TalkChess.com

mar wrote: ↑Sat May 25, 2019 1:37 pmFrom experience, people who use open source libraries (with truly free licenses) in their closed source programs often create PRs to help fix/add new features.

The GPL doesn't prohibit making PRs. And that is no "true" freedom because the added freedom of these leechers is just the missing freedom at the other end, e.g. at their customers.

I see 3 cheap SF clones in top 10 in CCRL, for example.

So? They use OSS exactly as intended, by forking it. While your complaint makes sense, you're barking up the wrong tree because forks can't pollute the CCRL. It's the CCRL maintainers' decision to include them that can.

I don't see how the freedom to make closed-source software out of open-source software would harm anyone. Something is always better than nothing. The closed-source software will likely be useful to many people, and those would be harmed if it had not been made.

mar wrote: ↑Sat May 25, 2019 11:20 am

JohnWoe wrote: ↑Sat May 25, 2019 1:39 am I published a piece of software I use in Sapeli.
https://github.com/SamuraiDangyo/Eucalyptus

Are you crazy? You attach GPL to the generated kpk table?!
So when someone includes it, you force the cancerous GPL crap on him?

I wonder why some people still believe that open source = GPL. There are many other (much better and much less restrictive) options.

I don't see where he states that "open source = GPL". But it is commonly accepted that GPL is one form of open source.

The generated table is just data encoding the KPK endgame and is therefore free of copyright. So anyone is free to include that data in his program.

The probing code could potentially be copyrighted (and thus fall under the GPL), but its functionality is free from copyright. SInce it is really simple, any programmer should be able to "re-implement' that functionality and avoid the copyright.

For what is it worth, it might be useful to review the Computer Chess Club Charter item 4 on discussions about the law:

Once a member gains access to the message board, he may read all messages and post new or response messages with the proviso that these new or response messages:

1. Are, within reason, on the topic of computer chess
2. Are not abusive in nature
3. Do not contain personal and/or libelous attacks on others
4. Are not flagrant commercial exhortations
5. Are not of questionable legal status

Moderators please take note, I suggest to stay within topics about the rules of chess or refer comments about "cancerous GPL crap" to a different forum.

D Sceviour wrote: ↑Sun Jul 07, 2019 9:22 pm For what is it worth, it might be useful to review the Computer Chess Club Charter item 4 on discussions about the law:

Once a member gains access to the message board, he may read all messages and post new or response messages with the proviso that these new or response messages:

1. Are, within reason, on the topic of computer chess
2. Are not abusive in nature
3. Do not contain personal and/or libelous attacks on others
4. Are not flagrant commercial exhortations
5. Are not of questionable legal status

Moderators please take note, I suggest to stay within topics about the rules of chess or refer comments about "cancerous GPL crap" to a different forum.

That's why there is a report button, if you feel the urge to reply to a month-old thread.
My opinion on GPL won't change and the OP has since removed the license from generated data. No case here.