David Levy on Cloned Chess Engines

Here. Levy condemns the practice, takes an inconclusive look at some of the controversies around Rybka, and then calls for help in setting up a forum to investigate claims of cloning.

Comments

[Stork]

Looks like Levy is up for some witch-hunting. Apart from The Langer case, where stealing is obvious, it's absurd.
If Houdini really is clone of Rybka, why is it stronger? It obviously has something SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT in it's code that makes him better. Author undoubtedly made some progress, either on his own, or on someone else work. He put in some effort and pull out the edge. I don't understand why guys from CCRL refuse to test it, and put it on the list. Clone or not, it's out there, it exist, and you can't deny it. This only makes list flawed.

[DM: No offense, but did you bother to read the article? The Houdini engine isn't even mentioned by Levy. On another matter, engine x being stronger than engine y is no defense to an accusation of theft. Someone could steal code and concepts with using all and only the stolen code. Finally, I think the CCRL decision makes sense: if they think that an engine is of dubious provenance, then they are right not to give them free advertising and their implicit blessing.]