Latest Updates:
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
Topic Tools
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis (Read 16974 times)
Smyslov_Fan
YaBB Moderator
Correspondence fan
*****
Offline


Progress depends on the
unreasonable man. ~GBS

Posts: 6902
Joined: 06/15/05
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #28 - 05/24/12 at 15:28:06
Post Tools
proustiskeen wrote on 05/24/12 at 15:16:13:
The legal issues and the practical facts of the Internet age are two different things.  As a practical matter, if you put it on the Internet, you must expect that people will do things with it that run contrary to your desires.  Copyright may well be implied in authorship, but unless brabo takes this up in the courts (which he seems unwilling to do) there is _literally_ no remedy.

Tony has created this contest to shore up morale here.  Can we now let this matter rest?  The grievance has been aired, concerns heard, and positions stated.  We're running in circles.

proustiskeen wrote on 05/23/12 at 20:46:35:
  If you put it online, someone can make use of it.  We can argue about whether this young FM made use of it properly or not - and I'm pretty sure, having looked at the article, that he did cite your prior work and is thus without blame - but this is the risk that you take in putting your material out there.

If such risk is unacceptable to you, don't post here, or anywhere else.  This is the world we live in.  Nothing is private anymore.  Take it up with NIC and your lawyer.

In my opinion, the very last thing chesspub should do is further lock out future users and contributers via any of the mechanisms discussed above.


I don't agree at all with the first paragraphs (even though the last might make sense). Just because you put something online does NOT in any way mean it doesn't have to be copyright protected. This "mistake" is made with e.g. photos. It has been very hard to do something about this, because if I in Europe want to take action against an American company, it is often not worth it, even if I have full rights.

[/quote]

Excuse me for quoting the entire text.

Proust, are you really quoting yourself and then disagreeing with yourself?  I haven't found the original quote that you use.


There seems to be something wrong with the way things are being quoted... There was an added " [/quote]" to the text.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
proustiskeen
God Member
*****
Offline


Hello from Omaha!

Posts: 642
Joined: 08/11/08
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #27 - 05/24/12 at 15:16:13
Post Tools
The legal issues and the practical facts of the Internet age are two different things.  As a practical matter, if you put it on the Internet, you must expect that people will do things with it that run contrary to your desires.  Copyright may well be implied in authorship, but unless brabo takes this up in the courts (which he seems unwilling to do) there is _literally_ no remedy.

Tony has created this contest to shore up morale here.  Can we now let this matter rest?  The grievance has been aired, concerns heard, and positions stated.  We're running in circles.

proustiskeen wrote on 05/23/12 at 20:46:35:
  If you put it online, someone can make use of it.  We can argue about whether this young FM made use of it properly or not - and I'm pretty sure, having looked at the article, that he did cite your prior work and is thus without blame - but this is the risk that you take in putting your material out there.

If such risk is unacceptable to you, don't post here, or anywhere else.  This is the world we live in.  Nothing is private anymore.  Take it up with NIC and your lawyer.

In my opinion, the very last thing chesspub should do is further lock out future users and contributers via any of the mechanisms discussed above.


I don't agree at all with the first paragraphs (even though the last might make sense). Just because you put something online does NOT in any way mean it doesn't have to be copyright protected. This "mistake" is made with e.g. photos. It has been very hard to do something about this, because if I in Europe want to take action against an American company, it is often not worth it, even if I have full rights.
[/quote]
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Offline


be

Posts: 864
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #26 - 05/24/12 at 12:42:59
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:39:39:
Jupp53 wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:22:24:
But why starting something new?

I started this thread because I want to lock and then delete the other one (renamed "... intellectual property...") as it is too inflammatory.

Sorry - it was meant not about the thread, it was meant about the copyright issue without looking at indeed inflammatory other thread.
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1543
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #25 - 05/24/12 at 11:51:58
Post Tools
brabo wrote on 05/23/12 at 21:14:46:
proustiskeen wrote on 05/23/12 at 20:46:35:
Brabo, you're the _only one_ who has raised this issue here.  I get that you're upset.  But this really isn't a chesspub issue.  It doesn't matter where you post your analysis.  If you put it online, someone can make use of it.  We can argue about whether this young FM made use of it properly or not - and I'm pretty sure, having looked at the article, that he did cite your prior work and is thus without blame - but this is the risk that you take in putting your material out there.

If such risk is unacceptable to you, don't post here, or anywhere else.  This is the world we live in.  Nothing is private anymore.  Take it up with NIC and your lawyer.

In my opinion, the very last thing chesspub should do is further lock out future users and contributers via any of the mechanisms discussed above.

I am probably also the first one on chesspub of whom content was used so extensively  in a commercial article without permission or even informing.
I ask what Max did for the forum here. What is the extra value of having a mass of readers which are never posting neither buying content but only searching free info for own amusement or profit. Is it really too much asked to put a limited restriction on this type of readers and ask them to give up their anonymity (only to Tony Kosten) in return for full content to read here on the forum for free? If that can solve such cases, is that too much asked from chesspub by a member whom is regularly posting quality analysis for free?


Now I am breaking a forum rule (because I can't find a response to this post. If there is one I broke another). But my answer is no, it is not too much to ask for.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1543
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #24 - 05/24/12 at 11:34:21
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:39:39:
Jupp53 wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:22:24:
But why starting something new?

I started this thread because I want to lock and then delete the other one


I think it was referring to "creative commons licenses" rather than a new thread.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3066
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #23 - 05/24/12 at 10:39:39
Post Tools
Jupp53 wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:22:24:
But why starting something new?

I started this thread because I want to lock and then delete the other one (renamed "... intellectual property...") as it is too inflammatory.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 917
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #22 - 05/24/12 at 10:39:03
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/24/12 at 10:21:36:
Very annoying at the time, but I didn't see any real point complaining about it.

I think that is the wrong attitude. If you don't complain then people consider it as ok. If complaining is considered as defamation (my interpretation of GM Ian Rogers last post) then so be it. Without a complaint nothing will change.

An example of a local complaint about behavior in chesstournaments (without details where and who):
It is a well known fact that many last round games are arranged. Sometimes money is split, sometimes even the result is fixed. Anyhow it is extremely hard to proof such things so complaints are very rare and people are getting used to that behavior. Last year finally a complaint was accepted. It has lead to one courtcase after another and still isn't finished. Suddenly people became aware that such actions were really not acceptable but a complaint was necessary to get people fully aware of this.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
Jupp53
God Member
*****
Offline


be

Posts: 864
Location: Frankfurt/Main
Joined: 01/04/09
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #21 - 05/24/12 at 10:22:24
Post Tools
As this kind of problems have risen in the past the creative commons license has been worked out. The advantage imo is the clear regulation of copyright and further use of original content fitting to web demands.

I'm no publisher - like Tony or Stefan. So I don't have experience and I'd like listen to what they have to say about it. If they think it's not good in this context I'd accept it without problems. But why starting something new?
  

Medical textbooks say I should be dead since April 2002.
Dum spiro spero. Smiley
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
GMTonyKosten
YaBB Administrator
*****
Offline


Mr Dynamic?

Posts: 3066
Location: Clermont-Ferrand
Joined: 12/19/02
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #20 - 05/24/12 at 10:21:36
Post Tools
Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/24/12 at 08:14:59:
In my 35 years of chess publishing, I have been involved in about hundred cases of copyright problems, and maybe ten of them were pretty serious. Not counting the many cases where I just open a chess book from another author and think: "How can he quote so excessively? Has he asked the author?" Some people don't care about such matters. And yes, I do think that discussing it here can be useful for the Forum. Tony is in a similar position as the editor of a magazine. When there is a copyright quarrel, it is usually between one of your contributors and somebody else who doesn't "work" for you. But somehow you are involved and interested to keep the author, so you try to give advice to find a solution. 

Wow, that's a lot of copyright problems! At ChessPublishing we have been aware of our authors' analysis reappearing elsewhere from time-to-time without attribution, but nothing very serious. There is a 'Copyright ...' tag added to all pages, all the popup games, and all the eBooks, although I don't know if anyone takes that very seriously.
The worst plagiarism I've suffered was when I annotated a game of mine once for the Hastings Tournament bulletin (for free). Quite by chance I noticed this game appeared in a US magazine word-for-word but under someone else's name!
Very annoying at the time, but I didn't see any real point complaining about it.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1543
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #19 - 05/24/12 at 08:57:00
Post Tools
Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/24/12 at 08:14:59:
By just publishing on Chesspub nobody gives up his copyrights, these rights remain with the creator. The copyright protection by the law is very strong. I wished some members here would read about copyright, e.g. on Wikipedia, before they post their vague ideas (which are often totally wrong).


I agree, I knew basically what protection you have in principle. What I have been saying and what has been mentioned here, is that there are two things in practice:

1. What actions can you take against the commercial entity that has violated your rights?
2. Threshold of Originality.

1. has been a problem with rather small cases, e.g. one image illegaly posted on a web page for a US company. Unfortunately, this has been far too common (for companies in general, they either don't know or don't give a damn). As far as I have understood, since the copyright laws have been different in the US than other places, it has not been worth it to pursue action against the company if it is not willing to negotiate.

In the case with the recent gambit, whether or not brabo could take it to court, it might not be worth it financially, as pointed out by e.g himself.

2. Here is the tricky part for me. This is often settled in court, because there it really is decided what is new and not. Precedent cases will usually be used as guidelines. Therefore, I wonder if there are any cases at all when it comes to chess analysis.

Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/24/12 at 08:14:59:
But for the sake of cultural exchange and progress of science, there exists a right to quote. Forum members here are often far too anxious. When you see a variation in a book and have doubts about the correctness of the final assessment, you are doing nothing wrong when you quote the whole variation, give credit to the author and mention the precise source. And if you give a new idea of your own, every author must welcome the contribution.


This is good to hear, and I know it works this way in science.

Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/24/12 at 08:14:59:
you cannot be absolutely sure that a copyright trial in the Netherlands will have the same result as elsewhere.


See above. Also, I would be surprised if there always would be the same result in Europe vs US, because the special way the juridicial system is set up in the US.

This whole discussion would not be if both sides would know their rights and would handle each other with respect, which I think would be the most appropriate since the community is pretty small. It might be that there have been wrong expectations from brabo's side, and miscommunication, misunderstanding or just neglect from NIC and Max side, dunno.

brabo wrote on 05/24/12 at 05:17:12:
I believe one may expect that somebody tries at least a simple effort to define the identity behind a handle. Max Illingworth preferred not to do that so he made a clear mistake there. He admitted in a mail that he didn't make contact just not to jeopardize the deal with NIC. That is proof which could be used in a court.


This is an issue I've thought about. There is a way to contact members here (but maybe it could be made clearer that the possibility exist?). But if it is true that no contact was made, if something similar would happen, we can't change anything here anyway to avoid another story. Even if it unethical to act this way, there might not be anything illegal about it. That is why the question of originality vs credit is critical in my mind. How much can you use of someone else's work (with citations) and your analysis would still be considered new?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Stefan Buecker
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 1381
Location: Germany
Joined: 02/11/09
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #18 - 05/24/12 at 08:14:59
Post Tools
fling wrote on 05/24/12 at 05:07:37:
I have seen people here posting that they don't want to post too much from this or that book because of copyright issues. That is why I asked. [...] This "mistake" is made with e.g. photos. It has been very hard to do something about this, because if I in Europe want to take action against an American company, it is often not worth it, even if I have full rights.

When someone does an analysis of a certain extent, his mental work is copyrighted. He can give up his rights, if he wants, partly or entirely, for example in a contract with a publisher, either for money or for nothing. By just publishing on Chesspub nobody gives up his copyrights, these rights remain with the creator. The copyright protection by the law is very strong. I wished some members here would read about copyright, e.g. on Wikipedia, before they post their vague ideas (which are often totally wrong).

But for the sake of cultural exchange and progress of science, there exists a right to quote. Forum members here are often far too anxious. When you see a variation in a book and have doubts about the correctness of the final assessment, you are doing nothing wrong when you quote the whole variation, give credit to the author and mention the precise source. And if you give a new idea of your own, every author must welcome the contribution.

Copyright law varies a bit from country to country, and the USA is still special. The basics are clear enough, but you cannot be absolutely sure that a copyright trial in the Netherlands will have the same result as elsewhere.

GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/24/12 at 00:08:49:
On reflection there haven't been many copyright problems in the nearly ten years since the Forum was started (one?!). Maybe we're just overreacting.

In my 35 years of chess publishing, I have been involved in about hundred cases of copyright problems, and maybe ten of them were pretty serious. Not counting the many cases where I just open a chess book from another author and think: "How can he quote so excessively? Has he asked the author?" Some people don't care about such matters. And yes, I do think that discussing it here can be useful for the Forum. Tony is in a similar position as the editor of a magazine. When there is a copyright quarrel, it is usually between one of your contributors and somebody else who doesn't "work" for you. But somehow you are involved and interested to keep the author, so you try to give advice to find a solution. 
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 917
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #17 - 05/24/12 at 07:12:15
Post Tools
GMTonyKosten wrote on 05/24/12 at 00:08:49:
On reflection there haven't been many copyright problems in the nearly ten years since the Forum was started (one?!). Maybe we're just overreacting.

I understand so no actions are to be expected from chesspub !? At least with my posts, members are now fully aware what can happen if you publish valuable content on this forum.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
brabo
God Member
*****
Offline


Welcome chessfriend

Posts: 917
Joined: 02/02/07
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #16 - 05/24/12 at 05:17:12
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 05/24/12 at 00:39:52:
You posted anonymously! 

Using a handle is not the same as anonymously. From a handle you can easily (like in this case) find the real identity. From anonymously this is much harder and often impossible.
I believe one may expect that somebody tries at least a simple effort to define the identity behind a handle. Max Illingworth preferred not to do that so he made a clear mistake there. He admitted in a mail that he didn't make contact just not to jeopardize the deal with NIC. That is proof which could be used in a court.
  
Back to top
WWW  
IP Logged
 
fling
God Member
*****
Offline


I Love ChessPublishing!

Posts: 1543
Joined: 01/21/11
Gender: Male
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #15 - 05/24/12 at 05:07:37
Post Tools
Markovich wrote on 05/24/12 at 00:39:52:
Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/23/12 at 23:14:06:
I believe (I am not even sure whether any such case was brought to court). The general consensus is that a single game or single variation cannot be copyrighted, but a work consisting of games/variations is copyrightable.


I believe that you're right about that, but I think that anyone's claim that 16 variations posted in an open forum are a copyrighted work would be very difficult to maintain.  You want to say someone has stolen your credit?  You posted anonymously!  You want to say someone has stolen your enjoyment of your property?  How exactly?   

Secondly I'm not completely sure that if someone merely copied out all the variations of, say, Avrukh's tome on 1.d4 and put them on the web, just the chess moves, nothing else, it would be a copyright violation.  I could be argued either way, it seems to me.


As I said, I don't know how it actually is. I have seen people here posting that they don't want to post too much from this or that book because of copyright issues. That is why I asked. I agree with Markovich's former post that this issue is also about citation vs copying, and what is really threshold of originality. The comparison to math is interesting. It might be that brabo is mixing up copyright and credit, i don't know. Tricky is what it is. Are there actually any court cases?

proustiskeen wrote on 05/23/12 at 20:46:35:
  If you put it online, someone can make use of it.  We can argue about whether this young FM made use of it properly or not - and I'm pretty sure, having looked at the article, that he did cite your prior work and is thus without blame - but this is the risk that you take in putting your material out there.

If such risk is unacceptable to you, don't post here, or anywhere else.  This is the world we live in.  Nothing is private anymore.  Take it up with NIC and your lawyer.

In my opinion, the very last thing chesspub should do is further lock out future users and contributers via any of the mechanisms discussed above.


I don't agree at all with the first paragraphs (even though the last might make sense). Just because you put something online does NOT in any way mean it doesn't have to be copyright protected. This "mistake" is made with e.g. photos. It has been very hard to do something about this, because if I in Europe want to take action against an American company, it is often not worth it, even if I have full rights.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Markovich
God Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 6099
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Joined: 09/17/04
Re: Guidelines for the use of ChessPub.com analysis
Reply #14 - 05/24/12 at 00:39:52
Post Tools
Stefan Buecker wrote on 05/23/12 at 23:14:06:
I believe (I am not even sure whether any such case was brought to court). The general consensus is that a single game or single variation cannot be copyrighted, but a work consisting of games/variations is copyrightable.


I believe that you're right about that, but I think that anyone's claim that 16 variations posted in an open forum are a copyrighted work would be very difficult to maintain.  You want to say someone has stolen your credit?  You posted anonymously!  You want to say someone has stolen your enjoyment of your property?  How exactly?   

Secondly I'm not completely sure that if someone merely copied out all the variations of, say, Avrukh's tome on 1.d4 and put them on the web, just the chess moves, nothing else, it would be a copyright violation.  I could be argued either way, it seems to me.
  

The Great Oz has spoken!
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 
Topic Tools
Bookmarks: del.icio.us Digg Facebook Google Google+ Linked in reddit StumbleUpon Twitter Yahoo