I must agree with Christophe here. Distributing an application in source is clearly a violation of the App Store rules (if they were quoted correctly here). By submitting Stockfish to the App Store, Tord has implicitly agreed to not do that. If he continues to distribute the source (under GPL or whatever), he is clearly in violation of his agreement with Apple, and Apple coulde take legal action against him. Such action could stay limited to kicking Stockfish out of the App Store, (i.e. voiding the agreement based on non-compliance by Tord), but in theory they could set their aim higher, and force Tord to honour the agreement by stopping the distribution of source, or sue for damages.tiger wrote:JuLieN wrote:No, you're confused, Christophe. Stockfish is released in the App Store under the App Store's agreement. But it's source code, that can be download on SF's website, is released under GPL agreement.tiger wrote: Then Stockfish is in clear violation of the App Store agreement, and if other derived work of Stockfish is removed from the App Store it would be consistent for Apple to also remove Stockfish until Tord releases it under another licence.
// Christophe
This is also a violation of the App Store agreement.
// Christophe
I am pretty sure this would apply to the exact source of the app as it is in the App Store. I am not sure what the legal status would be for releasing source code of something that does not compile exactly to the app, but does share code with it. The agreement is not that you transfer copyright of code. So my guess is that offering code for Stockfish as a general UCI engine would not count as distribution of the app. But for something including the GUI that could run on an iPhone, I think you are already getting in the danger zone. Even if it would be an improved 'Stockfish II' app for iPhone that you do not distribute through the app store.