bob wrote:Couple of things. First, if houdini comes from firebird/ivanhoe/robolito/ippolit, and if, as has been stated, the ip* family was based on Rybka 3 RE + changes, then houdini is a problem either because of the GPL / fruit, or copyright because anything Vas added to fruit would be his, which would violate GPL as well since all changes have to be released.
Second, one can sell a program based on GPL, so long as the GPL is followed, which means source MUST be available. Otherwise, it is a copyright infringement.
Finally, this is only going to get more complicated before it gets better. Ethics are at "low tide" for some...
You are one of the last sane and honest humans left in CCC, that's why few listen to you here....
This place is depressing for me, it keeps reminding me what human nature really is and what this may mean for computer chess down the road.
Life has a better chance to survive longer if technology increases. Doesn't matter at what cost as long as life survives.
IMO, Whether Houdini 1 had robbolito code or not has nothing to do with the commercial Houdini 2.0. Robert, in order to legally protect himself, could have change all the copied code to pure ideas to his own code when he made houdini 2.0.
Also, even if Houdini 1 had robbolito code then since no one is claiming the code then it is legal to use as one sees fit. I don't see any stealing whatsoever. Only a fool wouldn't make use of the strong ideas of it if they were planning to go commercial or were already commercial.
Lastly, having very high ethics is foolish (unless you believe in God or something) and having very low ethics is also foolish. The best thing to have is medium ethics (ethics which causes life to survive longer).
Houdini wrote: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
Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken. If your code contains any fruit, which came from ippolit and friends, you are in violation of copyright law as amended by the GPL fruit source was released under. If your code contains any parts of robo that were written by Vas, you are in violation of his copyright. Either can be quite serious.
The ip* guys can't copy any parts of fruit, and then release them as public domain by disclaiming their copyright. They don't own that copyright...
Houdini wrote: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
Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken. If your code contains any fruit, which came from ippolit and friends, you are in violation of copyright law as amended by the GPL fruit source was released under. If your code contains any parts of robo that were written by Vas, you are in violation of his copyright. Either can be quite serious.
The ip* guys can't copy any parts of fruit, and then release them as public domain by disclaiming their copyright. They don't own that copyright...
Instead of making wild speculations about a possible violation of the Fruit copyright in the Ippolit codes via the indirect link Fruit->Vas->Rybka->Ippo, why don't you do the smart thing and compare directly the Fruit and Ippolit source codes, both freely available and ready for inspection?
You will find Robbolito version 0.085f1 with Italian/Albanian (?) file names, variables etc. I have no idea who created this release, but I doubt that it was Norman. It may be the person that identifies himself as "Roberto Pescatore" (= "Bobby Fischer" - so probably not his real name) on the Ippolit web site.
The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.
Houdini wrote:The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.
Yes, and some think your english is better than your albanian and therefore you more likeley used the english, translated gpl'ed version.
Houdini wrote: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
Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken. If your code contains any fruit, which came from ippolit and friends, you are in violation of copyright law as amended by the GPL fruit source was released under. If your code contains any parts of robo that were written by Vas, you are in violation of his copyright. Either can be quite serious.
The ip* guys can't copy any parts of fruit, and then release them as public domain by disclaiming their copyright. They don't own that copyright...
Instead of making wild speculations about a possible violation of the Fruit copyright in the Ippolit codes via the indirect link Fruit->Vas->Rybka->Ippo, why don't you do the smart thing and compare directly the Fruit and Ippolit source codes, both freely available and ready for inspection?
Robert
Be careful, he and others likely are as Bob isn't given to wild speculation.
You will find Robbolito version 0.085f1 with Italian/Albanian (?) file names, variables etc. I have no idea who created this release, but I doubt that it was Norman. It may be the person that identifies himself as "Roberto Pescatore" (= "Bobby Fischer" - so probably not his real name) on the Ippolit web site.
The so-called "GPL-licensed" version Norman released later is virtually identical to this 0.085f1 version, if you inspect the source codes you will find no changes other than translating files and variables to English and reorganizing spaces.
Cheers,
Robert
Since all of use are so badly misinformed, why not clear up some details?
Is this what you meant by Houdini contains no "licensed" code except the Nalimov TB code and Houdini uses the unlicensed version of Robbolito as it's base?
We all know the answer, but we are looking for confirmation from you, the author.
If you can't be honest with your customer base, then why sell?
Peter
I was kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bibles to the fiction section.
Houdini wrote: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
Sorry, but you are sadly mistaken. If your code contains any fruit, which came from ippolit and friends, you are in violation of copyright law as amended by the GPL fruit source was released under. If your code contains any parts of robo that were written by Vas, you are in violation of his copyright. Either can be quite serious.
The ip* guys can't copy any parts of fruit, and then release them as public domain by disclaiming their copyright. They don't own that copyright...
Instead of making wild speculations about a possible violation of the Fruit copyright in the Ippolit codes via the indirect link Fruit->Vas->Rybka->Ippo, why don't you do the smart thing and compare directly the Fruit and Ippolit source codes, both freely available and ready for inspection?
Robert
That is not the only part of the equation. If it comes from Rybka 3, you have the SAME problem, whether you realize it or not.... That was my point.
