Are neural nets (the weights file) copyrightable?

[syzygy]

I do not understand this sentence in the GPL3

To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission

How could it ever require any kind of permission to modify something? Permission should only be required to distribute the modification.

I'm afraid you are mistaken. Copyright forbids you to create copies and therefore to modify "in a fashion requiring copyright permission", i.e. in a way that copies some of the copyrightable expression.

The GPL explicitly allows modifications as long as they are not released to other people. Copyright law does not allow this by default, but the GPL gives you permission.

[Fulvio]

If the video game is GPL, where is the infringement?

I wrote "without permission".
You don't have the permission to sell a GPL videogame if you don't respect all the clauses of the license.

[Dann Corbit]

If the video game is GPL, where is the infringement?

I wrote "without permission".
You don't have the permission to sell a GPL videogame if you don't respect all the clauses of the license.

You don't need any permission if you supply the source. It says that very clearly in the license.
People are trying to manufacture a requirement for data that does not exist, so that they can find fault.

[Michel]

I do not understand this sentence in the GPL3

To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission

How could it ever require any kind of permission to modify something? Permission should only be required to distribute the modification.

I'm afraid you are mistaken. Copyright forbids you to create copies and therefore to modify "in a fashion requiring copyright permission", i.e. in a way that copies some of the copyrightable expression.

The GPL explicitly allows modifications as long as they are not released to other people. Copyright law does not allow this by default, but the GPL gives you permission.

Do you claim that if I take a book and rewrite parts of if for my own pleasure without distributing the changed work, I would do something illegal? This I cannot believe.

[Fulvio]

What personal attack?

You accused me of hating ChessBase, which is not true and I don't understand what made you think that.

If they had not also released their NNUE net

This is the part I disagree with.
They distribute a work that includes a binary file, and to comply with the GPL license they must release all the part of the work, including the NNUE net.

[Michel]

What personal attack?

You accused me of hating ChessBase, which is not true and I don't understand what made you think that.

If they had not also released their NNUE net

This is the part I disagree with.
They distribute a work that includes a binary file, and to comply with the GPL license they must release all the part of the work, including the NNUE net.

We still have to establish that FF2 is a "covered work" in the sense of the GPL 3. In other words it has to be a modification of SF "requiring copyright permission". Hence my question about the meaning of the expression "requiring copyright permission".

[syzygy]

I do not understand this sentence in the GPL3

To “modify” a work means to copy from or adapt all or part of the work in a fashion requiring copyright permission

How could it ever require any kind of permission to modify something? Permission should only be required to distribute the modification.

I'm afraid you are mistaken. Copyright forbids you to create copies and therefore to modify "in a fashion requiring copyright permission", i.e. in a way that copies some of the copyrightable expression.

The GPL explicitly allows modifications as long as they are not released to other people. Copyright law does not allow this by default, but the GPL gives you permission.

Do you claim that if I take a book and rewrite parts of if for my own pleasure without distributing the changed work, I would do something illegal? This I cannot believe.

Even if you create a copy without changing one bit you are doing something illegal, unless with permission from the copyright holder. Or unless some exception within copyright law applies. But clearly copyright law restricts the right to copy.

EU copyright law includes many special exceptions that allow you to run a computer program that you legally acquired as long you run it "in accordance with its intended purpose". This is needed because running a legally acquired program creates a copy of the program in the memory of the computer, so would be forbidden by default (as confirmed by Article 4 below).

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content ... 32009L0024

Article 4 - Restricted acts

1. Subject to the provisions of Articles 5 and 6, the exclusive rights of the rightholder within the meaning of Article 2 shall include the right to do or to authorise:

(a) the permanent or temporary reproduction of a computer program by any means and in any form, in part or in whole; in so far as loading, displaying, running, transmission or storage of the computer program necessitate such reproduction, such acts shall be subject to authorisation by the rightholder;

(b) the translation, adaptation, arrangement and any other alteration of a computer program and the reproduction of the results thereof, without prejudice to the rights of the person who alters the program;

(c) any form of distribution to the public, including the rental, of the original computer program or of copies thereof.

2. The first sale in the Community of a copy of a program by the rightholder or with his consent shall exhaust the distribution right within the Community of that copy, with the exception of the right to control further rental of the program or a copy thereof.

Article 5 - Exceptions to the restricted acts

1. In the absence of specific contractual provisions, the acts referred to in points (a) and (b) of Article 4(1) shall not require authorisation by the rightholder where they are necessary for the use of the computer program by the lawful acquirer in accordance with its intended purpose, including for error correction.

2. The making of a back-up copy by a person having a right to use the computer program may not be prevented by contract in so far as it is necessary for that use.

3. The person having a right to use a copy of a computer program shall be entitled, without the authorisation of the rightholder, to observe, study or test the functioning of the program in order to determine the ideas and principles which underlie any element of the program if he does so while performing any of the acts of loading, displaying, running, transmitting or storing the program which he is entitled to do.

[syzygy]

If they had not also released their NNUE net

This is the part I disagree with.
They distribute a work that includes a binary file, and to comply with the GPL license they must release all the part of the work, including the NNUE net.

Do you understand "if', i.e. the concept of a hypothetical?

I am talking about the hypothetical situation that they had only released FF2 SF, i.e. a slightly modified SF, including the modified source code.
This is simply what GPLv3 allows. There can be no reasonable disagreement with this.

It is allowed to take a GPL'd program and develop it further and to release disfunctional development versions to the public, provided you also release the corresponding source code.

[Fulvio]

Do you understand "if', i.e. the concept of a hypothetical?

No.
Maybe there is a misunderstanding with the meaning of releasing, which I interpreted as "Remove restrictions or obligations from (someone or something) so that they become available for other activity."

Can you please reword your statement following this guidelines?
https://wordvice.com/grammar-avoid-double-negatives/

[Fulvio]

You don't need any permission if you supply the source. It says that very clearly in the license.
People are trying to manufacture a requirement for data that does not exist, so that they can find fault.

Are you claming that the images of a GPL videogame are not part of the source?