Re: chess moves

On 25 Apr 2000, Stephen Fishman <sfish55[_at_]yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> It seems to me you also have a problem with the merger doctrine.
> A chess move itself is an unprotected idea or fact. Only the
> way it is described can be copyrighted. But aren't there only
> one or two ways to describe a chess move? This means it can't
> be copyrighted or the first person to record a move would have
> a copyright on the fact of the move itself.

The various notation methods don't leave any room for expression. What I would call a "verbose" record -- for example, "Kasparov paused dramatically and then opened by moving a pawn to d4. Anand countered at once with d5" -- would be subject to copyright. In magazines like NEW IN CHESS you will find that sort of verbose annotation in abundance.

Best wishes,

Albert Henderson
Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY
<70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Thu Apr 27 2000 - 04:24:39 GMT