin.

Can you publish here at CCC part of the source code of Holdini? You don't need to publish parts which you think contains any secrets that makes it be the number one. I would be satisfied with the uci parser, move generation, hash tables, the main part of the search and evaluation function. You can strip out sections of code you want to protect your secrets from being undisclosed....

Of course, you are not obligated to do this. But in doing so you would settle all this mess for once and the people raising doubts on the origins of Houldini will move on...


Please?

Regards,

Even if he did so, how would we deal with the fact that there were several positions with exactly matching PVs for many depths compared to robbolito?

[marcelk]

Now, complete the sentence (It would make Peter Skinner a more happy person):

Houdini ______ contain Ippolit/* code.

a) DOES
b) DOESN'T

Come on Robert, I know you can... :)

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Thanks Robert for your answer.

Is there any specific reason to drop the wildcard (Ippolit/* --> Ippolit) from Ben-Hur's question? The wildcard is relevant because Ben-Hur clearly means the IP* family, including RobboLito, Ivanhoe etc, etc, etc, and not a single member, which is what your statement is now unfortunately referring to. The IPPOLIT code is very different from Robbo's for example, but still the same family. And the close similarities observed by Dailey and Conkie are with RobboLito 0085g3 x32 if I'm not mistaken, not with IPPOLIT.

I don't agree that legality is the only topic of discussion. The topic is what the posters want it to be and what the moderators allow it to become. In this case they are eager to know what is in the box you are advertising in this forum before deciding on buying. The question marks don't exactly fall out of the blue sky.

PS: Linux, MacOSX and iPad versions of the engine would be greatly appreciated. I would buy them all and donate the double amount to UNICEF if the game playing code in Houdini is completely your original work (EGTB probing code excluded).

[Alexander Schmidt]

Frank, Robert doesn't infringe GPL, because the Robbo* Ippolit* code he's accused to have as the base for Houdini is not GPL but public domain:
http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/FAQ

Q. How copyright IPPOLIT?
A. Publicdomain (workers), only.

Thats maybe not quite correct. He probably didn't use the "unreadable" Ippolit code, he probably used some kind of Robbo.

And even if it is based on Ippo: Is it allowed to decompile a commercial product and make it public domain? In case Ippo is a Rybka clone, all Ippo derivates are illegal as well.

AFAIK Robbo was published without copyright notice and later with GPL. Both wouldn't allow someone else to use it in the way Houdart used it.

I think Houdini is not legal but it will never come to a court decission so the discussion about the legality of Houdini is an academic one.

Alex

[kranium]

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Hi Robert-

How do you explain Jury Osipovs findings posted here:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 87157f81e5

Osipov Jury

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Posts: 177
Location: Russia
Posted: Fri May 21, 2010 6:31 am Post subject: Re: One similarity between Firebird and Houdini enines

I checked the PST initialization function in Houdini and compared it with the same function in Robbolito. They were completely identical, but all PST weights Houdini multiplied by 2.

Also,
Jeremy Bernstein has listed many, many illegal positions on Open-Chess in which Houdini behaves exactly like RobboLito 0.085g3 (newest, strongest, and most bug-free of the 15 versions released my myself and Sentinel under GPL)
here:
http://www.open-chess.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=992

Also, I noticed in the Houdini 1.0 executable, your UCI output utilizes an I64 type definition...
I've certainly seen this many times before before...it's present in all Ippolitos, RoboLitos, Igorrits, and IvanHoes, etc.

Of course there are also the positions Chris Conkie posted here:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... i+position

In order to clear everything up concerning Houdini's origins, would you please take time to explain these similarities...?

Thanks in advance and Regards,
Norm

[JuLieN]

Frank, Robert doesn't infringe GPL, because the Robbo* Ippolit* code he's accused to have as the base for Houdini is not GPL but public domain:
http://ippolit.wikispaces.com/FAQ

Q. How copyright IPPOLIT?
A. Publicdomain (workers), only.

Thats maybe not quite correct. He probably didn't use the "unreadable" Ippolit code, he probably used some kind of Robbo.

And even if it is based on Ippo: Is it allowed to decompile a commercial product and make it public domain? In case Ippo is a Rybka clone, all Ippo derivates are illegal as well.

AFAIK Robbo was published without copyright notice and later with GPL. Both wouldn't allow someone else to use it in the way Houdart used it.

I think Houdini is not legal but it will never come to a court decission so the discussion about the legality of Houdini is an academic one.

Alex

So, we would actually be having this?

(Fruit + Crafty + some Vas idea = Rybka)
-->
(Rybka + some comrades ideas= Robbo*)
-->
(Robbo* + some Robert ideas = Houdini)

Of course Robbo*'s rybka decompiled code can't be put into public domain, and it's also an infringement to Fruit and Crafty's GPL license...

[Thomas Mayer]

Hi Norman,

Houdini does NOT contain any Ippolit code.

Contrary to the other open-source engines mentioned above, even if it did, it wouldn't make any difference with regards to the legal side of the issue (which is the subject of this topic).

Robert

Hi Robert-

How do you explain Jury Osipovs findings posted here:
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopi ... 87157f81e5

you didn't have your best days in that threat either, did you ?!

In order to clear everything up concerning Houdini's origins, would you please take time to explain these similarities...?

Robert might go the Vas-way and simply denying everything or keep silence. And to be honest, there is much more material to believe that Houdini is a Robbo-Child then to believe that Rybka is a Fruit. But we all want to believe so much in Robert... Well, if he really goes the Vas way he is not guilty if we follow Eds logic. Computer Chess gets really ugly these days. -> I already said the days Toga (of course this is not Thomas Gaksch fault) was widely accepted that this is the end of the big programmers tournaments. And here we are.

Greets, Thomas

[IWB]

Thats maybe not quite correct. He probably didn't use the "unreadable" Ippolit code, he probably used some kind of Robbo.

That doesnt matter, The GPL which is now part of the Robbos was introduced AFTER the release of Houdini 1.03! I still have a Robo 0.9 here (later removed from the downloads) without any license! It is PD and anyone can do whatever he wants to do with it. It seems the Robbo guys did not think about that consequence and added the GPL later. (Selber Schuld!)

And even if it is based on Ippo: Is it allowed to decompile a commercial product and make it public domain? In case Ippo is a Rybka clone, all Ippo derivates are illegal as well.

If it is or not doesn't matter and it is very theoretical as VR stated that he lost the code and can not prove anything in front of a court. So it might a moral question, but it will never be one which will be decided finaly! To stirr it up again and again and again will not solve the problem.

AFAIK Robbo was published without copyright notice and later with GPL. Both wouldn't allow someone else to use it in the way Houdart used it.

As it was pusblished witout ANY license (It stated even PD status) This allows exactly the use as RH used it!

I think Houdini is not legal but it will never come to a court decission so the discussion about the legality of Houdini is an academic one.

Regarding the first part I dont care as I know that it is impossible to decide the second one. Actually I dont even mind if he admits a Robbo use or not. To have a statement from him would change exactly nothing ... which means the statement is completly useless.

(The only thing I do not get is that people are so obsesd about his statement of using ideas! If he would not have said a single word everything would be fine according to the not exsisting license. But as he said something people get mad about it, strange)

Bye
Ingo

[kranium]

That doesnt matter, The GPL which is now part of the Robbos was introduced AFTER the release of Houdini 1.03! I still have a Robo 0.9 here (later removed from the downloads) without any license! It is PD and anyone can do whatever he wants to do with it. It seems the Robbo guys did not think about that consequence and added the GPL later. (Selber Schuld!)

Ingo,
you must be confused, that's completely wrong.

If you are referring to RobboLito 0.09, it's still available for download from chesslogik.com.
It is GPL'd and always has been.

RobboLito 0.09 was released on 12/31/2009...well before the 1st Houdini release -> 5/16/2010
Please download it again and check the file signatures.

RobboLito 0.09 was one of the very last of my and Sentinel's Chesslogik RobboLito development series...
all previous versions have an even earlier release date.

Norm

[bob]

Hi there,

know a member the main url about GPL?
I found too many information urls which such information.

Important information for Robert Houdart.
I think we should help Robert a bit.

Best
Frank

I'd go to the "free software foundation" web page. They are the "keepers" of the GPL and also "the enforcement arm" as well...