Court case victory to Chessbase

[Albert Silver]

If game scores were ever genuinely copyrighted it would be the death of chess as we know it.

I think the stronger argument was the unfair competition one. If Chessbase had won on that the games still could not be copyrighted, but only not be relayed "live".

I guess I am missing something. IF Chessbase won on that?

Chessbase argued that the games were copyrightable, being inherently a database, and also that it was unfair competition. Of course, they lost both arguments.

There is still the appeal, though.

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

[michiguel]

Funny, every literary text is enumerable...
I just wrote such a program and it gave me

"one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played" in 2 seconds.

Not that i think this argument has much import... but my hunch is the reason chess games *are* numerable, while prose is not, is that all chess games must end - because of repetition, or the 50 move rule. Texts (and mindless chess forums for that matter), can go on forever.

Human chess is not enumerable, to start with. The enforcement of those rules are not mandatory. Moreover, to be pedantic, you can even have illegal moves and if nobody claimed them as such, they stay in the board.

In addition, the time consumed for each move is an intrinsic part of the game. So, if they are relayed, it changes the meaning of the score (was this in time trouble or not?).

Moreover, even if two scores are identical, the two players could be different changing completely the meaning. Look at the famous games between Soviets and Argentinians in Goteborg (1955?). The scores ended up being different... but they could have been the same. Moves were not played at the same time.

I agree with Kai. I think the scores should not be copyrighted, but for other reasons.

Some judges were never aware of Borges...

Miguel

Copyrighting games would really be the end of it. Chess has a big enough struggle penetrating as it is without trying to claim ownership of the moves played. I wont even get into the issue of reproducing the same moves of other games, but imagine books unable to be written because three dozen permissions and payment of royalties were required. Online news sites unable to share games, and let's not forget the popular press, where chess columns would be killed off quicker than you can blink since it is a hard enough sell to get them to support it without that insane hassle. The list goes on and on.

I don't think Danailov is genuinely interested in copyrighting games. I think he does this for the publicity. His choice to sue Chessbase is probably for their having denounced shady actions of his in the past. Other sites relayed moves and paid nothing despite demands, such as ICC, and others, but were not sued.

I agree with you, but it has nothing to do with my argument.

Miguel

[Sven]

If game scores were ever genuinely copyrighted it would be the death of chess as we know it.

I think the stronger argument was the unfair competition one. If Chessbase had won on that the games still could not be copyrighted, but only not be relayed "live".

I guess I am missing something. IF Chessbase won on that?

Chessbase argued that the games were copyrightable, being inherently a database, and also that it was unfair competition. Of course, they lost both arguments.

There is still the appeal, though.

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

The Bulgarian Chess Federation argued that the games were copyrightable, being inherently a database, and also that it was unfair competition. They lost both arguments against ChessBase.

Sven

[Dirt]

Chessbase argued that the games were copyrightable, being inherently a database, and also that it was unfair competition. Of course, they lost both arguments.

There is still the appeal, though.

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

Backwards? I don't know what you mean.

[Albert Silver]

Chessbase argued that the games were copyrightable, being inherently a database, and also that it was unfair competition. Of course, they lost both arguments.

There is still the appeal, though.

Are you sure you don't have it backwards?

Backwards? I don't know what you mean.

You wrote that Chessbase argued, and that Chessbase lost both arguments.

[Albert Silver]

Funny, every literary text is enumerable...
I just wrote such a program and it gave me

"one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played" in 2 seconds.

Not that i think this argument has much import... but my hunch is the reason chess games *are* numerable, while prose is not, is that all chess games must end - because of repetition, or the 50 move rule. Texts (and mindless chess forums for that matter), can go on forever.

Human chess is not enumerable, to start with. The enforcement of those rules are not mandatory. Moreover, to be pedantic, you can even have illegal moves and if nobody claimed them as such, they stay in the board.

In addition, the time consumed for each move is an intrinsic part of the game. So, if they are relayed, it changes the meaning of the score (was this in time trouble or not?).

Moreover, even if two scores are identical, the two players could be different changing completely the meaning. Look at the famous games between Soviets and Argentinians in Goteborg (1955?). The scores ended up being different... but they could have been the same. Moves were not played at the same time.

I agree with Kai. I think the scores should not be copyrighted, but for other reasons.

Some judges were never aware of Borges...

Miguel

Copyrighting games would really be the end of it. Chess has a big enough struggle penetrating as it is without trying to claim ownership of the moves played. I wont even get into the issue of reproducing the same moves of other games, but imagine books unable to be written because three dozen permissions and payment of royalties were required. Online news sites unable to share games, and let's not forget the popular press, where chess columns would be killed off quicker than you can blink since it is a hard enough sell to get them to support it without that insane hassle. The list goes on and on.

I don't think Danailov is genuinely interested in copyrighting games. I think he does this for the publicity. His choice to sue Chessbase is probably for their having denounced shady actions of his in the past. Other sites relayed moves and paid nothing despite demands, such as ICC, and others, but were not sued.

I agree with you, but it has nothing to do with my argument.

Miguel

Sure it does. You wrote "I think the scores should not be copyrighted, but for other reasons.", and I agree, and those are a few of my reasons.

[bob]

There are an infinite number of possible "literary texts". You can insert words for as long as you want. Chess, however, is finite, because of the rules (most notably the 50 move rule).

As you well know, that is optional. More to the point, there are a fairly small number of short games which get repeated from time to time. Where do you draw the line? If it hadn't already become a precedent I would be worried, though.

I don't follow your question. That is one reason why a game can't be copyrighted.

I always "hear" that silly argument about the 50 move rule being irrelevant, but I have _never_ seen it happen in practice, other than by pure accident. Who wants to play on forever, from both sides. This is a zero-sum game, after all.

[bob]

Many courts have already ruled that you can _not_ copyright a chess game, because chess games are "enumerable" and one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played.

Funny, every literary text is enumerable, hope the courts from now on will not allow them to fall under copyright protection, given the Chessbase precedent.

I just wrote such a program and it gave me

"one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played" in 2 seconds.

Kai

This isn't true. There are an infinite number of possible "literary texts". You can insert words for as long as you want. Chess, however, is finite, because of the rules (most notably the 50 move rule).

Funny again. Admitting that chess is enumerable, the only reason a literary text could not be enumerable is because it could be infinite? Does such text exist? Even this is irrelevant, as you seem to miss my main point. Both chess and MY utterance "I am" are innumerable.

Kai

I have no idea what you are talking about. "I am" can be enumerated easily. 4 loops, nested, each looping over all alpha characters and space, one loop for each of four positions. You get "I am" quickly. But for the general case, you have to have an infinite number of nested loops because there is no rule saying that "once you use N characters, you can't add another. In text, you can _always_ add another. Chess is finite. And I don't want to hear the silly "50 move is optional." Show me a game where 2 players decided to play on beyond 50 moves, _intentionally_. I've played in a ton of tournaments over the years (as a human player and operating a chess program against humans) and I have _never_ seen it happen. Realistically, the game is finite as it is zero-sum.

Does an infinite-length exist? Funny. But for any length text you produce, I can produce one that is one word longer... And we _never_ reach a point where that is no longer true.

With chess, 3900 moves or so and the game is over.

[michiguel]

Many courts have already ruled that you can _not_ copyright a chess game, because chess games are "enumerable" and one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played.

Funny, every literary text is enumerable, hope the courts from now on will not allow them to fall under copyright protection, given the Chessbase precedent.

I just wrote such a program and it gave me

"one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played" in 2 seconds.

Kai

This isn't true. There are an infinite number of possible "literary texts". You can insert words for as long as you want. Chess, however, is finite, because of the rules (most notably the 50 move rule).

Funny again. Admitting that chess is enumerable, the only reason a literary text could not be enumerable is because it could be infinite? Does such text exist? Even this is irrelevant, as you seem to miss my main point. Both chess and MY utterance "I am" are innumerable.

Kai

I have no idea what you are talking about. "I am" can be enumerated easily. 4 loops, nested, each looping over all alpha characters and space, one loop for each of four positions. You get "I am" quickly. But for the general case, you have to have an infinite number of nested loops because there is no rule saying that "once you use N characters, you can't add another. In text, you can _always_ add another. Chess is finite. And I don't want to hear the silly "50 move is optional." Show me a game where 2 players decided to play on beyond 50 moves, _intentionally_. I've played in a ton of tournaments over the years (as a human player and operating a chess program against humans) and I have _never_ seen it happen. Realistically, the game is finite as it is zero-sum.

No, "realistically" (i.e. in practice) the game is infinite. "Theoretically" (i.e. pedantically) the game is finite. But, the argument is really naive even from that point of view, because if you want to be pedantic about the "limited number" of possible games, the optionality of the 50 move rule is a pedantic counter argument.

By the way, this is all silly, because the score could have identical moves, but one has been played by Karpov and Kasparov, and the other by me and a friend. Both games are not the same (the players differ), and the scores are not the same.

Miguel

Does an infinite-length exist? Funny. But for any length text you produce, I can produce one that is one word longer... And we _never_ reach a point where that is no longer true.

With chess, 3900 moves or so and the game is over.

[michiguel]

Funny, every literary text is enumerable...
I just wrote such a program and it gave me

"one can write a program which, given enough time, can enumerate every possible game of chess that can be played" in 2 seconds.

Not that i think this argument has much import... but my hunch is the reason chess games *are* numerable, while prose is not, is that all chess games must end - because of repetition, or the 50 move rule. Texts (and mindless chess forums for that matter), can go on forever.

Human chess is not enumerable, to start with. The enforcement of those rules are not mandatory. Moreover, to be pedantic, you can even have illegal moves and if nobody claimed them as such, they stay in the board.

In addition, the time consumed for each move is an intrinsic part of the game. So, if they are relayed, it changes the meaning of the score (was this in time trouble or not?).

Moreover, even if two scores are identical, the two players could be different changing completely the meaning. Look at the famous games between Soviets and Argentinians in Goteborg (1955?). The scores ended up being different... but they could have been the same. Moves were not played at the same time.

I agree with Kai. I think the scores should not be copyrighted, but for other reasons.

Some judges were never aware of Borges...

Miguel

Copyrighting games would really be the end of it. Chess has a big enough struggle penetrating as it is without trying to claim ownership of the moves played. I wont even get into the issue of reproducing the same moves of other games, but imagine books unable to be written because three dozen permissions and payment of royalties were required. Online news sites unable to share games, and let's not forget the popular press, where chess columns would be killed off quicker than you can blink since it is a hard enough sell to get them to support it without that insane hassle. The list goes on and on.

I don't think Danailov is genuinely interested in copyrighting games. I think he does this for the publicity. His choice to sue Chessbase is probably for their having denounced shady actions of his in the past. Other sites relayed moves and paid nothing despite demands, such as ICC, and others, but were not sued.

I agree with you, but it has nothing to do with my argument.

Miguel

Sure it does. You wrote "I think the scores should not be copyrighted, but for other reasons.", and I agree, and those are a few of my reasons.

Ok, I get it now. I see scores as a description of what happen in one event. Like listing who scored what and when in a given sport game, etc. That data cannot be copyrighted.

Miguel