This isn't fair.I thought stockfish is the strongest computer.
Do I understand correctly from the settlement that Chessbase has to offer Fat Fritz 2 (or its source code) for free on foss.chessbase.com within 8 weeks?
What I learned here is that for profit corps can steal from open source projects with impunity, and if those then really lawyer up, they can just pay a symbolic amount afterwards. That was always their MO. Open source projects are vulnerable and this settlement helped solidify that vulnerability. So, good that they won a settlement, but imo liars and thieves belong in prison, even if they're really rich.
Chessbase should fire their lawyers for making this deal. They should've gotten a lot more out of this.
Now it’s time for Stockfish team to come up with a software that competes with and replaces the outdated and clunky Chessbase which has only gone through fake updates over the years with no real improvement in its functionality. CB has enjoyed too much market exclusivity which explains why it’s still in its ancient form.
@g3rfx said in #32:
> Do I understand correctly from the settlement that Chessbase has to offer Fat Fritz 2 (or its source code) for free on foss.chessbase.com within 8 weeks?
Absolutely! As we watch this space... foss.chessbase.com
> Do I understand correctly from the settlement that Chessbase has to offer Fat Fritz 2 (or its source code) for free on foss.chessbase.com within 8 weeks?
Absolutely! As we watch this space... foss.chessbase.com
<Comment deleted by user>
@KingsChessAdmin said in #29:
> It's a shame there was no way for both parties to lose this case since they have both created engines that have had huge negative impacts on the world of chess they deserve to be treated in the way as scientists who created the nuclear bomb.
That's an incredibly dumb comment. Stockfish is on the same level as a city-destroying bomb. Who let this loon have an account?
> It's a shame there was no way for both parties to lose this case since they have both created engines that have had huge negative impacts on the world of chess they deserve to be treated in the way as scientists who created the nuclear bomb.
That's an incredibly dumb comment. Stockfish is on the same level as a city-destroying bomb. Who let this loon have an account?
@justaz said in #22:
> considering stockfish has only gained 6 elo in 6 months.
The dynamics of ELO in the evolution of engine tournaments, a mystery? What should be the rate of climbing.. Does a saturation of ELO mean having achieved perfect chess. All of this is off-topic though.. sorry.
Glad for the level-headed-ness too.. Maybe not asking for compensation is NOT saying open source show not be a source of living income, but a statement that it would not be through lawsuit ballets.
Perhaps also to contrast the set of values demonstrated in the theft of public intellectual property for the benefit of few individuals or a company avatar of those (having fun with words).
It does leave the question of defending open source code in court as something feasible for other projects. Perhaps if precedent are worth it, this may help in general, augmenting the likely hood of such cases being heard, in the respect of open source direction.
Still the financial back-bone inherent unfair burden of law proceedings fees remains unanswered by this event, I think, naively.
> considering stockfish has only gained 6 elo in 6 months.
The dynamics of ELO in the evolution of engine tournaments, a mystery? What should be the rate of climbing.. Does a saturation of ELO mean having achieved perfect chess. All of this is off-topic though.. sorry.
Glad for the level-headed-ness too.. Maybe not asking for compensation is NOT saying open source show not be a source of living income, but a statement that it would not be through lawsuit ballets.
Perhaps also to contrast the set of values demonstrated in the theft of public intellectual property for the benefit of few individuals or a company avatar of those (having fun with words).
It does leave the question of defending open source code in court as something feasible for other projects. Perhaps if precedent are worth it, this may help in general, augmenting the likely hood of such cases being heard, in the respect of open source direction.
Still the financial back-bone inherent unfair burden of law proceedings fees remains unanswered by this event, I think, naively.
<Comment deleted by user>
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.