Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue CFC

[Vlad Drkulec]

I have it from a reliable source that Robert Hamilton, Kasparov's representative in Canada for the 2014 FIDE election (well at first he was, then he wasn't, then he was again) is going to sue us for copyright infringement for publishing a game of his on the newsfeed. We await receipt of the official papers notifying us of the claim which is going to proceed in Ontario small claims court.

[Brad Thomson]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

Anyone interested can probably find the game in an old Informant.

[Rene Preotu]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I have it from a reliable source that Robert Hamilton, Kasparov's representative in Canada for the 2014 FIDE election (well at first he was, then he wasn't, then he was again) is going to sue us for copyright infringement for publishing a game of his on the newsfeed. We await receipt of the official papers notifying us of the claim which is going to proceed in Ontario small claims court.

I don't understand why you used Kasparov's name in the thread title. Do you believe this has something to do with the fact that CFC supported the other candidate for FIDE election in 2014?
Or maybe it's just a clickbait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait

[Bob Armstrong]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I don't understand why you used Kasparov's name in the thread title. Do you believe this has something to do with the fact that CFC supported the other candidate for FIDE election in 2014?
Or maybe it's just a clickbait.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clickbait

This could well be a precedent-setting court decision on the ownership of chess game scores.

I have done some research (Not extensive) on this and what I know (Or think I know) to date, is that chess game scores are jointly owned by the two opponents and the organizer.

But I have always assumed (I don't have legal precedent for this) that once one of these three makes the game available in the public realm, all ownership/copyright rights are no longer relevant re reproduction of the game score in any way, including for commercial gain by some third party re-producer.

I know CFC interactions with legal counsel on this will be privileged and confidential. But I hope in the interest of public education, any written decision will be made available to all members, at least. Similarly, if the case settles, I hope the CFC will not be subject to a gag agreement, and will be able to publicize the law on which they determined to settle.

Bob A

[Hugh Brodie]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

Edward Winter has dug up a lot on this subject over the years:

http://www.chesshistory.com/winter/extra/copyright.html

Comments from https://www.chess.com/forum/view/gen...hess-copyright :

"Information isn't really subject to copyright. What is subject to copyright is how that information is presented. The notation of a chess game is just like the line score of a baseball game. No one can claim a copyright on that information in itself and present it as their property. What they can copyright is an article they write about that game."

"Yes, facts aren't copyrightable because there has to be some degree of non-trivial creativity for a copyright to apply. Despite some player's insistance that they are creating art when they play, a pgn of a game can be freely published since it's simply a record of fact that those were the moves played, no different than the box score of a sporting match.
Analysis does fall under copyright though. You can quote material with proper attribution for commentary purposes ("So-and-so says this, and here's why I agree..."), but wholesale paraphrasing could get you in trouble."

"Say it's determined that chess games can be copyrighted. Who, then, owns the copyright? The players? The event organizer(s)? The sanctioning body (FIDE, USCF, etc)? What happens if Magnus Carlsen wants to publish an annotated collection of his world championship games but Vishy Anand doesn't agree to it? Or what if Magnus and Vishy want to do it together, but FIDE (or AGON, or whoever) doesn't agree?
Or what of websites such as this one [chess.com]? Would Chess.com have to attempt to locate every person who's played a game on the site and pay them royalties? Would it have to automatically erase the record of each and every game from its servers as soon as the game is finished?
Yeah, I really don't see why any chess player would want to open up that box."

And from a lawyer's point of view (with reference to the US Copyright Act):

http://lawblog.usfca.edu/lawreview/u...le-zugzwang-3/

[Steve Douglas]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

This could well be a precedent-setting court decision on the ownership of chess game scores.

I have done some research (Not extensive) on this and what I know (Or think I know) to date, is that chess game scores are jointly owned by the two opponents and the organizer.

But I have always assumed (I don't have legal precedent for this) that once one of these three makes the game available in the public realm, all ownership/copyright rights are no longer relevant re reproduction of the game score in any way, including for commercial gain by some third party re-producer.

I know CFC interactions with legal counsel on this will be privileged and confidential. But I hope in the interest of public education, any written decision will be made available to all members, at least. Similarly, if the case settles, I hope the CFC will not be subject to a gag agreement, and will be able to publicize the law on which they determined to settle.

Bob A

I'll reply to this quickly since I don't have a lot of time at the moment.

Rene: I'm not sure why Vlad is even posting this here in the first place, but I'm assuming he's including Kasparov's name because he feels that this rumoured action is predicated on the animosity between the Kasparov camp and the CFC.

Bob:

IANAL, but:

- there is a difference between the scoresheets themselves and a gamescore;
- the scoresheets can be copyrighted and belong to the players and potentially organizers; reproduction without permission of either player's scoresheet would be a copyright violation
- a gamescore (i.e. a summary of moves played, player name, tournament details) is a another matter entirely
- a gamescore is a factual *record* of what happened in a game, including the moves played
- I don't believe a factual record of a contest can be copyrighted
- I believe the prevailing thought regarding chess gamescores is that they cannot be copyrighted because the moves are "discovered", not created in the standard context of a creative process
- game annotations and/or analysis can be copyrighted (assuming the annotation is sufficient in depth and breadth--i.e. putting "?" after a move won't be enough)
- I doubt that a small claims court will be able to make a determination about whether a chess gamescore can be copyrighted
- the court can order that:
a. the CFC stop publishing the game (i.e. remove it from its website)
b. formally apologize to Mr. Hamilton
c. pay Mr. Hamilton the money the CFC's earned from publishing the game
d. pay Mr. Hamilton damages
- none of these is likely to happen, particularly c. (non-existent I presume) and d. (Mr. Hamilton would have to demonstrate that he suffered damage of some sort)

This is just my view looking on.

Steve

[John Upper]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

Anyone interested can probably find the game in an old Informant.

No. The game was played at the 2016 Maritime Open Championship in August, and AFAIK, appears only on the CFC Newsfeed.

The post in question is here:
http://chess.ca/newsfeed/node/881


Hugh Brodie's summary

here

is my understanding of copyright for chess games:

• they are (currently) treated by courts as "discovered facts", and since facts cannot be copyrighted, neither can the scores of chess games.
• the standard comparison (in US courts, anyway) is with the box scores of baseball games: they are not protected by copyright, but the video footage of the game can be.

The problem for chess players who want compensation for the publication of their gamescores is that --- unlike the baseball boxscore -- the list of moves is a large percentage of the valuable content.

FWIW, if I was arguing for chess copyright I would try to make the case that each move in a game is more than a discovered fact, it is also an indication of each player's knowledge and values -- not simply that this move is possible, but that it is a better move than the 20-or-so legal alternatives. A relevant analogy would be between moves in a chess game and notes in a music score.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

This could well be a precedent-setting court decision on the ownership of chess game scores.

I have done some research (Not extensive) on this and what I know (Or think I know) to date, is that chess game scores are jointly owned by the two opponents and the organizer.

According to the latest FIDE rules, which the CFC follows, games have to be made available by the organizers and players to check for evidence of computer cheating or collusion by players.

But I have always assumed (I don't have legal precedent for this) that once one of these three makes the game available in the public realm, all ownership/copyright rights are no longer relevant re reproduction of the game score in any way, including for commercial gain by some third party re-producer.

I know CFC interactions with legal counsel on this will be privileged and confidential. But I hope in the interest of public education, any written decision will be made available to all members, at least. Similarly, if the case settles, I hope the CFC will not be subject to a gag agreement, and will be able to publicize the law on which they determined to settle.

Bob A

The CFC will not be settling. This, if successful, is an existential threat to the CFC, FIDE, the news feed, the email magazine, chesstalk and pretty much every chess site and magazine in existence. I do not believe that Kasparov is personally involved in this but there has been a pattern of former Kasparov operatives being involved in costly litigation against FIDE and federations around the world in an apparent effort to saddle the federations including FIDE with associated legal fees in actions which they (the former Kasparov operatives) have invariably been losing. In the correspondence I have seen Karpov whose bid for FIDE president was supported by Kasparov has been cited as supporting this action. There is no independent verification that Karpov actually supports this.

I am prepared to take this as seriously as I did the continuation process under the new NFP act and do what has to be done to win the court case if it does materialize.

The reason that I suspect that the CFC is being targeted is because we are perceived as a soft target unable to defend ourselves in the hopes we will settle for $1 or some similar sum and set a precedent.

I see a number of errors in the email announcing this action.

[Neil Frarey]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

Fascinating, I side with Chess Fed on this one.

To me it would seem almost impossible to clearly demonstrate that Hamilton's game moves (and those of his opponent) are wholly original. And as for publication, I have no idea how this will pan out.

Seems expensive.


.

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I'll reply to this quickly since I don't have a lot of time at the moment.

Rene: I'm not sure why Vlad is even posting this here in the first place, but I'm assuming he's including Kasparov's name because he feels that this rumoured action is predicated on the animosity between the Kasparov camp and the CFC.

Bob:

IANAL, but:

- there is a difference between the scoresheets themselves and a gamescore;
- the scoresheets can be copyrighted and belong to the players and potentially organizers; reproduction without permission of either player's scoresheet would be a copyright violation

You are incorrect on this. A simple google search will yield legal opinions on copyright of chess moves and ownership of scoresheets. In 2009, Hal Bond was quoted on just this issue in a Toronto Star article on the Bulgarian Chess Federation (Danailov also a Kasparov operative) assertion of copyright against Chessbase.

- a gamescore (i.e. a summary of moves played, player name, tournament details) is a another matter entirely
- a gamescore is a factual *record* of what happened in a game, including the moves played

Since the newsfeed published the moves and not the scoresheet the copyright is being asserted against the moves being published.

- I don't believe a factual record of a contest can be copyrighted
- I believe the prevailing thought regarding chess gamescores is that they cannot be copyrighted because the moves are "discovered", not created in the standard context of a creative process
- game annotations and/or analysis can be copyrighted (assuming the annotation is sufficient in depth and breadth--i.e. putting "?" after a move won't be enough)
- I doubt that a small claims court will be able to make a determination about whether a chess gamescore can be copyrighted
- the court can order that:
a. the CFC stop publishing the game (i.e. remove it from its website)
b. formally apologize to Mr. Hamilton
c. pay Mr. Hamilton the money the CFC's earned from publishing the game
d. pay Mr. Hamilton damages
- none of these is likely to happen, particularly c. (non-existent I presume) and d. (Mr. Hamilton would have to demonstrate that he suffered damage of some sort)

This is just my view looking on.

Steve

[Brad Thomson]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I do not believe that Kasparov is personally involved in this but there has been a pattern of former Kasparov operatives being involved in costly litigation against FIDE and federations around the world in an apparent effort to saddle the federations including FIDE with associated legal fees in actions which they (the former Kasparov operatives) have invariably been losing.

This is laughable. Mr. Hamilton is a small time nickel and dimer hoping to swindle himself some beer money. A few years back we were warned that he was going to sue the CFC for crazy amounts. To bring the name of Kasparov into this is utterly nonsensical.

[Ken Craft]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I am disconcerted that the first place I have heard of this is on Chesstalk.

[Frank Dixon]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I played a game in this KID line in 1989, drawing with IM Danny Kopec in an Ottawa simul.

[Frank Dixon]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

IM Danny Kopec (2500) -- Frank Dixon (1950)
Carleton University simul, Ottawa 1989
King's Indian Defence, E61
1.d4 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nf3 Bg7 4.g3 d6 5.Bg2 O-O 6.Nc3 c6 7.O-O Bf5 8.Nh4 Be6 9.d5 cxd5 10.cxd5 Bd7 11.Be3 a5 12.Qb3 b5 13.Nxb5 a4 14.Qd3 Ng4 15.Nc3 Nxe3 16.fxe3 Qa5 17.Kh1 Na6 18.e4 Nc5 19.Qe3 Rab8 20.Rab1 Rb7 21.Nf3 Rfb8 22.Nd1 a3 23.b3 Nxb3 24.Ng5 Be8 25.Qf4 Be5 26.Qh4 h5 27.g4 Nd2 28.Rxb7 Rxb7 29.Rg1 hxg4 30.Qh7+ Kf8 31.Ne3 Bg7 32.h4 Qb5 33.h5 gxh5 34.Qxh5 Qxe2 35.Nxg4 Rb2 36.Qh3 Rxa2 37.Nh7+ Kg8 38.Ngf6+ exf6 39.Nxf6+ Kf8 40.Nxe8 Kxe8 41.Qc8+ Ke7 42.Qc7+ Ke8 43.Qc6+ Ke7 44.Qc7+ Ke8 1/2.
I am OK with anyone publishing this game anywhere they wish. I think I may have shown this game to FM Hamilton at some point! I defeated him in his Kingston 1991 simul, and that game was published in EP August 1991!

[Vlad Drkulec]

Re: Kasparov's representative in Canada for FIDE election 2014 Robert Hamilton to sue

I am disconcerted that the first place I have heard of this is on Chesstalk.

There is nothing yet. No one has been served. The initial downside to this is the loss of $250 or $150. Making this public is a way to ensure that this doesn't happen. Filing this should be embarrassing.