Sanity has prevailed.
That is awesome. Good news.
It is the classic case of whether a chess game is copyright protected. This was previously disputed with the same result.
If you create a book with a group of chess games and annotate the games, then I think it would be copyright protected.
Cordially,
CG
If you create a book with a group of chess games and annotate the games, then I think it would be copyright protected.
Cordially,
CG
You can't copyright a chess game. It's absurd to think you can.
I could see them having an argument for the video of the match where they physical players are moving the pieces on the actual board, and hitting the clock. However if it's on a separate board... no, just no. That would be the equivalent of making someone pay to do a play by play of a sport.
I could see them having an argument for the video of the match where they physical players are moving the pieces on the actual board, and hitting the clock. However if it's on a separate board... no, just no. That would be the equivalent of making someone pay to do a play by play of a sport.
It's not that absurd as you may think @lurarose.
If you see chess as an art a game might be considered as a work of art and therefore may obtain copyright protection.
The main argument that it is NOT is, that all the games are part of a competition and competition is never art.
If you see chess as an art a game might be considered as a work of art and therefore may obtain copyright protection.
The main argument that it is NOT is, that all the games are part of a competition and competition is never art.
@Mollus The problem is that nearly all chess games especially at top level contain a certain amount of already known theory.
Particularly in the openings, and endgames.
Suppose there were a game between Magnus Carlsen, and another top GM for his title defense. During this game Magnus Carlsen plays the first 20 moves in a fashion that only 1 other player has ever done before, and is almost a novelty, but not quite. Suppose these moves were done by Anand as a novelty created by him in 1993.
Should Anand be able to Sue Magnus for copying his moves from 1993 in some sort of copyright?
The game marches on, and goes into an endgame. Magnus converts the endgame into a book won endgame position. This exact position is in an endgame book written by Paul Keres in 1974. Keres passed away in 1975.
Should the heirs to the Keres estate be able to sue Magnus for copying the book position?
When you try to claim chess as an intellectual property it has to be treated as other intellectual properties. Like software, or music. We really don't need to see a DMCA on a chess game.
Suppose Magnus played a common opening at the top level, and then on move 12 broke from the mold playing a move that the Houdini Engine has played already in 4 of it's games, but has never ever been played by a human being.
Should the creators of the Houdini Engine have a lawsuit against Magnus in this case?
The video recordings of the match itself, along with the accompanying audio is reasonable in such regards, but the moves themself should never be given the attribute of intellectual property as often times a move is not original, and there is a source.
Yes it is absurd to think of chess moves as copy-written
Particularly in the openings, and endgames.
Suppose there were a game between Magnus Carlsen, and another top GM for his title defense. During this game Magnus Carlsen plays the first 20 moves in a fashion that only 1 other player has ever done before, and is almost a novelty, but not quite. Suppose these moves were done by Anand as a novelty created by him in 1993.
Should Anand be able to Sue Magnus for copying his moves from 1993 in some sort of copyright?
The game marches on, and goes into an endgame. Magnus converts the endgame into a book won endgame position. This exact position is in an endgame book written by Paul Keres in 1974. Keres passed away in 1975.
Should the heirs to the Keres estate be able to sue Magnus for copying the book position?
When you try to claim chess as an intellectual property it has to be treated as other intellectual properties. Like software, or music. We really don't need to see a DMCA on a chess game.
Suppose Magnus played a common opening at the top level, and then on move 12 broke from the mold playing a move that the Houdini Engine has played already in 4 of it's games, but has never ever been played by a human being.
Should the creators of the Houdini Engine have a lawsuit against Magnus in this case?
The video recordings of the match itself, along with the accompanying audio is reasonable in such regards, but the moves themself should never be given the attribute of intellectual property as often times a move is not original, and there is a source.
Yes it is absurd to think of chess moves as copy-written
Attorney contacted & law-suit filed.
I don't want to argue with you about the sense and nonsense with intellectual property @lurarose, I just wanted to demonstrate how chess could be seen legally speaking.
Your example with Magnus may sound ridiculous but exactly the same is the case with almost every scientific paper. You can of course use other thoughts and ideas for your personal use but as soon as you want to publish them you have to consider intellectual property.
Just think a chess move as a music note. You can't have a copyright on the top C but nevertheless Michael Jacksons Thriller is protected, containing the same note used in millions of songs before.
Your example with Magnus may sound ridiculous but exactly the same is the case with almost every scientific paper. You can of course use other thoughts and ideas for your personal use but as soon as you want to publish them you have to consider intellectual property.
Just think a chess move as a music note. You can't have a copyright on the top C but nevertheless Michael Jacksons Thriller is protected, containing the same note used in millions of songs before.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.