< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 22 ·
|Feb-20-09|| ||badest: <dexterious> Svidler is good ... but I prefer Shipov (he's funny :)|
|Feb-20-09|| ||Marmot PFL: <chessgames.com: <Does chessgames.com have permission?> We don't need permission, because in the USA (and most civilized nations) chess moves are regarded as "facts" and not creations, therefore are not subject to copyright law. We're just reporting the news>|
It could be argued that the moves of the game are the creative effort of the players, much like the notes played in performance by musicians. If you recorded and broadcast those without permission you could land in some trouble.
|Feb-20-09|| ||AnalyzeThis: This argument existed as far back as Lasker. Basically, nobody has ever been able to copywright chess moves.|
|Feb-20-09|| ||Pyke: <AnalyzeThis: This argument existed as far back as Lasker. Basically, nobody has ever been able to copywright chess moves. >|
Yes, the last one to try was Evgeny Sveshnikov. But he failed as well.
In my opinion this is a good thing.
And all the recent accusations are NOT related to the topic of copyright per se. They're more or less just an instrument to settle an old score between the "Bulgarian camp" and Chessbase. That's all.
|Feb-20-09|| ||Valmy: And a soccer game is not a new, interesting one...
I think you are supposed to pay something to the one who bought the right to display the event, chess or an other sport.
For example if chess becomes an olympic game, I would be very surprise if Chessgames or other, could broadcast the olympic chess tournament in live. Some TV pay to broadcast the olympic game and would sue anyone breaching their rights.
Well anyway, I thank Chessgames to take such a risk.
|Feb-20-09|| ||Jim Bartle: If chess were in the Olympics, I suspect others could not broadcast the video of the game, but would have every right to disseminate the moves. On a board.|
Everybody can report the scores of gymnastics or decathlong competitions in progress. Chess would be the same.
|Feb-20-09|| ||jhoro: i don't know about the legal side, but as a Bulgarian am a bit ticked at the cheap shot from CG|
<We don't need permission, because in the USA (and most civilized nations) chess moves are regarded as "facts">
what does this have to do with how <civilized nation> Bulgaria is? if anything it is just the opposite - the more "civilized nations" have stricter copyright laws.
|Feb-20-09|| ||drkodos: Greed.
The propietary rights of the games moves should belong to the players. They actually belong to the tournament.
It is not easy to fix because of long standing precedent.
More people can make more $$ by having them fall into public domain.
Copyright laws do apply to published analysis.
|Feb-20-09|| ||Jim Bartle: The most outrageous attempt to enforce broadcast rights was during the 1972 Olympics. ABC had the American rights to televise the games, but when the Palestinian attack occurred, naturally the other networks moved in to cover it as a breaking new event.|
And ABC tried to claim they had exclusive rights to the standoff! Fortunately that went nowhere.
|Feb-20-09|| ||drkodos: Fair use laws are our friends.|
|Feb-20-09|| ||drkodos: Especially here on the intrawebs where people "borrow" licensed items as a matter de facto.|
|Feb-20-09|| ||OneArmedScissor: Capitalism.|
|Feb-20-09|| ||Valmy: We must not mix two differents thinks.
"The Copyrigh" which allows the creator of something to use it with exclusivity in a commercial point of view (applies to art and technology), and "the right to broadcast" which is the right to broadcast in live an ongoing event.
The event does not need to be protected by copyright to be subject to broadcast right.
To keep the same example, as fas as I know, soccer is not subject to copyright...Players or trainer don't owe the games, but a soccer game is subjest to broadcast right.
I think that in 1972, a TV channel bought the right to brodcast FISHER/SPASSKY and I doubt, but I am not sure, that other channels broadcasted at the same time in live.
Others channels have the right to give the result or, in an information show, to explain briefly what is going on.
This is an other right, the right to give information. But it's clearly limitated, in any country I suppose.
And I would say, but I could be wrong not knowing the US law, that you cannot use the right to information to broadcast thoroughly, a live chess game, if this game is submitted to broadcast right.
But maybe Chessgames called it's lawyer before and he found something.
BTW, I am not sure that my english is good enough to explain those kind of things.
|Feb-20-09|| ||messachess: just played over the game: Amazingly, Gata appears to the more aggressive player in this match, choosing the apparently sharpest lines in the sharpest of openings. I'm very glad to see it, but will it succeed?|
|Feb-20-09|| ||sillybilly47: Anand--the clock is ticking. Topa is coming. Topa forever!|
|Feb-20-09|| ||An Englishman: Good Evening: Looks like another one of those games where both players fight so hard but so well that it could never end in anything but a drew.|
|Feb-21-09|| ||zdigyigy: Drawski!! Topalov draws with white and wins with black.....I wonder what GM Suba would say about this?|
|Feb-21-09|| ||stefan1967: I suppose, all bulgarian chess fans (like me) are glad, that they can see the moves on CG. CG is not broadcasting the live match, but the moves. So it's the same like showing the live score of a futball match. I don't think the organizers of this event have the right to forbid anybody to broadcast the moves...|
|Feb-21-09|| ||stefan1967: <We don't need permission, because in the USA (and most civilized nations) chess moves are regarded as "facts">
Maybe this pity announcement tries to insist, that the "uncivilized bulgarian nation" has anything to do with this ridiculous chess war?
|Feb-21-09|| ||Valmy: IMHO When you broadcast in live every single move you obviously broadcast the game, most of all if you show the moves on a chessboard. But I may be wrong, of course.|
|Feb-21-09|| ||stefan1967: Whatever is the truth, all this is a matter of international law and not of "civilization's level" of nations.|
|Feb-21-09|| ||2ndNature: I don't understand why CG is calling the USA a civilized nation... unless invading a souvereign country based on falsified reasons is considered an acting in a civilized manner.|
|Feb-21-09|| ||keypusher: <jhoro: i don't know about the legal side, but as a Bulgarian am a bit ticked at the cheap shot from CG
<We don't need permission, because in the USA (and most civilized nations) chess moves are regarded as "facts">|
what does this have to do with how <civilized nation> Bulgaria is? if anything it is just the opposite - the more "civilized nations" have stricter copyright laws.>
It's not a "cheap shot." It does not say, or even imply, that Bulgaria is not a civilized country. It says that in most civilized countries chess games are regarded as non-copyrightable facts. Which is true.
|Feb-21-09|| ||keypusher: <dexterious: While I appreciate CG.com's effort to have a GM commenting on the game, I wish they could have gotten someone who sticks only to chess, and doesnt get his insecurities out in such ways (Svidler maybe?). But then of course, such GM's who don't have any axe to grind, would not be as cheap as Nigel here.>|
There is nothing more tiresome on this site than some Armenian posters' obsession with Nigel Short. Get over it.
|Feb-21-09|| ||jhoro: <keypusher>, as <Valmy> pointed out it is about broadcast/distribution rights and not copy right. These commercial rights were given to the organizers by FIDE according to their agreement:|
As far as the comment about the copy right laws in the <civilized countries> I definitely disagree with you and CG. Copy right of chess moves has nothing to do with who's more civilized imo.
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 21 OF 22 ·