Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Our lawsuit against ChessBase

stockfishchess.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

231–240 of 261 posts

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#231

Post by boarquantile »

LocalPCGuy wrote: post #126
londons_explore wrote: post #111

> leading developers of Stockfish have terminated their GPL license with ChessBase permanently. Can the developers do this? I was under the impression that when code is published on the web GPL licensed, the developers cannot retroactively withdraw the license... Or perhaps they are withdrawing the license for all new code... To publish some code as "GPL, available for all except this person"? Is that allowed? Even i…

See the termination clause. V3 provides some ways to get a terminated license reinstated, v2 is a bit different I think. This pull quote is from v3. > 8. Termination. > You may not propagate or modify a covered work except as expressly provided under this License. Any attempt otherwise to propagate or modify it is void, and will automatically terminate your rights under this License (including any patent licenses gra…

And from the same section, importantly:

> [...] reinstated (a) provisionally, unless and until the copyright holder explicitly and finally terminates your license

which is what the Stockfish developers have now done. I.e. if Chessbase starts to comply now, it would be too late.

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#232

Post by yoyoplayer »

aliswe wrote: post #225
yoyoplayer wrote: post #180

From the article: "developers of Stockfish have terminated their GPL license with ChessBase permanently" https://www.debian.org/social_contract states: "The license must not discriminate against any person or group of persons." Thus, is Stockfish no longer DSFG?

The license itself may not discriminate, but they may issue (and subsequently revoke) the license to whom they will. It's like some companies licensing with AGPL and then issuing LGPL or even proprietary licenses to whoever pays them for it (so they can use it in their projects at their own discretion).

I see "The license itself may not discriminate, but they may issue (and subsequently revoke) the license to whom they will." meets the letter-of-DFSG but does it meet the spirit?

If I choose to grant a GPL license to only green-eyed people, would that meet DFSG's defintion of non-discrimination? By your argument, yes: the license itself is not discrimination.

Yet I do not think that meets the spirit of DFSG.

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#233

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #165

Surprisingly, I find myself slightly skeptical of Stockfish's claims, which is... a disquieting feeling. Could someone help me out by finding the flaw in my logic? 1. ChessBase was in violation of the GPL, but then cured the violation by releasing code ( https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/statement-on-fat-fritz-... ). But the post claims they refused to release the weights. 2. But the weights are already being rele…

>> 2. But the weights are already being released with the program they're selling. Otherwise, how would the program run?

In the same way that, e.g. Windows can run from binaries, without distributing the source code? That is to say, the weights are in a binary format that is not amenable to re-use without decompilation and reverse-engineering.

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#234

Post by YeGoblynQueenne »

dang wrote: post #82

Past related thread: Open source chess developers warn about a commercial engine based on Stockfish - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26185139 - Feb 2021 (130 comments) I thought there were others - maybe someone will find one?

There's this, from today:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27903787

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#235

Post by dmurray »

jimmytucson wrote: post #226
sillysaurusx wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it will be so easily won: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27900683 Note that it’s legal to sell stockfish as long as you’re compliant with GPLv3. ChessBase seems to be compliant. Stockfish argues that ChessBase isn’t compliant because they refuse to release the weights. But this makes no sense; the weights are distributed with every copy of Fat Fritz 2. (Otherwise, how would the program run? It’s n…

> I think it’s lame that ChessBase sold stockfish for $80. I’m interested to know how ChessBase was able to charge $80. If their software were licensed under GPL then couldn’t anyone have asked for its source code and compiled it themselves, for free?

Lots of people (Red Hat, Richard Stallman...) charge money for open-source software, so this seems a moot question.

This case is a bit different though: Chessbase (unlike RH and RMS) didn't tell anyone their product was open source, but pretended it was their own proprietary work and that it was better than the leading open source engine that it was stolen from.

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#236

Post by jimmytucson »

dmurray wrote: post #235
jimmytucson wrote: post #226

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think it’s lame that ChessBase sold stockfish for $80. I’m interested to know how ChessBase was able to charge $80. If their software were licensed under GPL then couldn’t anyone have asked for its source code and compiled it themselves, for free?

Lots of people (Red Hat, Richard Stallman...) charge money for open-source software, so this seems a moot question. This case is a bit different though: Chessbase (unlike RH and RMS) didn't tell anyone their product was open source, but pretended it was their own proprietary work and that it was better than the leading open source engine that it was stolen from.

I don't think so. Red Hat Linux - the software - is free under GPL. Red Hat the company charges for support, training, and documentation. ChessBase charges for the software, which means they're either not compliant with the terms of GPL, or there's some other aspect of the software they're not obligated to share. I'm particularly interested if it's the latter.

But I'm just wading into this subject matter, so others chime in if I'm missing something :)

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#237

Post by ansible »

ansible wrote: post #213
cycomanic wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't it in the duty of care of the bank to make sure that the property they give a mortgage on is actually owned by the mortgagee? I would assume that you should get the land and the bank can then sue the brothers to get their money back. Why should the mortgage be transfered to the original owners, they never agreed to it.

Yes, but the bank can afford more and better lawyers, so good luck getting them to eat the cost of the mortgage.

Just to be clear, I'm not saying this is at all the desired outcome, that the people who have been swindled out of their property lose all their money.

I'm just predicting the likely outcome.

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#238

Post by ThomasCM »

jeremyjh wrote: post #110
chaosmachine wrote: post #102

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really like Listudy for drills, it imports from Lichess studies (which you can create from PGNs): https://listudy.org/ Also Opening Tree for bulk analysis: https://www.openingtree.com/ They're both free and open source.

Opening Tree is great and I use it a lot but it does not persist my games - I have to download them every time I use it. But I'd love an app with that interface that could persist the data and cross-check it with my repertoire. I guess it would not have to be same tool as the repertoire trainer, it just seems cleaner to have it all in one tool. But you are right Listudy can help with the spaced repetition, it just do…

I'm currently developing this: https://www.chessmonitor.com/

It stores your games and gives you an explorer for your games similar to what openingtree does.

Here is an example for the current world champion: https://www.chessmonitor.com/u/kcc58R9eeGY09ey5Rmoj/explorer

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#239

Post by codehotter »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #165

Surprisingly, I find myself slightly skeptical of Stockfish's claims, which is... a disquieting feeling. Could someone help me out by finding the flaw in my logic? 1. ChessBase was in violation of the GPL, but then cured the violation by releasing code ( https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/statement-on-fat-fritz-... ). But the post claims they refused to release the weights. 2. But the weights are already being rele…

> 1. ChessBase was in violation of the GPL, but then cured the violation by releasing code (https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/statement-on-fat-fritz-...). But the post claims they refused to release the weights.

They mean that the weights are not open sourced. If the weights are distributed separately and not considered part of the "Corresponding Source", that may not be a GPL violation, and the blog post does not imply that it is. (They only say that they condemn the approach.)

> 2. But the weights are already being released with the program they're selling. Otherwise, how would the program run? Why would they refuse, when they already distribute the weights with every copy of the program? I thought maybe Fat Fritz 2 was a cloud-hosted solution (weights aren't provided locally), but https://en.chessbase.com/post/running-leela-and-fat-fritz-on... seems to indicate it can run on a laptop with a GPU.

The GPL can be interpreted to require that all the input necessary to reproduce and run a functioning binary must be distributed. If the weights and engine are integrated in one binary, and not "all the source code needed to generate, install, and run the object code and to modify the work, including scripts to control those activities" is provided, that could be a GPL violation. This does not apply if the weights are distributed separately under a different license.

> I'm on Stockfish's side here, because I suspect ChessBase simply duplicated StockFish's training methodology and tried to pass it off as their own. (The engine's performance seems almost identical.) But I hope Stockfish has an airtight case for court. It'd be a bad idea to hinge the GPL violation on "they refused to release the neural net weight training code."

They may have terminated the license in response to the Houdini revelations[1] which is another chess engine based on Stockfish that Chessbase has sold as original work, disguising its Stockfish origins in violation of the GPL.

As the GPLv3 says under Section 8 [2] the license can be reinstated if "this is the first time you have received notice of violation of this License (for any work) from that copyright holder" - the first violation would have been Fat Fritz 2.

[1] https://groups.google.com/g/fishcooking/c/DygaIdBvJm0 [2] https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/blob/sf_14/C...

Re: Our lawsuit against ChessBase

#240

Post by codehotter »

nuclearnice1 wrote: post #184
sillysaurusx wrote: post #169

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think it will be so easily won: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27900683 Note that it’s legal to sell stockfish as long as you’re compliant with GPLv3. ChessBase seems to be compliant. Stockfish argues that ChessBase isn’t compliant because they refuse to release the weights. But this makes no sense; the weights are distributed with every copy of Fat Fritz 2. (Otherwise, how would the program run? It’s n…

> But this makes no sense; the weights are distributed with every copy of Fat Fritz 2. (Otherwise, how would the program run? This reasoning isn’t correct. The weights may be as object code not as source. Simply saying the program runs doesn’t mean you’ve distributed the weights anymore than it means your distributed the code. Last time this came up people pointed at the installation information clause > “Installatio…

While it seems plausible that the network weights would fall under the "installation information" clause - the intention seems to be to limit this clause to consumer products (e.g. a Digital Video Recorder) and it's not clear that it can apply to Fat Fritz 2.

https://github.com/official-stockfish/Stockfish/blob/sf_14/C...

Post reply on HN