Copyright issues aside, you would think claims of innovation would be taken with a grain of salt until this engine competes with, and beats Stockfish and Leela at the TCEC (top computer engine championship).
Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
41–50 of 136 posts
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#42Some stories from ChessBase Chess News describing these products, roughly reverse chronological order:
https://en.chessbase.com/post/chess-and-artificial-intellige... ChessBase founder Frederic Friedel talks about Fat Fritz
https://en.chessbase.com/post/interview-with-albert-silver-h... 1 hr video interview with Silver about his "path to inventing the [Fat Fritz] 2.0 engine"
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-2-0-the-new-number-1 "Fat Fritz has revolutionised the world of chess engines."
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-2-best-of-both-world...
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-ingenious-without-st...
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-and-the-1200 has a section "What differentiates Fat Fritz from Leela?"
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-defeats-stockfish-ma...
https://en.chessbase.com/post/fat-fritz-what-on-earth-is-tha... 2019 - Albert Silver describes in detail how he made his "AlphaZero clone" Fat Fritz
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#43This article is light on the details about this being a GPL license violation or not. The final paragraph also makes it sound like Stockfish is under a permissive license (only requiring attribution) when in fact it's licensed under the copyleft GPLv3.
The stockfish blogpost is quite a lot clearer: https://blog.stockfishchess.org/post/643239805544792064/stat...
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#44Many commenters are missing that the issue is not that an Open Source project was repackaged as a commercial project, but that the open source origin has been hidden.
> Many commenters are missing that the issue is not that an Open Source project was repackaged as a commercial project, but that the open source origin has been hidden.
That is not what Joost VandeVondele, current maintainer of the Stockfish project, posts:
> Recently, ChessBase has started distribution and sales of the Fat Fritz 2 chess engine. This chess engine is a Stockfish derivative, with a few lines of code modification (engine name, authors list and a few parameters), and a new set of NNUE net weights considered proprietary
> Selling Stockfish derivatives is possible with the GPLv3 license we grant, but not without requirements. In particular, the license states that if one redistributes a program derived from our work, the corresponding modifications of our sources and all information needed to build that program must be made available. Only after explicitly informing Albert Silver (the author of the net in Fat Fritz 2) of a license violation have matching C++ sources, but not the net weights, been made available. Obviously, we condemn the approach taken.
https://blog.stockfishchess.org/post/643239805544792064/stat...
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#45As long as the license allowed it, I'm not seeing the issue. Sure; it's a less-then-advertised product, but the world is full of those. If people want to drop 100$ on something that doesn't work as well as the free alternative, more power to them. People do it everyday in the real world.
> This chess engine is a Stockfish derivative, with a few lines of code modification (engine name, authors list and a few parameters), and a new set of NNUE net weights considered proprietary.
https://blog.stockfishchess.org/post/643239805544792064/stat...
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but that the open source origin has been hidden. What is the specific licensing issue here? If this is about them not liking the product, fine, but don't dirty the open source ethos unless they are breaking the license. Part of the problem is the current HN headline perhaps.
The specific licensing issue is that both are under GPL v3.0. Which means that you can sell a derivative, but you have to clearly advertise that it wasn't your work, provide source upon request, and so on. They did none of this and so are in copyright violation. And so should be sued.
Is this the Ben Tilly that paints and lived in Seattle moved to ???
Hello Ben!
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#47As long as the license allowed it, I'm not seeing the issue. Sure; it's a less-then-advertised product, but the world is full of those. If people want to drop 100$ on something that doesn't work as well as the free alternative, more power to them. People do it everyday in the real world.
And I might be the only idiot here, but I tried to run stockfish from source and it was not an instant process. In addition, there isn't really a front end, you essentially end up with a CLI to input moves. And for those who say, hey you, there are prebuilt binaries, just download them! Check out this message [1] " The binaries at the top of the table are fastest, but may not support all CPUs. If you don't know which…
Because the engine is not an interface. You can have then engine you want on any interface that supports it. I suppose the easiest way to play stockfish is to click "Play with the computer" on lichess.org, you don't even have to signup!
Then, you will find a /lot/ of GUI interfaces for your favorite OS (Linux, Android, BSD, Win/Mac...), and probably it will have Stockfish included.
As such, you don't have to download or build stockfish, basically any free chess app that you will find will make it available to you. I can think of no reason to make a free chess interface without Stockfish.
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
The specific licensing issue is that both are under GPL v3.0. Which means that you can sell a derivative, but you have to clearly advertise that it wasn't your work, provide source upon request, and so on. They did none of this and so are in copyright violation. And so should be sued.
Is this the Ben Tilly that paints and lived in Seattle moved to ??? Hello Ben!
Sorry, different Ben. I grew up in Victoria, BC, never lived in Seattle, and have only painted a handful of times in my life.
Re: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but that the open source origin has been hidden. What is the specific licensing issue here? If this is about them not liking the product, fine, but don't dirty the open source ethos unless they are breaking the license. Part of the problem is the current HN headline perhaps.
It's GPL: its not attributed and the binary is available for download while the code isn't open sourced.
Code is open source (given when requested as per GPL [1]) but not the net weights.
I don't think under GPL the net weights have to be open sourced.
[1] https://blog.stockfishchess.org/post/643239805544792064/stat...
There seems to be confusion on what the issue is.