Show the date
Stockfish Files Lawsuit Against Chessbase
Sort:
Aug 10, 2021
0
#23
ericthatwho wrote:
Show the date
I suggest you use some rudimentary Google Search skills...
Am I right in thinking that something similar happened with reference to Rybka? Didn't ChessBase sell that as well, without revealing the source code (most of it copied from Crafty)? Or am I confusing matters?
BonTheCat wrote:
Am I right in thinking that something similar happened with reference to Rybka? Didn't ChessBase sell that as well, without revealing the source code (most of it copied from Crafty)? Or am I confusing matters?
No confusion- the older Rybka case is as you've described it.
pfren: Thanks for confirming. Shame on ChessBase.
BonTheCat wrote:
pfren: Thanks for confirming. Shame on ChessBase.
Well... in the Rybka case the violator of thr GPL wasn't Chessbase but rather Rybka's developer Vasik Rajlich. In the case of Fat Fritz i/II, the engine is produced by hired developers on demand.
Dentangle wrote:
Two big names in the chess world do battle:
https://stockfishchess.org/blog/2021/our-lawsuit-against-chessbase/
SUSSY BAKA
interesting
Jul 5, 2022
0
#30
Looks like the judge is trying to negotiate a "compromise" in this lawsuit. https://perlenvombodensee.de/2022/07/05/die-stockfish-klage-gegen-chessbase-richterin-schlaegt-vergleich-vor/
In my opinion, (disclaimer when I post on court sensitive matters)
Chessbase may have been misled by Albert Silver as to his development efforts. However,
Chessbase will have to explain the origin of the Fat Fritz 2 engine to the courts and the reasons why they feel it is proprietary software.
I put FF2 in my cart on ChessBase this morning, so I think it is still for sale. I didn't complete the purchase, since I already own a copy. I believe stopping sale of the product before you get to court could be interpreted as a partial admission of culpability.