Promising engines 3000+ ELO not Stockfish derivatives

[amanjpro]

I miss your point.

Oh dear you miss a lot of points!

Don't want that people compiles or modifies your source code? Don't release it under GPLv3.

Zahak is not released under GPLv3, but MIT...

Don't want that people test your binaries? Keep them private and never share them.

I have no issues people test Zahak, and I am also happy about people having interest in them. That is why I release binaries.

You tell me that I overestimates the strength of Zahak an when I try to correct it, referring official rating lists values, you aren't still happy.

I honestly don't pay much attention to your results, all I care is you not calling it Zahak 9.0, but Zahak 9.0-Compiled By ... or Zahak-9.0-modified or whatever, just to avoid confusion.

You should be grateful to people than help you to compile it for other operating systems and also grateful to people testing it.

I expect you to appologize for your very rude statement here, I give away something for free, I don't need to be greatful.

As you know, I like and support all engines derivatives, so if Zahak MOD for Android works, it's ok.

As I said, I have no issue you running Zahak. I don't even have the right to complain however you test it. I have released it under MIT after all.

BUT I do have all the right to forbid you to call it Zahak 9.0, call it whatever you like. Is this too much to ask? Call it Zahak 9.0-derivative, Zahak 9.0-compiled-by-..., Zahak-9.0-like or whatever. BUT THIS IS NOT ZAHAK 9.0, its source code/or Makefile is for sure modified or it cannot compile for Android

[AlexChess]

Zahak is not released under GPLv3, but MIT...

OK

I honestly don't pay much attention to your results, all I care is you not calling it Zahak 9.0, but Zahak 9.0-Compiled By ... or Zahak-9.0-modified or whatever, just to avoid confusion.

The name is INTERNAL, I have not changed it (the binary has another name) and all Android users have the same output. The infographic is based on Chess for Android Tournament results messagebox that I publish to show that I'm not modifying the data. Ask it to the compiler (I have found Zahak 9.0 in an Android engines collection and there was a direct link to your source, so the changes are related only to Android compilation)

I expect you to appologize for your very rude statement here, I give away something for free, I don't need to be greatful.

The very rude (and offensive) statements came only by you, also privately: "Childish", "You do not understand", "You are a desperate situation for me really"

As I said, I have no issue you running Zahak. I don't even have the right to complain however you test it. I have released it under MIT after all.

BUT I do have all the right to forbid you to call it Zahak 9.0, call it whatever you like. Is this too much to ask? Call it Zahak 9.0-derivative, Zahak 9.0-compiled-by-..., Zahak-9.0-like or whatever. BUT THIS IS NOT ZAHAK 9.0, its source code/or Makefile is for sure modified or it cannot compile for Android

As I said, I'm not the compiler, only a private tester.

[AlexChess]

Really Amaji,

I don't understand why you are so hostile with me.

As requested, I've abandoned Guenter's topic because original authors hate SF derivatives, and I can undestand them.
I have opened my own topics so I can freely add comments, tests, logos, crosstables, PGNs and humor.

I have supported Zahak since 6.0, asking you to solve my hardware issues and encouraging you reporting all games played.
I have even added Kurdistan flag to Arena because you seemed to me a kind friend and interesting programmer to follow
I have added Zanak 7.0 to my Superblitz (even the only working 386 build, because I like it) and I have removed it only for lack of space while other stronger engines has been published (planning to add it again when AVX issue would be solved, since Zanak 7.0 is 3000 ELO and Drofa 3.2.0 has 3123 ELO)

I like to privately test all chess engines doing it only for hobby: promising ones like your, derivatives, commercials, even derivatives not GPLv3-MIT-Santa compliant but never sharing them. I'm an ASP.net programmer 57 years old, I'm not skilled enought to write a chess program, but I'm not a child, an idiot or a troll.

Best regards, Alex

PS: In Outskirts, Chess2U, BSG chess forums we are all friends, respecting each other. Only Talkchess is like Afganistan!

[amanjpro]

You are posting your results and screenshot here publicly.

Dude this my 10th comment here just to make you fix your mistake. Would it have been so hard if you had acknowledged it and fixed it? Instead of lecturing me a few times? Is it too much to ask to be accurate

[amanjpro]

Anyways I retire from this thread post however you want. I'm tired

[Vernon Crawford]

BUT I do have all the right to forbid you to call it Zahak 9.0, call it whatever you like. Is this too much to ask? Call it Zahak 9.0-derivative, Zahak 9.0-compiled-by-..., Zahak-9.0-like or whatever. BUT THIS IS NOT ZAHAK 9.0, its source code/or Makefile is for sure modified or it cannot compile for Android

Amanj, in all due respect, YOU granted Alex tremendous latitude concerning your software:
https://github.com/amanjpro/zahak/blob/master/LICENSE

"Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so..."

and now you're crying about it ?

I suggest you either
1.) change your software license
and/or
2.) stop being so childish & petty

PS - this whole matter could have been discussed with Alex privately, without you spamming his topic.

[amanjpro]

BUT I do have all the right to forbid you to call it Zahak 9.0, call it whatever you like. Is this too much to ask? Call it Zahak 9.0-derivative, Zahak 9.0-compiled-by-..., Zahak-9.0-like or whatever. BUT THIS IS NOT ZAHAK 9.0, its source code/or Makefile is for sure modified or it cannot compile for Android

Amanj, in all due respect, YOU granted Alex tremendous latitude concerning your software:
https://github.com/amanjpro/zahak/blob/master/LICENSE

"Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so..."

and now you're crying about it ?

I suggest you either
1.) change your software license
and/or
2.) stop being so childish & petty

PS - this whole matter could have been discussed with Alex privately, without you spamming his topic.

Let's see what have I asked him to do? Can you repeat my ask please (since you think what I ask is unjust, you surely understand the ask)

[dkappe]

BUT I do have all the right to forbid you to call it Zahak 9.0, call it whatever you like. Is this too much to ask? Call it Zahak 9.0-derivative, Zahak 9.0-compiled-by-..., Zahak-9.0-like or whatever. BUT THIS IS NOT ZAHAK 9.0, its source code/or Makefile is for sure modified or it cannot compile for Android

Amanj, in all due respect, YOU granted Alex tremendous latitude concerning your software:
https://github.com/amanjpro/zahak/blob/master/LICENSE

"Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a copy
of this software and associated documentation files (the "Software"), to deal
in the Software without restriction, including without limitation the rights
to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and/or sell
copies of the Software, and to permit persons to whom the Software is
furnished to do so..."

and now you're crying about it ?

I suggest you either
1.) change your software license
and/or
2.) stop being so childish & petty

PS - this whole matter could have been discussed with Alex privately, without you spamming his topic.

Not only does he have a right to control what is done with his trademark (see “unregistered trademark”), but he has a duty to do so. To quote from FreecycleSunnyvale v. Freecycle Network:

[T]rademark owners have a duty to control the quality of their trademarks. It is well-established that a trademark owner may grant a license and remain protected provided quality control of the goods and services sold under the trademark by the licensee is maintained. “Naked licensing” occurs when a licensor “fails to exercise adequate quality control over the licensee.” Naked licensing may result in the trademark’s ceasing to function as a symbol of quality and a controlled source.

So, an open source license and a trademark are two different but related things.

Now IANAL, but I’ve been involved in enough software related legal activities to

1) know some of the basic concepts
2) know when to use qualified legal representation
3) know when someone is blowing smoke

You, sir, are a clear case of #3.

[Vernon Crawford]

Let's see-
Someone compiled Zahak for Android, and Alex presented some results here...
It's a legal issue now?
I guess Amanj will have to obtain a lawyer and file a complaint.
Perhaps you'll represent him?

Honestly such a bunch of nonsense over such a ridiculously trivial thing...it's laughable.
I've never seen anybody cry like this (or at all) because their release on github was compiled by a 3rd party.

Amanj - This seems to be personal, and about Alex...you're awfully quick to attack him, like several others in this forum.
It certainly doesn't bolster my respect for you.

[dkappe]

Let's see-
Someone compiled Zahak for Android, and Alex presented some results here...
It's a legal issue now?
I guess Amanj will have to obtain a lawyer and file a complaint.
Perhaps you'll represent him?

Honestly such a bunch of nonsense over such a ridiculously trivial thing...it's laughable.
I've never seen anybody cry like this (or at all) because their release on github was compiled by a 3rd party.

Amanj - This seems to be personal, and about Alex...you're awfully quick to attack him, like several others in this forum.
It certainly doesn't bolster my respect for you.

Vern,

It’s simple. You can compile it however you like, but if you change the code, you’ve got to get the author’s permission to call it by his trademark or call it something else.

Just because you and Alex are dense doesn’t mean people need to give up their rights. Just respect the author’s wishes. He’s been nice enough to release it under an open source license, so now Alex can do his part and not call a derivative work by the original name. Otherwise, why have a license at all?