Yes, nice to have you back.Xann wrote: Gian-Carlo,
Long time no see ...
I heard you're already a big name in computer Go!
You could say I "Fruited" the computer go people in 2008
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
Yes, nice to have you back.Xann wrote: Gian-Carlo,
Long time no see ...
I heard you're already a big name in computer Go!
Wrong. Fabien just wrote he disagreed. "Reading" or "re-writing" is not "using" code in the normal meaning of the word.Alexander Schmidt wrote:VR used Fruit code. Noone who looked at the facts can disagree.
Wrong again. Copyrights do not extend to rewrite.Maybe everything is rewritten, but that would still be a GPL violation.
OK, so you are not only wrong on all counts now, you were wrong many times before. Nice to let us know. If it is a GPL violation follows from examining the Fruit code and the Rybka binary. Fabien's opinion on this is completely irrelevant. Justice in this world is done by facts, not by opinions of people who are considered important or respected. And legal action can only be taken by the FSF, as they own the copyrights, and Fabien is no longer an interested party.What I wrote many times is: We cannot say if this was a GPL violation or not as long as Fabien doesn't complain.
Only those that cannot understand what they read 'know' this...Now he complained, now we know Rybka is illegal.
I told you that they'll keep silence like a goat butt....tomgdrums wrote:man the silence on the Rybka forum is deafening!!!!!!
I posted there HOURS ago asking the Rybka team to say something! Anything!
As I posted on another forum, I will not go to bed tonight as a hypocrite SO if the Rybka team can not even say ANYTHING about this, then Rybka 3 and 4 are off my computer before I turn in for the night. Which sucks but I won't feel right if I don't.
If you really insist on misreading my previous post, I'll make the point a third time.SzG wrote:Yes, if we didn't exist, they could not refer to us. Excellent observation.Houdini wrote: That doesn't alter the observation that CCRL and CEGT have been instrumental in allowing Rybka to ban a number of engines without actually providing any proof or beginning any legal action.
Gabor,SzG wrote:Suppose Rybka 1.0 is a clone of Fruit 2.1.Matthias Gemuh wrote:"those versions" only ?Graham Banks wrote:...
Personally, I'm waiting for this to play out further before making any big decisions.
Once Fabien says that he has examined all the facts for himself and states that Rybka is undeniably nothing more than a Fruit ripoff and which versions this applies to (statements that he would be prepared to defend in a legal sense), I will be perfectly happy to personally stop testing those versions ...
Why do you then reject latest Ivanhoe versions even if Ippolit were a clone ?
Matthias.
Now if the Rybka family were based on version 1.0 as a backbone, all members of the family would be illegal. OK.
But what if versions 2 and upwards are really different from 1.0, meaning that Vasik used 1.0 only as a learning stage? What if he had not released version 1.0 at all?
I don't think we can solve this problem. Even if we take it granted that Rybka 1.0 stole code, we cannot be sure with further versions. They may be using only ideas from 1.0, just as Houdini uses only ideas from Robbolito...
As I pointed out before in this thread, http://talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=389878, although his opinion does not change the facts, in reality Fabiens opinion certainly matters for what can happen.hgm wrote:If it is a GPL violation follows from examining the Fruit code and the Rybka binary. Fabien's opinion on this is completely irrelevant. Justice in this world is done by facts, not by opinions of people who are considered important or respected. And legal action can only be taken by the FSF, as they own the copyrights, and Fabien is no longer an interested party.
If I may comment this, i'll just point the fact that leaking is what Julian Assange do, not Rybka's zealots.Dr.Wael Deeb wrote:I've just been honest with Vasik in the Rybka forum....here's what I've just posted there....
Rajlich....you're the biggest crook ever to influence the computer chess community....
The same goes for your hellhounds that keep barking and leaking your feet all these years....
Dr.D
Of course it won't last long and most probably I'll be banned for life but hey....you can always register there with funny accounts like bannedforlife
HGM,hgm wrote:Wrong. Fabien just wrote he disagreed. "Reading" or "re-writing" is not "using" code in the normal meaning of the word.Alexander Schmidt wrote:VR used Fruit code. Noone who looked at the facts can disagree.
...