Author: Lance Perkins
Date: 18:54:10 02/15/05
Go up one level in this thread
Just a follow-up. Let's also say that you even modified all the names of the characters of the novel in chapter 1 from English-sounding names to Mexican-sounding names. On February 15, 2005 at 21:49:45, Lance Perkins wrote: >Consider this scenario: > >You saw someone else's code, then you went out and wrote your own code, which >ended up to be like the other code. > >Even in this scenario, you could be violating the copyright of the other code. > >The only way around this is with the 'clean room' approach. If you want to make >a similar or compatible code, you should have not seen the other person's code. >Instead, somebody else would see it, describe to you what it does, then you go >and write the code. > >So, in all the cases where you stated that you took crafty's code and modifed >potions of it, it is considered a clone. > >Let me go back to my novel example: > >Assuming someone has written a 12-chapter novel. You then went and copied the >1st chapter, and then with your own ideas, you wrote chapters 2 to 12 which is >your very own original story. Can you submit this new novel to a publisher and >claim it as your own work? > >--- > >On February 15, 2005 at 18:38:43, John Merlino wrote: > >>I'm not trying to start a brutally long thread here, but I'm just curious about >>how people feel about a particularly touchy subject -- clones. What, in your >>mind, would lead you to the conclusion that an engine is a clone? >> >>Let's forget trying to find ways to PROVE that a clone is a clone; I'm just >>trying to define one. For the sake of argument, assume that the author of this >>engine in question tells you exactly what he did and did not do, and you must >>decide whether to call it a clone or not. >> >>Here are some hypothetical questions to start the debate: >> >>If the author took Crafty and completely rewrote the evaluation code and nothing >>else, would it be a clone? >> >>How about if the author rewrote the evaluation code and search algorithm only, >>but left the hashing code, et. al.? >> >>How about if the author rewrote everything EXCEPT for the evaluation? >> >>How about if the author rewrote everything EXCEPT for Crafty's evaluation of >>passed pawns? >> >>I think you can see where I'm driving. Obviously, many engine authors have >>studied Crafty and other engines whose authors have graciously provided their >>source code. But, for an engine to not be considered a clone, does it have to be >>absolutely 100% the work of the author? (Forget about Nalimov's EGTB probing >>code and any other code that can be used with permission). >> >>Many thanks in advance for your thoughts, >> >>jm (who's just preparing for any eventuality during his upcoming stint as >>moderator :-)
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.