Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 10:29:16 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 13:24:54, Uri Blass wrote: >I understood from the winboard forum that Bob considers DanChess as a crafty >clone and the question is what is the definition of a clone. > >I remember from slater's post in this forum that if most of the code is >different you cannot win in court by complaining that it is a clone. > >I understood from Dann's post that only 30% of the code of DanChess is >similiar(that does not mean the same as Crafty). > >Dann Corbit posted in the winboard forum the SEE function of Danchess that is >similiar to Crafty. >I wonder if it is really the main reason that Bob considers Danchess as a clone >or only one of the reasons. There are more reasons that that one routine. Several routines are similar. He also used some ideas from eval that are found only in crafty. For instance, he had a stonewall detection. The only other program I ever saw with stonewall detection was crafty. There is no standard for: "This is a clone" or "This is not a clone" It is clear to me that if you use ideas from someone else and they challenge you as to cloning, then you may have a big problem to sort it out. Therefore, if someone has an idea you want to use, I think the only wise course is to send an email and ask if you can use the idea. There are some people who don't care. If code is donated to the public domain, you can do anything you want to with it. I have made many donations in this manner. However, it would be wrong to inflict my will upon others. They are free to copyright or patent.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.