Fabien's open letter to the community

[Sven]

Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to

yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said

no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

But not necessarily of each single version you create. And with some bad luck you miss to make that backup copy for a while.

Sven

[playjunior]

Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to

yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said

no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

But not necessarily of each single version you create. And with some bad luck you miss to make that backup copy for a while.

Sven

Neh. They had Rybka 3 beta available for some time, they were testing/tuning it, for what, months? Not a single backup copy in that timeframe? Who does that?

Edit: And then you make the release version and start selling it without bothering to take a backup.

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

Neh. They had Rybka 3 beta available for some time, they were testing/tuning it, for what, months? Not a single backup copy in that timeframe? Who does that?

They might very well have the source for some of the betas. I think what was said was that the exact one that became the release wasn't saved. Sloppy, but by no means impossible.

[playjunior]

Neh. They had Rybka 3 beta available for some time, they were testing/tuning it, for what, months? Not a single backup copy in that timeframe? Who does that?

They might very well have the source for some of the betas. I think what was said was that the exact one that became the release wasn't saved. Sloppy, but by no means impossible.

I don't remember the story exactly, but weren't they saying they don't have anything resembling Rybka 3 source left? Can someone refresh us?

And wasn't it 'lost' long after the release?

I just refuse to believe something like this can happen. To Vas, who used a dedicated computer so that no one has access to code, who obfuscated search info so that the competitors could not guess what is going on under the hood. People who are so concerned about their code/security/whatever backup every day. Automated. And then do it by hand from time to time to be sure.

It just does not compute.

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

People who are so concerned about their code/security/whatever backup every day. Automated. And then do it by hand from time to time to be sure.

I have to admit I have no argument against clairvoyance.

[JuLieN]

I think this quite recent (september 2009) jurisprudence of the Cour d'Appel de Paris (Paris' court of appeal) will be an interesting addendum to this debate :

Code: Select all

Paris Court of Appeals condemns Edu4 for violating the GNU General Public License

PARIS, France -- Tuesday, September 22, 2009 -- In a landmark ruling that will set legal precedent, the Paris Court of Appeals decided last week that the company Edu4 violated the terms of the GNU General Public License (GPL) when it distributed binary copies of the remote desktop access software VNC but denied users access to its corresponding source code. The suit was filed by Association pour la formation professionnelle des adultes (AFPA), a French education organization.

"This decision should raise awareness about free software licensing for everyone involved with it," said Olivier Hugot, attorney of Free Software Foundation France. "Companies distributing the software have been given a strong reminder that the license's terms are enforceable under French law. And users in France can rest assured that, if need be, they can avail themselves of the legal system to see violations addressed and their rights respected."

The events of the case go back to early 2000, when Edu4 was hired to provide new computer equipment in AFPA's classrooms. Shortly thereafter, AFPA discovered that VNC was distributed with this equipment. Despite repeated requests, with mediation from the Free Software Foundation France, Edu4 refused to provide AFPA with the source code to this version of VNC. Furthermore, FSF France later discovered that Edu4 had removed copyright and license notices in the software. All of these activities violate the terms of the GNU GPL. AFPA filed suit in 2002 to protect its rights and obtain the source code.

"We've long said the GNU GPL is enforceable, and of course we're pleased to see another court reaffirm that fact," said Loic Dachary, president of FSF France. "But what makes this ruling unique is the fact that the suit was filed by a user of the software, instead of a copyright holder. It's a commonly held belief that only the copyright holder of a work can enforce the license's terms - but that's not true in France. People who received software under the GNU GPL can also request compliance, since the license grants them rights from the authors."

The Court's ruling is available on the web at http://fsffrance.org/news/arret-ca-paris-16.09.2009.pdf.

Media contact

Loïc Dachary, FSF France president. E-mail : loic@dachary.org Phone : +33 6 64 03 29 07

About Free Software Foundation France

The FSF France (http://www.fsffrance.org/) is a non-profit organization dedicated to all aspects of Free Software. Access to software determines who may participate in a digital society. Therefore the freedoms to use, copy, modify and redistribute software - as described in the Free Software definition - allow equal participation in the information age. Creating awareness for these issues, securing Free Software politically and legally, and giving people freedom by supporting development of Free Software are central issues of the FSF France.

Let me single out the most important part of this decision :

Code: Select all

"We've long said the GNU GPL is enforceable, and of course we're pleased to see another court reaffirm that fact," said Loic Dachary, president of FSF France. "But what makes this ruling unique is the fact that the suit was filed by a user of the software, instead of a copyright holder. It's a commonly held belief that only the copyright holder of a work can enforce the license's terms - but that's not true in France. People who received software under the GNU GPL can also request compliance, since the license grants them rights from the authors."

Source : http://fsffrance.org/news/article2009-09-22.en.html
And a slightly more detailed explanation for those who understand french : http://fsffrance.org/news/article2009-09-22.fr.html

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Bob, a big difference between 1995 and now is that now you can encrypt, zip and email the source to yourself and it will take you 3 minutes. It is that simple.

I read long time ago when Strelka came out someone asked Vasik whether it might be possible that his code got stolen, he said no, because he keeps it a dedicated computer with no internet connection.

A person who takes such precautions would surely take a minute or two to take care he has a backup copy.

Vasik is a proffesional liar....
Dr.D

[rbarreira]

Let me single out the most important part of this decision :

Code: Select all

"We've long said the GNU GPL is enforceable, and of course we're pleased to see another court reaffirm that fact," said Loic Dachary, president of FSF France. "But what makes this ruling unique is the fact that the suit was filed by a user of the software, instead of a copyright holder. It's a commonly held belief that only the copyright holder of a work can enforce the license's terms - but that's not true in France. People who received software under the GNU GPL can also request compliance, since the license grants them rights from the authors."

Well in that case Rybka's author may never have to worry about losing his source code again. If he has to send his source code to every Rybka user that asks for it, there will be tons of backups stored in France

[Dr.Wael Deeb]

Let me single out the most important part of this decision :

Code: Select all

"We've long said the GNU GPL is enforceable, and of course we're pleased to see another court reaffirm that fact," said Loic Dachary, president of FSF France. "But what makes this ruling unique is the fact that the suit was filed by a user of the software, instead of a copyright holder. It's a commonly held belief that only the copyright holder of a work can enforce the license's terms - but that's not true in France. People who received software under the GNU GPL can also request compliance, since the license grants them rights from the authors."

Well in that case Rybka's author may never have to worry about losing his source code again. If he has to send his source code to every Rybka user that asks for it, there will be tons of backups stored in France

Great idea indeed

[Osipov Jury]

Students are quite good at this kind of obfuscation. One can do the above to improve speed (one popcnt vs N BSF instructions in a loop) or to make the code appear to be different (both do the same thing, but look significantly different, particularly if you change the variable names as well...

You are very strong teacher. I would not want to be your student.

Another example. In the function SEE of Ivanhoe, we can find the following:

Code: Select all

  do
    {
      cbf &= ~bit;
      mask = BitboardOppP & bit;
      if (mask)
	{
	  bit ^= (~(mask - 1)) & mask;
	  PieceValue = ValueP;
	}
      else
...

Obviously, this is a mistake. After the capture by a pawn on the open diagonal can be an bishop or a queen. In Houdini this bug is corrected:

Code: Select all

  while (bit & OppOccupied) {
    if (mask = BitboardOppP & bit)
      {
        capture_value += 100;
        if &#40;capture_value < -60&#41; return 0;
        from = first_one&#40;mask&#41;;
        occ &= ClearBit&#91;from&#93;;
        bit &= ClearBit&#91;from&#93;;
        bit |= BMagicAttacks&#91;BishopIndex&#40;to, occ&#41;&#93; & diag & occ;
      &#125;
    else
...

Is it also plagiarism?