TEST position TCEC5- Houdini 1.03a-DRybka4 1-0

[Roger Brown]

Wow, is this controversy *ever* going to end?

Is it not clear that Rybka 1 was heavily dependent on the Fruit source code? And that Houdini is partially based on the Ippolit family, as the author clearly states on his website?

Hello Jeffrey Hall,

Yes, it will end once a Rybka version is indisputably the strongest engine in the world. Once that happens, once all other engines are firmly in Rybka's Elo shadow, then all of this will fade.

Until then....

Later.

[Tom Barrister]

It's apparent to me that if Mr. Rajlich were to bring a lawsuit against the clones, he would need to

...identify who he was suing.

You could probably do a better job of that than I could. That's one of the problems Mr. Rajlich would face with a potential lawsuit.

There are several other hurdles that Mr. Rajlich would have to overcome:

1) Identify the author(s) of the alleged clones and bring litigation against him/her/them.

2) Prove that the author(s) stole program code from him. It wouldn't help here to sue somebody else who used the stolen code, unless it could be proven that that person knew that the code was stolen.

3) Prove that he owned the stolen code.

4) Prove that damages were suffered. The thief doesn't need to profit from the distribution of the stolen code, as long as Mr. Rajlich suffered damages (i.e. lost revenue) from its distribution.

5) Collect.

All of those are played across an international scene, against persons and'or entities whose identities are (I would assume) vague, at best.

Proving infringement can be a tall order to overcome even for software giants such as Microsoft, Symantec, Oracle, etc.---- companies with batteries of lawyers---faced with known entities based in the same country. For a one-man operation against multiple, probably largely unknown identities, spread out over various countries (or over multiple venues in one country), it's a venture that Mr. Rajlich undoubtedly sees as hopeless.

The further problem is to prove that the person or entity that's sued caused the damages, and then to prove how much (although the latter is generally up to the judge or jury). For example, suppose, for a hypothesis, that Mr. Rajlich decides to go after Mr. Houdart. Assume that Mr. Rajlich releases the source of Rybka, it's not a dervivative of Fruit (e.g. Mr. Rajlich owns the code), that Mr. Houdart (for whatever reason, forced or otherwise) releases the source of Houdini, it's proven to contain source code of Rybka, and it's also proven that Mr. Houdart either stole the code himself or knew that the source that he used for Houdini was stolen from Rybka, and also that Mr. Houdart knew that Mr. Rajlich owned the code that was used--- a lot of assumptions. Even after all of those assumptions are validated, Mr. Rajlich still has to prove that Mr. Houdart's program caused damages over and above (in addition to) damages caused by any others among the supposed clones.

Add all of this up, and it's a useless venture to try to bring litigation.

[Albert Silver]

It's apparent to me that if Mr. Rajlich were to bring a lawsuit against the clones, he would need to

...identify who he was suing.

it's a venture that Mr. Rajlich undoubtedly sees as hopeless.

Add all of this up, and it's a useless venture to try to bring litigation.

I personally believe that he has simply concluded (probably correctly so) that it is simply not worth the time and effort. On top of that, it would be time he wasn't spending programming or with his wife and newborn baby.

[Gino Figlio]

It's apparent to me that if Mr. Rajlich were to bring a lawsuit against the clones, he would need to

...identify who he was suing.

it's a venture that Mr. Rajlich undoubtedly sees as hopeless.

Add all of this up, and it's a useless venture to try to bring litigation.

I personally believe that he has simply concluded (probably correctly so) that it is simply not worth the time and effort. On top of that, it would be time he wasn't spending programming or with his wife and newborn baby.

That's one of the benefits of popularity: make a claim and present yourself as a victim. Don't spend a minute more of your time supporting the claim but allow your fans to waste their time defending you, obviously with very limited arguments.
Who are the real losers in this situation?

[De Vos W]

It's apparent to me that if Mr. Rajlich were to bring a lawsuit against the clones, he would need to

...identify who he was suing.

it's a venture that Mr. Rajlich undoubtedly sees as hopeless.

Add all of this up, and it's a useless venture to try to bring litigation.

I personally believe that he has simply concluded (probably correctly so) that it is simply not worth the time and effort. On top of that, it would be time he wasn't spending programming or with his wife and newborn baby.

That's one of the benefits of popularity: make a claim and present yourself as a victim. Don't spend a minute more of your time supporting the claim but allow your fans to waste their time defending you, obviously with very limited arguments.
Who are the real losers in this situation?[/quote]

Let me guess?... The lapdogs and their bark is worse than their bite....

[Graham Banks]

Let me guess?... The lapdogs and their bark is worse than their bite....

They may be barking, but they're not the ones crapping all over this place.

[De Vos W]

Let me guess?... The lapdogs and their bark is worse than their bite....

They may be barking, but they're not the ones crapping all over this place.

Your bark is ok Mr. Banks...

[De Vos W]

Apparently you are a very angry man, having no problems with Rybka derivatives (even promoting them), which are 90% more closer to Rybka than Rybka to Fruit

In the mean time your posting is completely missing my point, which was to answer mr Houdarts claim that Houdini is playing completely different compared to Rybka. For me that is the joke of the year!

Psalm 137:8

O Cloner(s) of Rybka, doomed to destruction, happy is He who repays you
for what you have done to Us - He who seizes your infant and dashes
their brains against the rocks " Rejoice in The Lord (Vas)

[De Vos W]

This is the most funny comment I have been reading since a while. You must believe in fairy tales

Jeroen,

Look at the very fine game of chess presented by Bram. Compare the evaluations and the ponder moves. Consider whether Rybka has correctly evaluated the trapped bishop, and whether Houdini has done so.

Curiously, over the last 18 months you have made exactly 4 posts at Talkchess, and every time your *only* goal appeared to be to denigrate Houdini or other competitors of Rybka.
Surely a prominent member of the Rybka team can make better contributions to Talkchess than just trash-talking Houdini.

Robert

Jeroen deserved this one! I think he laughs on the wrong side of his face now.

[De Vos W]

Apparently you are a very angry man, having no problems with Rybka derivatives (even promoting them), which are 90% more closer to Rybka than Rybka to Fruit

In the mean time your posting is completely missing my point, which was to answer mr Houdarts claim that Houdini is playing completely different compared to Rybka. For me that is the joke of the year!

Sure I'm promoting free engines like Houdini, Rybka ways, they don't work Mr. Noomen.
Rybka customers paid 100 Euro for Deep Rybka 4, but they get better customer service from the free programs! They let them know about a MPV bug in their program (Houdini) and it is fixed with a new release in a few days. With a Sorry from the programmer for putting out a version with a bug!!

I am starting to think that Rybka 4 is going down the same road as Rybka 3, and no bug fix will be provided, maybe that's the joke of the year Mr. Noomen.

Met groeten uit uw buurland.