dkappe wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 2:33 am
...
I’m open to this interpretation, but does it really matter? As a legal question, you don’t have to give credit to the developers (see the GPL FAQ site up above). So, if you’re arguing that ChessBase violated the GPL, then, sorry, no. If you are arguing that they are being rude by chess development community standards, then yes, they probably are.
...
Whether Stockfish is adequately credited or the question of whether the marketing materials are misleading isn't directly relevant to whether there was a GPL violation, correct. My initial post was a reply to your response to Jakob which launched this discussion:
dkappe wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 8:06 pm
...he didn’t care if ChessBase’s behavior was technically legal if it went against his conception of correct behavior.
You can even almost ignore the "correctness" thing it just casts doubt about the decision makers most basic competence. If you rely on the work of foss developers and release a product that is overwhelmingly built on their achievement it stands to reason you should give them appropriate credit even if not strictly speaking legally required. Just because you don't want to piss off the people you rely on to do all the heavy lifting for you... for free.
It's just plain stupid behavior, on an institutional level. If no one of the many people that must be in the decision chain raised a red flag about this it speaks volumes about the culture of the company.
This has already been covered. Stockfish was prominently mentioned in the marketing material.
Last edited by connor_mcmonigle on Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:00 am, edited 2 times in total.
you don’t do yourself any favors by using such hyperbolic language and making personal insults. Before you go on another rant about the racist sales practices of ChessBase, let’s just let it go.
Fat Titz by Stockfish, the engine with the bodaciously big net. Remember: size matters. If you want to learn more about this engine just google for "Fat Titz".
The Stockfish team wrote:Even though we had our first successes, leading to a recall of the Fat Fritz 2 DVD and the termination of the sales of Houdini 6, we were unable to finalize our dispute out of court.
Can the SF team, or the "team of maintainers and developers of Stockfish", elaborate on what this means?
Alrighty. I'll concede that my use of the word "buried" was a bit hyperbolic if you'll concede that your claim that Stockfish is "heavily mentioned" in the marketing material is simply false.
There’s not that much of it. Here from the description tab:
*The Fat Fritz 2 Chess Engine is based on the software Stockfish. The Fat Fritz 2 Chess Engine and the software Stockfish are licensed under the GNU General Public License Version 3. You will receive further information during installation.
So from a small number of sentences Stockfish is mentioned twice. We can have a discussion about these things but not if team Stockfish practices willful misunderstanding.
You do understand that those pages were only updated AFTER getting legal notice from Stockfish, right? The explicit mentioning of Stockfish's GPLv3 is an attempt to remedy the violation. You know full and well the original page made no direct associations between Stockfish and FF2.
How can he know something that's completely untrue? Not only was it there but it's also printed on the back of the box. In fact that description is simply a copy and paste of the text that is printed on the back of the box.
"Tactics are the bricks and sticks that make up a game, but positional play is the architectural blueprint."
Albert Silver wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:49 amsimply a copy and paste
says ASilver, oh man that's a quote of the day applies to almost every context.
Albert Silver on Fat Fritz 2: "In fact ... is simply a copy and paste". Look, I'm a journalist now
#WeAreAllDraude #JusticeForDraude #RememberDraude #LeptirBigUltra "Those who can't do, clone instead" - Eduard ( A real life friend, not this forum's Eduard )
Albert Silver wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 3:49 amsimply a copy and paste
says ASilver, oh man that's a quote of the day applies to almost every context.
Albert Silver on Fat Fritz 2: "In fact ... is simply a copy and paste". Look, I'm a journalist now
You're not doing yourself any favors.
I'm enjoying myself
#WeAreAllDraude #JusticeForDraude #RememberDraude #LeptirBigUltra "Those who can't do, clone instead" - Eduard ( A real life friend, not this forum's Eduard )
Luecx wrote: ↑Fri Jul 23, 2021 10:11 am
It feels like many people here dont understand the difference between whats legal and what is allowed. The legal part is decided by official courts where as what is allowed is decided by the chess community. Especially the unique engine authors, tcec etc.
According to common chess community standards, it is not allowed to:
- steal code
- not correctly credit other people if parts of it are used
- using other peoples data when training NN's
- ...
I do not care if FF is actually legal or not, all i know is what they did is not allowed by common chess community standards and they need to face the consquences for that.
one more point:
- restricting engine to run on specific rating-lists/tournaments only
Hmm, can this work out? Enforcing moral standards on an GPL project which are not covered by the GPL? Maybe people should come up with an "unique engine authors licsense"? I mean it serious. If you define some rules for playing the game, why not enforce it via your own kind of licsense. Crafty had its own kind of license, its point was that taking ideas is OK but taking code is not, as an example.
--
Srdja
PS: in context of all these recent issues I concluded myself to use MIT for my next releases.
AndrewGrant wrote: ↑Sat Jul 24, 2021 2:54 am
You do understand that those pages were only updated AFTER getting legal notice from Stockfish, right? The explicit mentioning of Stockfish's GPLv3 is an attempt to remedy the violation. You know full and well the original page made no direct associations between Stockfish and FF2.
An attempt to placate the Stockfish team, no doubt. But probably not an attempt to remedy an alleged violation which has not been heard in court yet. I hope that court case comes soon so that everyone has clarity from the legal standpoint.
