How can you reject the terms of a contract you have willingly entered into? Color me confused also.
Abusive contract
Sort:
Well, if you reject the terms of use, you should not be there, as membership (even free membership) implies their acceptation.
If you would like to point out to us the problematic points, it would allow chess.com to improve in the future though.*
*or it will give us a good laugh, I'm taking bets on that second option
md642 wrote:
But I don't want to argue.
Aw, you're taking all of the fun out of it. 
Well, I was a bit tired when I wrote this message and there was thunder here.
I have one question about privacy. Could I publish a choice of my terminated games on a my personal website?
md642 wrote:
I have one question about privacy. Could I publish a choice of my terminated games on a my personal website?
Games are not copyrighted material. You can publish any game you want (whether you played it or not) anywhere, you can indicate the opponent's name without needing their permission.
You can also post unfinished games, but there is a thin line between doing so and asking for analysis (which is prohibited), so I would not recommend it.
However, you probably should not post the annotations of a game without the author's consent (ie if you find some analysis in a forum and just copy-paste it elsewhere). Just ask the author in that case.
I find the fact that somebody actually carefully read the terms of use hillarious.
Irontiger wrote:
Games are not copyrighted material. You can publish any game you want (whether you played it or not) anywhere, you can indicate the opponent's name without needing their permission.
That raises an interesting point actually. I remember quite a long discussion on these forums on whether or not chess qualifies as an art form. If the answer to this is yes, and chess games are works of art, then they would be subject to copyright.
Seems like the law is coming down on the No side in the "Is chess an art?" debate.
madhacker wrote:
Irontiger wrote:
Games are not copyrighted material. You can publish any game you want (whether you played it or not) anywhere, you can indicate the opponent's name without needing their permission.
That raises an interesting point actually. I remember quite a long discussion on these forums on whether or not chess qualifies as an art form. If the answer to this is yes, and chess games are works of art, then they would be subject to copyright.
Seems like the law is coming down on the No side in the "Is chess an art?" debate.
Well, setting apart art as a philosophical topic (chess might be an art for people's mind, if it is not for the law, there is no such protection), legally it would cause some trouble.
How do you "copyright" a game ? Precisely, what is included and not included in the copyright ?
The moves, probably. But what if some other players play the exact same game ? Are they infringing copyright automatically (which means that chessplayers should be aware of all previously played games) or do you need to prove they knew the game beforehand and decided to follow it (which is close to impossible) ?
Is copying all the moves but one infringement ? 90% of the moves ? 50% ? 10% ? The first moves 1.e4 e5 ?
How are people supposed to play if you copyright an opening or an endgame ? Avoid it no matter what ?
etc. it's easy to think of reasons for which it would be practically difficult, and it's not easy to think of reasons for which they should be (the only persons that make money from publishing chess positions are the composers). There is probably an interesting case to make that compositions should be protected (like journalistic articles), but I don't know the specifics.
i really don't understand this
i read carefully the terms of use. I rejected them.
All I want to do is play chess for fun and keep my games archived on a neutral (this term is quite an evidence) server.
I found the terms of use Very Offensive for a funny game like chess.
But I don't want to argue.