Moderator: Ras
Crap, i've made that typo many times beforeasanjuan wrote:¿How is it?My understanding is that this is actually pretty simple: whoever writes the code owns the copyright to the code.
I claim that this line of code is mine:All you have to pay me!Code: Select all
printf("Helo world");
Sorry, here in spain we make tones of jokes.
The latter bit simply means that the framework and hosting is Tangient's stuff; since you don't need this, you dou needn't fret about it.CPW wrote: Contributions to http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com/ are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike 3.0 License.
Portions not contributed by visitors are Copyright 2011 Tangient LLC.
For the record, the US patent office will not patent any "algorithm" or such (including an idea) related to computer programming. They stopped doing this a LONG time back, at least 25 years ago... We had someone from the US patent office come to USM before I left (in 1985) to discuss this very issue.Don wrote:This is where a patent would come in. Of course a patent can be challenged or deemed too general, etc. You would probably find it not worth the effort unless the idea was pretty substantial and different from anything else we are doing. I seriously doubt there is anything in any chess program that could legitimately be patented.ChrisFlorin wrote:Thank you.Don wrote:I do not think your honor is in question. You are doing fine.Yes, last night, I was very tired and frustrated.You are victim of the pro-clone propaganda, they hammer you with FUD in order to make it seem that these issues are too complicated to resolve and that everything needs to be changed. In a sense they have won if you now feel frustrated.Thank god, but how would someone "own" an idea should they have one?I am not aware of any computer chess idea that is patented. These ideas are all in the public domain and the do not belong to anyone in particular. Getting an idea does not make you "owner" of the idea.I do not understand this distinction at all, perhaps this is a problem.However CODE is copyrighted, not patented. But keep in mind that copyright and patents are two different things. This is a big source of confusion. If you don't understand that distinction, you will be victim of all the silly arguments which are based on refusing to acknowledge the difference.I don't oppose plagiarism, but I sort of assumed some things that I guess I shouldn't have assumed. In college (and high school a little) composition classes, they are very strict with plagiarism and giving credit to original authors, but nobody teaches this in engineering. I know enough to know that it's obviously illegal to copy computer programs, but the line is blurry with respect to computer code. Yes, Stockfish is GPL, blah blah blah, but what about tutorials? Example code? Forum posts asking how to do something? MSDN code? What if there's just not another way to do something that is easy and intuitive? For example, the code I use to disable buffering that I originally found in Beowulf, and stumbled across in the MSDN looking for something else completely unrelated?The straw man they have constructed in a nutshell (which I am going to exaggerate to make the point) is that if you oppose plagiarism, it's because you are old-fashioned and petty and do not want others to make progress or share ideas. Of course that is not our position at all, but that is the straw man they like to attack.Confuse me, yes. Hold me back? We'll see. My original intention with respect to releasing code was to release a "shell" of an engine, complete with protocol communication, board representation, move generation, the most basic PVS search, and material evaluation, etc. i.e. everything required to get a basic engine working under another gui.Please don't let them confuse you or hold you back from having fun with computer chess.
I have rewritten Blackmail from scratch 7 times since my hard drive failure. This 7th time, I didn't even write a search function, evaluation, anything until my perft times beat those of Stockfish. And I still made improvements to it during search/evaluation development. Every step of the way, if anything slowed Blackmail too much, I scrapped it or rewrote it several times. Blackmail still has no concept of center/square control simply because I cannot implement it efficiently.
But, I never wanted to be accused of cloning. I had a dream last night in my frustration, Vasij accused me of cloning Rybka in a tournament, and I pulled out a usb drive and told him to put up or shut up. I don't even know what he looks like, it's funny how the brain fills information in.As does any genetic algorithmWe need more diversity, not less, andYou will.I hope to see some good stuff from you.
The code has been pulled from download since technically, I guess I can't even release Blackmail under GPL until I resolve all of the issues with example code I copied, mostly from chessprogramming.wikispaces.com. This site should really come with some disclaimers. Anyway, I'll be working on that. Any code that I simply get out of my head, such as the SEE code will be rewritten in assembly. I fully intend on releasing example code for public domain; I simply don't understand or see the point in copyrighting "tutorial class" code. I would love to make a copy of my code/engine to the authors of Crafty, Stockfish and Beowulf to look over; not only for integrity purposes, but perhaps they can learn something from an engine written by someone who has reviewed their code pretty thoroughly.I found this in the Getting Started section, but am too lazy to look comprehensively. I'm not convinced this is warning enough to not copy code from the website to the average programmer. Although it does warn against clones, not every programmer is aware of code copyright laws as I have demonstrated. There should be an ethics for engineers class or somethingchessprogramming.wikispaces.com wrote:Just be careful, and don't copy the code and say it is your own! Clones are frowned upon by the computer chess community as a whole.
Anyway, when I make the required changes for release, I'll let you guys know. Until then, I would recommend anybody who downloaded my code to delete it and not distribute it since it contains illegal code and distribution of it would be illegal. Hopefully the FBI isn't watching.
I am not sure I am reading this correctly.For the record, the US patent office will not patent any "algorithm" or such (including an idea) related to computer programming. They stopped doing this a LONG time back, at least 25 years ago... We had someone from the US patent office come to USM before I left (in 1985) to discuss this very issue.
I don't know what you've been drinking... Perhaps you should read this:bob wrote: For the record, the US patent office will not patent any "algorithm" or such (including an idea) related to computer programming. They stopped doing this a LONG time back, at least 25 years ago... We had someone from the US patent office come to USM before I left (in 1985) to discuss this very issue.
Copyright law certainly applies to source code, however...
