The Junior/ Hiarcs Intifada

[Hood]

It's not yours. Try putting this OS on another computer. Certainly, this should be a reasonable test of ownership - shouldn't I be able to buy a second computer and still use the software I already purchased on it?

I think you have to admit that you are not buying the software, you are "renting" it.

My point was chess engine (application) not OS. OS is a special kind of software.

Nevertheless when i bought a bike i will be not able to swimm by it
It will be not the test of the ownership. ?

By occasion thanks for the free Komodo SP. From my point it is free program because many users are dedicating 1 core for analysing 1 game when playing many games paralelly.

rgds
H

[Gian-Carlo Pascutto]

My point was chess engine (application) not OS. OS is a special kind of software.

I don't think there's any law in any country providing for operating systems to be treated any differently from any other software.

[John Conway]

I bought the windows and they are 'mine' the same as I bought the bicycle and that bicycle is mine. I can use that bicycle for racing.

Bicycle is not a good analogy. If it was, some would say you can't take the bicycle apart to see how it works, and you certainly can't make a copy of it.

[Hood]

I don't think there's any law in any country providing for operating systems to be treated any differently from any other software.

When i have bought Rybka, Fritz etc. i have signed nth, when Windows yes I have to fill the license conditions.

There must be the diferrence. Wnds are the big product the chess engine small one.
There is not important difference between the CD with chess engine and the CD with audio record. It is enough not sold - gave the copies of it , is not it ? The way of using it is the matter of the customer.

rgds
H

[Don]

It's not yours. Try putting this OS on another computer. Certainly, this should be a reasonable test of ownership - shouldn't I be able to buy a second computer and still use the software I already purchased on it?

I think you have to admit that you are not buying the software, you are "renting" it.

My point was chess engine (application) not OS. OS is a special kind of software.

Nevertheless when i bought a bike i will be not able to swimm by it
It will be not the test of the ownership. ?

By occasion thanks for the free Komodo SP. From my point it is free program because many users are dedicating 1 core for analysing 1 game when playing many games paralelly.

rgds
H

If you don't understand the difference between owning a bicycle and "purchasing" a software license, then this discussion is probably too deep for you.

No matter what physical thing you buy, it will have it's own limitations but these are not limitations placed on you by decree.

A different model of ownership that I suggest would change things of course. Some people would have to make their money differently. But so what? It would be a big net benefit to society. The current model of ownership is not natural either and completely changed how people do business, for instance with patent laws. Patent laws are not some kind of law of nature, it is an artificial man made creation designed to artificially restrict almost everyone. It's so unnatural that yet another arbitrary decision is made to cause the restriction to expire at some point - this in itself reveals how silly the idea is. As more time transpires, the restriction becomes more and more obviously ridiculous. Otherwise you would have to pay someone for the right to use a wheel (and it would be illegal to build your own wheel.)

[Hood]

If you don't understand the difference between owning a bicycle and "purchasing" a software license, then this discussion is probably too deep for you.

No matter what physical thing you buy, it will have it's own limitations but these are not limitations placed on you by decree.

If sth is to deep it means it is unusable.
If we can not explain the matter easy it means we do understand it.
It seems that we are writing about diffrent matters.

I am not discussing the matter of illegal copying.

Bike, music, software are the things for trade and shall be easy to manage by customer.

I bought sth to use it i do not need the additional problems nor knowledge to play with . It does not matter if you call it the ownership or the permanent right to use it.

I want to use it in differrent places. If the author wants to avoid a confrontation with other products it is his matter. The customer has a right to compare the product by his own.

rgds h

[lmader]

I think it is clear that you are not talking about copying software illegally. You are questioning whether it is valid for a piece of software to have a license that restricts its use, as in the Junior license that specifies that it cannot be entered into a certain tournament under certain conditions.

Your position is that you think that this license is not something that can be enforced. In doing so, you are describing how you think things *should* be, or how you *want* them to be.

Your position may or may not actually conform to what is legal. It may very well be that a software license like this is legal and enforceable, although I do not know for sure.

If you disagree with the terms of the license, that is up to you. Whether or not your position is legally valid is an open question. However if you violate it (enter the program in said tournament) you might find yourself in the uncomfortable position of having to deal with a lawsuit from the Junior team . You might win that lawsuit, you might lose that lawsuit, or they might never even try to enforce.

Now, that being said, we don't have to _like_ that license, and if you don't you can vote with our dollars and choose not to purchase a program with a license like that.

[Hood]

I do not know exact conditions of Junior license because I do not have it.
Is there sth written that i have to have the agreement of producer to use it.
For what i would pay in that case ?

I know when i am buying a chess program i am signing nth.
I am obliged to the usual copyright law. In the law there is nth that i can not use the piece of software in the tournament or i need the agreement of the producer to use it.
It would be the total absurd like forbidding the car owner to take a part in the competition race, rally etc. It will cut the sales. That is all.

I am not touching the problem of enforcement of the license.
It is other matter.

rgds H

[Hood]

Bicycle is not a good analogy. If it was, some would say you can't take the bicycle apart to see how it works, and you certainly can't make a copy of it.

It is not bad analogy either. Bike is not so easy as it is seen. There is a lot of technical knowledge in it. They are a lot of tests before bike is sent for sale

i.e.
the technical solutions can be discovered from the bicyle:
- the diameters of the parts
- the distances beetween parts,
- the materials of which the parts are made.

Having that details you can produce the bicyle without developing and testing phase. That are the big costs reductions.

chess software is nothing special
rgds H

[lmader]

Is there sth written that i have to have the agreement of producer to use it.

Yes. This is true of almost all commercial software, and is certainly true of most commercial chess programs. Fritz, Junior, etc, although the terms of the license agreements vary. When you install software, the installation program displays the license agreement. You usually have to click an "Accept" button to accept the terms of the license agreement. This is standard practice for commercial software

I know when i am buying a chess program i am signing nth.

False. See above.

It would be the total absurd like forbidding the car owner to take a part in the competition race, rally etc.

Perhaps it is absurd. But these are the facts.

Here is an interesting article on MaximumPC about it:
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/column ... e_continue