Fat Fritz 2

[gonzochess75]

You're so full of crap...
The video description clearly explains it's a parody.

It’s bullying. And a copyright violation.

No, and no.

Tomasz Sobczyk is actually a Stockfish developer, so not some random Yahoo. Vaguely racist. Hmmm.

"I'm out of arguments, let's call it racist!"

You're ridiculing yourself with such claims.

Guessing he is referring to the line about “naive Indians” in the video which I just assumed was in reference to chessbase heavily advertising in the Indian market...

[Sopel]

You're so full of crap...
The video description clearly explains it's a parody.

It’s bullying. And a copyright violation.

No, and no.

Tomasz Sobczyk is actually a Stockfish developer, so not some random Yahoo. Vaguely racist. Hmmm.

"I'm out of arguments, let's call it racist!"

You're ridiculing yourself with such claims.

Guessing he is referring to the line about “naive Indians” in the video which I just assumed was in reference to chessbase heavily advertising in the Indian market...

Yes this is a reference to the recent interview with Albert Silver by Chessbase India. I can also assure everyone that there are some Indians that are naive. To anyone considering the statement racist, please reconsider the first thought that came to your mind and don't project your prejudice on me.

[dkappe]

Yes this is a reference to the recent interview with Albert Silver by Chessbase India. I can also assure everyone that there are some Indians that are naive. To anyone considering the statement racist, please reconsider the first thought that came to your mind and don't project your prejudice on me.

As a show of good faith, can I ask you to take the video down?

[Sopel]

As a show of good faith, can I ask you to take the video down?

You can ask but I won't take the video down by your request as I don't see any reason why this video should be taken down.

What I think is good faith is to entertain the community with some cheerful memes while this terrible drama drags.

[dkappe]

As a show of good faith, can I ask you to take the video down?

You can ask but I won't take the video down by your request as I don't see any reason why this video should be taken down.

What I think is good faith is to provide the community with some cheerful memes while this terrible drama drags.

I’d ask you to reconsider. But I do want to apologize to you. One should not use “racist” lightly if it’s not warranted. Maybe I’m overly sensitive. In the United States we’ve just had an election where social media was rife with racist memes. Meme’s often reinforce stereotypes, so when I saw this video, independent of subtitles, it made me ill. Again, maybe overly sensitive, but certainly no excuse for calling your video racist.

[AndrewGrant]

The Albert Silver "interview" video linked on fatfritz.net is pure gold. Linking it here:

Thanks. Reported it.

You're so full of crap...
The video description clearly explains it's a parody.

It’s bullying. And a copyright violation.

So ... fair use of a video is copyright violation .... but no one has ever violated the GPL. Do you get off on being a contrarian? Without even reading your post, I can just assume you will have the view of someone who disagrees with the rest of the thread, and be correct in 99.99% of all cases.

[dkappe]

So ... fair use of a video is copyright violation .... but no one has ever violated the GPL. Do you get off on being a contrarian? Without even reading your post, I can just assume you will have the view of someone who disagrees with the rest of the thread, and be correct in 99.99% of all cases.

Crap. I just lost a bet. So we have Stockfish which is copyrighted and the use and distribution of which is governed by a license, the GPLv3. And we have part of a television broadcast, which is used without the copyright holders permission. Fair use is not a rule or exception to copyright law, but a defense to a copyright infringement action. It is handled on a case by case basis.

[AndrewGrant]

So ... fair use of a video is copyright violation .... but no one has ever violated the GPL. Do you get off on being a contrarian? Without even reading your post, I can just assume you will have the view of someone who disagrees with the rest of the thread, and be correct in 99.99% of all cases.

Crap. I just lost a bet. So we have Stockfish which is copyrighted and the use and distribution of which is governed by a license, the GPLv3. And we have part of a television broadcast, which is used without the copyright holders permission. Fair use is not a rule or exception to copyright law, but a defense to a copyright infringement action. It is handled on a case by case basis.

Re titling a broadcast for which you don't own the rights, so long as the title constitutes a commentary, is enough to qualify for fair use. I don't think you know anything you are talking about. You seem to be an expert on everything, yet provide nothing. The fact that you would so simply and so naively claim something you disagree with to be a violation of copyright, and willingly sit back while others have their rights violated and take no objection to it, is disgusting. Do you stand for anything? Do you have any principles? Do you have a guiding moral code? You remind me a lot of Trump. All talk, nothing behind it.

I'm trying to find the post I referenced with commentary in the title. It was some twitter/youtube type personality who reuploaded the video of a social media instagram socialite type person, but with the title change. He was sued, fought off the suit and got his legal fees reimbursed as well as an undisclosed settlement. I'm having a hard time finding the keywords to find a news story, since it was a left vs right type event, and the MSM did not post it only small outlets reported it.

EDIT: Found the part one of the story, https://www.lexology.com/library/detail ... f05687cb59

[peter]

So ... fair use of a video is copyright violation ....

That's really your view of fair use?

Good old El Risitas is funny to see and hear even after the many other mis- und abuses of his interview still, but the text of the subtitels aren't really soo funny, are they?
And to put it on a specially dedicated domain with title Interview with Alber Silver and to share links with these title in open fora isn't of any conflict for armchair lawyers specialized on media law?

The whole mission comes rather near to what I'd call hate on the net.

And if the now all of a sudden rediscovered idea of bigger nets in SF framework, if these trials would have been more successful with SF dev. already and the new one net from Albert Silver wouldn't have been somewhat competitive yet too, the moral outrage of some parts of the "SF community" would have been a little bit less hysterical maybe also.
When FF1 came out, it was the same kind of selling before, but nr.1 in rating lists of SF wasn't as endangered as much as it is now from numerous other GPL- projects. Maybe it's simply getting harder and harder for the first one of these GPL projects, the SF- framework, to cope with its own licence model of a copyleft.
Yet it was and is the reason of the success of SF still too, isn't it?

So what regards

[AndrewGrant]

So ... fair use of a video is copyright violation ....

That's really your view of fair use?

The threshold for fair use appears to be extremely low. People have successfully in the same vein that reuploading that video, without the captions, but with the new title of "Interview with Albert Silver on Fat Fritz family of chess engines." is a commentary upon the work. Even easier is to look at the efforts made by the video maker, who added his own commentary and thus transformed the work into a commentary on Chess, despite the original content having no relation to the new found understanding of the work.