Re: chess moves

On 27 Apr 2000, Bruce E. Hayden <bhayden[_at_]ieee.org> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2000, Albert Henderson <noblestation[_at_]compuserve.com> wrote:
> >
> > Chess publishers and authors around the world consider the
> > moves of a game to be facts. Bad moves are equal to good
> > in terms of facts. My impression is that many, if not most
> > games, are lost through error rather than won by brilliant
> > innovation.
>
> Well, I am not the least surprised at their position -- after
> all, if there were a copyright in the moves themselves (ignoring
> the recordation of such), then the publication of such would be
> potentially infringing.
>
> Even at the highest levels, I would suggest that the play of
> one player is often identifiable as belonging to or being like
> that one player's play.
>
> One problem with the theory that the moves of a game are "facts"
> and thus not protected by copyright is that almost all works of
> original authorship are such -- ranging from the words of a
> dictionary arranged into a short story, to computer instructions
> arranged into a computer program.
>
> Thus, while pawn to king-4 may not be protected as such, its
> combination with other moves seems to me to vary little from
> other arrangements that qualify for copyright protection.
>
> > I believe that annotations, which are added to the text
> > of a game are considered to be unique expressions that may
> > vary from one player to another and are presumed to be
> > subject to copyright.
>
> I don't doubt that in the least. However, as I think that you
> can tell, I think that the more interesting question is whether
> a chess game itself qualifies for copyright protection as a
> collaborative work of the two players -- and if the level of
> protection (assuming that there is some) increases as the
> quality of play decreases.

In an editorial in INSIDE CHESS, its publisher, GM Yasser Seirawan, traced "the dream of copyrighting chess games" back at least to Emanuel Lasker. (10,21:3 Oct. 27, 1997) In 1997, FIDE (the acronym of the organization that controls international chess rankings and championships) had announced its intention, based on the advice of two lawyers, to collect royalties on the publication of games conducted under its auspices. They wished to take ten percent of gross revenue of all chess publishers and databases while leaving the general press and the Internet alone.

Seirawan poined out, "Despite the strenuous efforts of the baseball, football and basketball leagues, the courts have consistently ruled that box scores are public domain."

FIDE's initiative quickly died, of course.

Albert Henderson
Editor, PUBLISHING RESEARCH QUARTERLY
<70244.1532[_at_]compuserve.com> Received on Mon May 01 2000 - 13:05:43 GMT