Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old May 31st 06, 06:15 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2004
Posts: 337
Default Copyrighting of chessgames/player right to publicity

Instead of all the infighting, why not work on the two things that would
bring real money to chessplayers? I'm talking about copyrighting the game
score of a chessgame (which includes not just the moves, but the date, time,
place, event, and the two players; the moves themselves obviously have no
protection), and giving players the exclusive right to publish their games
with their names attached.

If an eventholder sponsors a chess event and wants to publish a tournament
book, there should be a 50-50 split between the organizer and the players'
association (or union if the unemployed chess politicos ever get really
bored). One reason these game collections are often not worth money is that
no one has attached IP rights to them.

How much would Bobby Fischer have made if he were the only one allowed to
publish his games and include the fact that he was one of the players?


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918


  #2   Report Post  
Old May 31st 06, 11:52 AM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2006
Posts: 781
Default Copyrighting of chessgames/player right to publicity

I support this idea, but the fundemental problem is that the infighting
is becasue of a conflict between the supra rich (me) and Kirsan. Our
conflict has to do with MONEY AND POWER. If we could just play in the
****ING WORLD CHESS CHAMPIONSHIP, perhaps we would NOT be fighting.

Marcus Roberts

Ray Gordon wrote:
Instead of all the infighting, why not work on the two things that would
bring real money to chessplayers? I'm talking about copyrighting the game
score of a chessgame (which includes not just the moves, but the date, time,
place, event, and the two players; the moves themselves obviously have no
protection), and giving players the exclusive right to publish their games
with their names attached.

If an eventholder sponsors a chess event and wants to publish a tournament
book, there should be a 50-50 split between the organizer and the players'
association (or union if the unemployed chess politicos ever get really
bored). One reason these game collections are often not worth money is that
no one has attached IP rights to them.

How much would Bobby Fischer have made if he were the only one allowed to
publish his games and include the fact that he was one of the players?


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918


  #3   Report Post  
Old June 1st 06, 05:06 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 30
Default Copyrighting of chessgames/player right to publicity

Ray Gordon wrote:
Instead of all the infighting, why not work on the two things that would
bring real money to chessplayers? I'm talking about copyrighting the game
score of a chessgame (which includes not just the moves, but the date, time,
place, event, and the two players; the moves themselves obviously have no
protection), and giving players the exclusive right to publish their games
with their names attached.

If an eventholder sponsors a chess event and wants to publish a tournament
book, there should be a 50-50 split between the organizer and the players'
association (or union if the unemployed chess politicos ever get really
bored). One reason these game collections are often not worth money is that
no one has attached IP rights to them.

How much would Bobby Fischer have made if he were the only one allowed to
publish his games and include the fact that he was one of the players?


Why would you think that the games would belong to the players. In
*EVERY* sport from poker, golf to major league baseball, the scores and
broadcast have been owned by those that put on the event, not those that
participated.

I am not sure that Bobby Fischer has been impoverished because of
keeping some odd monopoly on the facts of the game. I am sure that
chess has been enriched by all of the folks that have put their own spin
on the game, and by the creation of chess databases.

On second thought I can't believe I am responding to this.
  #4   Report Post  
Old June 2nd 06, 02:21 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: May 2004
Posts: 337
Default Copyrighting of chessgames/player right to publicity

If an eventholder sponsors a chess event and wants to publish a
tournament book, there should be a 50-50 split between the organizer and
the players' association (or union if the unemployed chess politicos ever
get really bored). One reason these game collections are often not worth
money is that no one has attached IP rights to them.

How much would Bobby Fischer have made if he were the only one allowed to
publish his games and include the fact that he was one of the players?


Why would you think that the games would belong to the players. In
*EVERY* sport from poker, golf to major league baseball, the scores and
broadcast have been owned by those that put on the event, not those that
participated.


The players of those sports negotiate a percentage of the league revenue as
a salary cap, so they are well compensated.

I am not sure that Bobby Fischer has been impoverished because of keeping
some odd monopoly on the facts of the game. I am sure that chess has
been enriched by all of the folks that have put their own spin on the
game, and by the creation of chess databases.


The enrichment is for everyone but the players. Fischer would have been
very wealthy if he had enforced this right, since it would have made him the
only one who could publish his game collections legally.


--
"Google maintains the USENET." -- The Honorable R. Barclay Surrick, Eastern
District of PA Judge
From Parker v. Google, E.D.Pa. #04-cv-3918


  #5   Report Post  
Old June 4th 06, 10:13 PM posted to rec.games.chess.politics
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by ChessBanter: Jun 2006
Posts: 6
Default THERE SHALL BE NO COPYWRITING! SO SAYS FEKLAAR!

Ray Gordon wrote:

NOTHING!
NOTHING THAT IS ANCTIONED BY FEKLAAR! THERE SHALL BE NO COPWRITING OF CHESS,
FEKLAAR FORBIDS THIS. YOU HAVE NO GAME, OVER OR OTHERWISE, THERE IS ONLY
FEKLAAR, WHO IS MIGHTY!
Reply
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Publicity for chess... Ha! [email protected] rec.games.chess.politics (Chess Politics) 8 February 21st 06 12:37 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:52 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 2004-2019 ChessBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Chess"

 

Copyright © 2017