rbarreira wrote: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.
rodolfoleoni wrote: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.
rbarreira wrote:
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.
Marek Soszynski wrote:
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.
