< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 109 OF 110 ·
|May-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: On the Nakamura page I said I didn't know the full context of the comment. Take a look.|
My opinion is different. Nakamura is now near the top of the chess world, a possible challenger for the world title. The games which would be included in a book would be from tournaments and matches, games available to the public from the moment they were completed, or even during play.
I see no reason why any author cannot write and have published "Nakamura's Best Games," with analysis from the author and perhaps snips of analysis from others. Obviously it would not be kosher simply to reprint all of the player's, or others', analysis, a subject which has led to conflicts involving well-known authors.
So the player doesn't like it. I say tough luck. Plus, look at it this way: when a top player (or not so top) player publishes a collection of his games, does he get permission from each and every opponent to publish the games between the two? After all, a game is the creation of two people, not just one.
|May-26-12|| ||Petrosianic: On the legal question, you're probably right (the games aren't copyrighted, and public figures have less right to privacy), but we're still not sure that that was Naka's objection in the first place.|
|May-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: All I saw was a reference to a tweet on the Nakamura page. Not much context.|
<Book and Twitter
Edition Olms has published a book
titled Figthing Chess with Hikaru
Nakamura by Karsten
GM Nakamura's reaction on Twitter
suggests that he is not really happy:
"It is truly disgusting that people are
allowed to write books and profit
off of our games without our
Cited from Chess Today.
|May-26-12|| ||DanielBryant: Based on that comment, we just can't jump to any conclusions regarding legal opinions or the like. If he actually does threaten legal action at some point, that would change.|
|May-26-12|| ||Petrosianic: Calling it disgusting doesn't imply that he thinks it <is> illegal. He might just be saying that it <should be> illegal.|
I don't know if I agree with him on that or not. I can see arguments on both sides.
|May-26-12|| ||MORPHYEUS: <Petrosianic: Calling it disgusting doesn't imply that he thinks it <is> illegal. He might just be saying that it <should be> illegal.>|
Correct. It's very disgusting, specially if he was planning to right his own book. The money should go to him, not to somebody.
|May-26-12|| ||Shams: Whether you like Nakamura or not, he's definitely a "somebody".|
|May-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: Morphyeus: Say I research and write a biography of, say, Manny Pacquiao. You think I should pay him for it? That would be news to a few thousand writers and publishers around the world.|
|May-26-12|| ||MORPHYEUS: <Jim Bartle>. My argument is more on understanding why Nakamura reacted that way. If i was planning my own book and the other guy beat me to it, without me being compensated one cent, i'll feel disgusted too.|
I'm just saying Nakamura is just being a normal guy.
|May-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: OK, he can be upset, but really without much justification. <Unless> the other book falsely implies he was one of the authors, or participated in some way.|
|May-26-12|| ||Petrosianic: Well, Fischer was upset that they used his name in "Searching For Bobby Fischer" without "permission". I put "permission" in quotes, because legally they didn't need his permission. He was a public figure. Naka is unhappy for a similar reason.|
Fischer was kind of dotty on such matters, and believed that anything he didn't like was "illegal". In fact, it was not illegal to use his name in that movie. But on the other hand, I can see why he wouldn't like it. Every public person was a private person before he became a public one, and is used to thinking of himself that way. If someone wrote a book on your life story without consulting you on it or getting your okay, you probably wouldn't be happy about it. It sounds like that's why Naka is unhappy. Even if the book isn't illegal, it seems a bit discourteous.
Now, on the other hand, if the author had asked for Naka's blessing, and/or input, and he'd said "Sorry, I haven't got the time", and they went ahead and wrote it anyway, I wouldn't have any sympathy for Naka. But I have a little sympathy this way, even though I'm pretty sure the law is on the author's side.
|May-26-12|| ||Jim Bartle: At the same time, there's been an entire industry of books on Fischer's games, in many languages, and I've never heard him complain about not being paid or asked for permission in those.|
The only time he was upset was when M60MG was published in the Soviet Union and he was never paid any royalties. In that case he had every right to be angry. I think the organizer of the 1992 Spassky match paid Fischer $100,000 to cover those missing royalties.
|May-27-12|| ||Shams: <Petrosianic><Now, on the other hand, if the author had asked for Naka's blessing, and/or input, and he'd said "Sorry, I haven't got the time", and they went ahead and wrote it anyway, I wouldn't have any sympathy for Naka.>|
I assume in suggesting the author ask for Nakamura's blessing and/or input, you are imagining a joint business venture with a sharing of book proceeds. (If not, it would seem even more offensive.) Isn't that asking a lot? I doubt writers make much on books like this.
As noted, he's a public figure. He's lucky that chess is popular such that he can make a living at it. This is what comes with that popularity, as I see it. He can't have it both ways. If he's smart, he gets out in front and capitalizes on his own success. In this respect at least, Kasparov is a great role model.
|May-27-12|| ||rilkefan: Part or most of the issue for me is the use of someone else's work product. Writing a biography of Naka (based on reading public articles by a wide variety of reporters and analysts, and interviews conducted by the writer), is different than publishing a work the majority of content of which is by someone else. This book erodes the value of a work by Naka.|
Re the IP of the various other players in a game collection, I consider that fair use. If player X publishes a book, The Worst Games of Y, or even My Victories Over Y, that would be different.
|May-27-12|| ||rilkefan: <<Shams>: I assume in suggesting the author ask for Nakamura's blessing and/or input, you are imagining a joint business venture with a sharing of book proceeds.>|
If Müller had simply written to Naka and said, "I'm thinking about writing a book about your games based on my own analysis, will that cramp your style?", I might not have a different view but certainly there could be less question of offense.
|May-27-12|| ||Shams: <rilkefan> I'm open to having my mind changed, but I'm having a hard time seeing an injury here.|
With the proliferation of super-strong engines, annotating a chess game isn't the esoteric labor of love it once was. I think the real value from a reader's perspective lies in hearing the thought of the players: why that opening, that day, against that opponent? Why zig instead of zagging at a critical point? Only Nakamura can write that book.
|May-27-12|| ||Jim Bartle: Seems to me the same reasoning could be applied to Lionel Messi or Michael Jordan. Writing a book about one of them is hardly different than a book about a chessplayer. And anybody can write a book about an athlete without the athlete's permission.|
The one important difference is that a chess book can reproduce the game exactly, while a book on football and basketball can only describe (inadequately) what happened during the game.
|May-27-12|| ||SteinitzLives: I think the issue may be the game scores. Several year ago some top players wanted to copywright their game scores, and they were laughed out of court. Football and basketball teams cannot copywright their box scores, and that is what a chess game score is, a record of what happened.|
Now if he has been mis-represented, libeled or slandered in some way, that's a different story.
Their may be some fair competition issues if Naka was working on his own book, but I think there is little there. Naka needs an agent, not to mention a coach. If he does not get an agent, others will keep making money off of him.
Naka needs to take the risk of trusting a professional that he is paying for service, to help him. People do it all the time
|May-27-12|| ||Shams: Ok, the cover and the title are a bit much. I'll concede that. |
<SteinitzLives><I think the issue may be the game scores.>
The rest of your paragraph shows why the game scores are not the issue, does it not?
|May-27-12|| ||SteinitzLives: Yes game scores are the issue, which does not mean legitimate or illegitimate. The legal field of Intellectual property known as IP (patents, trademarks and copyrights, etc.) has tons of legal practitioners, because the related issues that come up can be so contentious, and with much to gain or lose. Some good-sized law firms do nothing but IP law.|
|Jun-23-12|| ||Eric Schiller: Schiller time control:
I propose a new time control to speed up games while preserving quality. Most games these days don’t require time in the prepared portions of openings or in technical positions in endgames. One minute per move is enough. However, more tome is needed when the opening goes outt of book and for developing a strategy and for deciding whether to tnter an endgame. So I propse a control of one minute per move with each player getting three exceptions per game. This keeps the games to about the same for most xports broadcasts and allows for two games per day.
Each player has 60 seconds to make each move except that this limit may be exceeded three times per game. On one occasion the player may take up to ten minutes and on two occasions up to 5 minutes. The clock will count down from 60 seconds and when that is expired will automatically switch to 6-minute mode (assuming the player has one left) and light a 5-minute flag. If the 5 minutes are exhausted it will add another 5 minutes if the 10-minute exemption has not been used and light the to-minute indicator and reset the 5-minute indicator, otherwise it will indicate loss on time. When all three indicators are lit, using up 60 seconds results in a loss on time.
• Games last 3-4 hours maximum, usually 2 hours if 40 moves.
• No long waits for spectators, but enough time for meaningful commentary.
• Decent quality games, since most moves can be made quickly
• Can be modified for playoff Armageddon style with Black receiving one extra 5-minute think or White losing one.
• Tension for spectators as clock drops below ten seconds
• Clocks always show real time remaining, no delay confusion
|Jul-22-12|| ||Eric Schiller: I've just finished a new book on the Blackmar-Diuemer Gambit focusing on checkmating tactics. It will be published by Ishi Press in a few weeks and will also be available on Kindle.|
|Jul-22-12|| ||wordfunph: <Eric Schiller> thanks for the update.|
Blackmar Diemer Gambit Bogoljubow Variation 5...g6 Second Edition: A Chess Works Publication by Eric Schiller
|Jul-25-12|| ||sbevan: <Eric Schiller: A time control for public chess>|
FM Schiller, IMHO this proposal is truly excellent. Well thought out, well reasoned. I hope it draws support but most importantly I hope it's implemented.
|Dec-24-12|| ||brankat: Dear Eric!
May You have a very Happy Holiday Season!
< Earlier Kibitzing · PAGE 109 OF 110 ·