Fritz 5.32 and older Chessbase products really free?

[hgm]

It looks to me that "Moderation" took as granted, what was yet to be proven or disproven, a copyright violation by Mr. Ed Schröder.

For me the quoted response of Chessbase is enough to demonstrate this could be a copyright violation. That is sufficient reason to moderate the links. There doesn't seem to be any complelling reason why you should replicate Ed's links here anyway. If Ed had wanted them to be here, he could have posted those himself. For the rest it is all 'hearsay'. You could be making it up, the Chessbase contact person could be erring, there could be a misunderstanding as to what you are allowed to compared to what Ed is allowed to do...

[pozzo-balbi]

They were not links to the questionable programs but the website of Mr. Ed Schröder, present and in archive.org. Why did ChessBase not ask Mr. Ed Schröder or the hoster one.com A/S, Denmark to remove those links? I want copyright to be respected, that's why I started this thread. But self-censorship, because there is doubt toward the legitimacy of Mr. Ed Schröder's links on his website, is going to far - IMHO. In German terms like "Vorauseilendem Gehorsam" and "Schere im Kopf" are coming to my mind, but I don't know how to properly translate them to English.

And why was the link to PC!go with fritz 5.32 download not removed here? http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 15#p125415
and how many more links would I find, if I would start searching talkchess.com???

[karger]

You will make a lot of friends in the Chess community by trying to impune the character of a chess legend like Ed Schroder.

[hgm]

They were not links to the questionable programs but the website of Mr. Ed Schröder, present and in archive.org. Why did ChessBase not ask Mr. Ed Schröder or the hoster one.com A/S, Denmark to remove those links? I want copyright to be respected, that's why I started this thread. But self-censorship, because there is doubt toward the legitimacy of Mr. Ed Schröder's links on his website, is going to far - IMHO. In German terms like "Vorauseilendem Gehorsam" and "Schere im Kopf" are coming to my mind, but I don't know how to properly translate them to English.

In general we don't allow links to pages that do contain links to pirated software. That especially holds when the presence of the latter links is already mentioned where the former links are posted.

And why was the link to PC!go with fritz 5.32 download not removed here? http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 15#p125415
and how many more links would I find, if I would start searching talkchess.com???

Because no one reported it, I suppose? It is also not clear to me whether any copyright violation is going on there. It seems to be about redistribution of something that was in an officially free software package.

[Rebel]

It looks to me that "Moderation" took as granted, what was yet to be proven or disproven, a copyright violation by Mr. Ed Schröder.

For me the quoted response of Chessbase is enough to demonstrate this could be a copyright violation.

About 10-12 years ago (or so) I got permission from the boss Matthias Wüllenweber of Chessbase.

[Graham Banks]

They were not links to the questionable programs but the website of Mr. Ed Schröder, present and in archive.org. Why did ChessBase not ask Mr. Ed Schröder or the hoster one.com A/S, Denmark to remove those links? I want copyright to be respected, that's why I started this thread. But self-censorship, because there is doubt toward the legitimacy of Mr. Ed Schröder's links on his website, is going to far - IMHO. In German terms like "Vorauseilendem Gehorsam" and "Schere im Kopf" are coming to my mind, but I don't know how to properly translate them to English.

And why was the link to PC!go with fritz 5.32 download not removed here? http://talkchess.com/forum3/viewtopic.p ... 15#p125415
and how many more links would I find, if I would start searching talkchess.com???

Di you join our forum just to post these gripes, or do you intend to be a genuine contributor?

[pozzo-balbi]

About 10-12 years ago (or so) I got permission from the boss Matthias Wüllenweber of Chessbase.

Dear Mr. Schröder, thanks so much for your input. I contacted ChessBase with that information. And thanks for your great Mephisto Gideon, the Rebel and Prodeo programs!

[karger]

Let me see if I got this right ? You started a thread acussing Ed Schroder of providing links to copyrighted chess software without permission , which it turns out he had permission to share from the head of Chessbase. So you wasted server resources on a thread that had no reason other than someone's ignorance for its existence. Cannot wait to see who you accuse of what next !!! Go get them , detective

[pozzo-balbi]

@karger I accused no one of anything. I gathered facts and presented them in an open forum in hopes of getting closer to the truths. I did mention, that I could not privately contact Mr. Schröder or Mr. Huber. I expressed my surprise on how fast moderation jumped to the conclusion, that Mr. Schröder would distribute "pirated software" (not my words) and that first hand sources, i.e. links are not welcome (I am now using second hand sources, i.e. "screen shots" for explanation), but I respect that. When I contacted ChessBase the first time, I did share the link of Mr. Schörder's website and I got the answer, to not download those files. Now I am awaiting their answer, because Mr. Schörder confirmed that he did get permission and that this permission was not revoked until today. I am sure that clarification is in public interest and nothing else is intended.

Honestly, I am getting tired of these personal attacks and/or off-topic answers. If you don't have anything substantial to add to the topic of this thread, please keep it to yourself or post it somewhere else!

[MikeB]

It looks to me that "Moderation" took as granted, what was yet to be proven or disproven, a copyright violation by Mr. Ed Schröder.

For me the quoted response of Chessbase is enough to demonstrate this could be a copyright violation. That is sufficient reason to moderate the links. There doesn't seem to be any complelling reason why you should replicate Ed's links here anyway. If Ed had wanted them to be here, he could have posted those himself. For the rest it is all 'hearsay'. You could be making it up, the Chessbase contact person could be erring, there could be a misunderstanding as to what you are allowed to compared to what Ed is allowed to do...

+1