To Hell with Private Engines

[bob]

It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.

So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...

If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?

Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.

Shoot, I'm going to steal a 60" 3D LED tv. I'm only going to use it in my own home, for my own personal use, so that would seem to be OK...

[Larry]

Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan

That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.
LH

[Graham Banks]

Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan

That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.
LH

And here I was thinking it was Oprah!

[Marek Soszynski]

It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.

So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...

If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?

Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.

Shoot, I'm going to steal a 60" 3D LED tv. I'm only going to use it in my own home, for my own personal use, so that would seem to be OK...

By the same argument, Bob, you'd ban your students from ever photocopying anything at all out of a book for their own personal use. Just what do you think the photocopiers in university libraries are for?

[De Vos W]

If they are so private, keep them inside drawers and not send them to tournaments.
With so many generous guys overthere giving his engines for free and dicussing openly his work, these private-men type of guys sounds a note of secrecy, meaness and....go to hell, I wanted to have that rick 48 thing!!!!!


fern

Someone's boring me. I think it's you...
let's have some new cliches.

[rodolfoleoni]

It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.

So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...

I cannot agree with you. If I'm managing to learn how to program better, I can borrow open sources and I can make experiments with them. I can take Stockfish and Crafty and I can build some kind of Craftyfish. As far as it remains a private work, I see nothing wrong with that.

A different case is when private engines partecipate at official tournaments. I think none of them could be defined a clone. I don't know what's the strongest private engine, but I think it's far weaker than top engines. So, no clue of cloning.

As a member of a private engine team, I can assure author is working hard since several years to get some +ELO.

[rbarreira]

It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.

So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...

If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?

Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.

Shoot, I'm going to steal a 60" 3D LED tv. I'm only going to use it in my own home, for my own personal use, so that would seem to be OK...

So how does one "steal" an engine in that sense? I guess you would have to retrieve the source code and then delete all the other copies that the author can get to (otherwise it's not "stealing", it's "copying").

I suppose you're not saying that everyone who downloads Crafty from your website is stealing it. The word "steal" has no relevance here.

A better analogy would be that you *buy* a TV (or get one for free if they are giving them away) and then you change the hardware inside for your own fun and study. This is perfectly legal and acceptable (at most you'd lose your warranty).

[AdminX]

Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan

That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.
LH

And here I was thinking it was Oprah!

Shit, I thought it was my wife!

[Tom Barrister]

It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.

If it's their work, yes. However, I agree that tournament officials should require that the source be available to a tournament judge or judges, in any case that cash prizes are involved. I realize that analyzing source is a pain, but cheaters have made that necessary.

Would you ban engines like The Baron from computer chess, just because it's a private work?

No, but I'd require that source be made available as above. That's the way I would handle it, and others may not agree.

Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.

In the United States and most other countries, if the license forbids such, it's not legal for any reason except by court order. The laws of some countries may differ.

By the same argument, Bob, you'd ban your students from ever photocopying anything at all out of a book for their own personal use. Just what do you think the photocopiers in university libraries are for?

In most countries, there's a law permitting LIMITED copying of printed media for purposes such as commentary, criticism, news reporting, research, teaching or scholarship. Note the word "limited". The same exceptions are generally non-applicable or stricter on digital (e.g. audio/visual) media, and they don't, as a rule, apply to software if the license doesn't permit such.

[rbarreira]

Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.

In the United States and most other countries, if the license forbids such, it's not legal for any reason except by court order. The laws of some countries may differ.

Do you have a source for this? I know that licenses often say thing like "you can't reverse engineer this", but that doesn't mean it's not legal to do... Often these licenses are unenforceable AFAIK.