Re: Algorithms or Copyright

[cesczx@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (Chen Zhixing)]

>
>An algorithm is an object of science; it cannot be copyrighted.
>
   Of course. For example, Prof. Ken Chen published his scheme of group
identification.  This is a breakthrough in the history of computer go. Many
programmers used it. Some programmers in Taiwan showed the same scheme in
their papers introducing their programs.  No one would acuse the Taiwanese
programmers as plagiarists.  I think Ken Chen must take pleasure to know
that his scheme can be adopted by other programmers.
   Reverse engineering is also allowed, provided that the purpose is only
for study and is not directly used for economic interest.  As a similar
case, if any one translates, modifies or annotates a work of art without
publishment, it is legal.  If any one wish to do reverse engineering of my
Handtalk, to study its algoritm, and to write his own go program with the
same algoritm, please do it. I will never acuse him.  Of course, I have no
way to detect incorporation of my algoritm in any other go program.
   However, SilverIgo and Hamlet are really plagiaries.  I have found that
the whole engine of Handtalk (some sold version) has been translated into a
language they used (I guess it is C++) with minor modification.  In the sold
version of SilverIgo, a considerable part of instructions in Handtalk have
been found to be incorporated without translation.  While in a newer sold
version named Family Igo (the 4th FOST Cup version of SilverIgo is based on
it) tranlates that part rather than directly incorportes it.  Such actions
are not merely reverse engineering or learning algorithm, but belongs to the
category of plagiarism.  The details will be posed on a web site I will make
as soon as possible.
   The two cases are far from termination.  We have to fight for justice
until thorough victory.

Chen Zhixing