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...rbarreira wrote:If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?bob wrote:So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...rbarreira wrote:It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.
Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.
To Hell with Private Engines
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 20943
- Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
- Location: Birmingham, AL
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
-
- Posts: 840
- Joined: Sun Mar 12, 2006 3:59 am
- Location: Sydney
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.mephisto wrote:Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan
LH
Growth is the problem; not the solution
-
- Posts: 41435
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 10:52 am
- Location: Auckland, NZ
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
And here I was thinking it was Oprah!Larry wrote:That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.mephisto wrote:Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan
LH
gbanksnz at gmail.com
-
- Posts: 582
- Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 7:28 pm
- Location: Birmingham, England
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
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?bob wrote: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...rbarreira wrote:If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?bob wrote:So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...rbarreira wrote:It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.
Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.
Marek Soszynski
-
- Posts: 431
- Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 11:59 am
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
Someone's boring me. I think it's you...fern wrote: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
let's have some new cliches.
Gods are fragile things; they may be killed by a whiff of science or a dose of common sense.
-
- Posts: 263
- Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2010 9:16 pm
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
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.bob wrote:So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...rbarreira wrote:It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.
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.
Rodolfo (The Baron Team)
-
- Posts: 900
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:48 pm
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
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").bob wrote: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...rbarreira wrote:If they only use it privately and don't distribute it, why not?bob wrote:So they can steal source, then do whatever they want? This is happening in a _bunch_ of cases today...rbarreira wrote:It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.
Reverse engineering and hacking of software is legal for self-study purposes as far as I know... and I think that it should be.
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).
-
- Posts: 6340
- Joined: Mon Mar 13, 2006 2:34 pm
- Location: Acworth, GA
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
Shit, I thought it was my wife!Graham Banks wrote:And here I was thinking it was Oprah!Larry wrote:That ain't Diana Ross, it's Whitney Houston, you fool.mephisto wrote:Hi Fern
Like the photo of you and Diana Ross
Motown Regards
Bryan
LH
"Good decisions come from experience, and experience comes from bad decisions."
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
__________________________________________________________________
Ted Summers
-
- Posts: 227
- Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2010 5:29 pm
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
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.rbarreira wrote:It's their engine, they can do whatever they want with it.
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.rodolfoleoni wrote:Would you ban engines like The Baron from computer chess, just because it's a private work?
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.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 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.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?
This production is being brought to you by Rybka: "The engine made from scratch.™"
-
- Posts: 900
- Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 3:48 pm
Re: To Hell with Private Engines
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.Tom Barrister wrote: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.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.