Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess Courts Controversy

  • SonofPearl
  • on Thu, 6/3/2010 9:39am.

Silvio_Danialov.JPGWith the sort of press coverage that our royal game gets from popular newswires, you could forgive the average man in the street for thinking, like Sherlock Holmes, that all chess players have a scheming mind.

Recent developments will do nothing to change this view, with two significant but separate legal actions being mooted, both having profound implications for the future of chess.

Firstly, Veselin Topalov's controversial manager Silvio Danailov (pictured) has initiated legal proceedings against the German company Chessbase over their live coverage of the recent world chess championships.

Live coverage of the event was restricted to the official website, with other sites having to request permission, or provide delayed coverage.  Chessbase violated this prohibition, says Danailov, and therefore is guilty of "violating copyright rules".

Arguments about whether chess games can be copyrighted have a long history, but all attempts to copyright individual moves or games have failed.  Players and event organisers have tried to claim rights to games, but the consensus view is that the moves themselves are reportable facts, like the score of a football game. Only added value extras such as commentary and analysis are covered by copyright.

It is hard to see how the action can succeed, but Chessbase are clearly prepared to fight their corner in the courts if necessary.

Secondly, the incumbent FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is reportedly set to sue his challenger Anatoly Karpov for defamation.  Part of Karpov's stated aim is to rid FIDE of corruption, the existence of which Ilyumzhinov denies.  The FIDE president is effectively challenging Karpov to provide evidence of such corruption, or retract the allegation.

The back-story here is, of course, the on-going battle for the nomination of Russian Chess Federation in the FIDE presidential election in September.  Karpov won the backing of the majority of members, but Ilyumzhinov and his allies attempted to declare the vote invalid, and then sent in some private security guards to sieze the offices of the Russian Chess Federation.

Karpov's response was beautifully apt: "Knocking the pieces off the board when you lose does not change the result".

See you in court!

3342 reads 22 comments
2 votes

Comments


  • 24 months ago

    smartens

    @preachingforjesus:

    Copyright only protects the artistic expression of an idea, not the idea itself.  If Chessbase was broadcasting the same video footage as the official site, or duplicating the commentary from that site, then yes it is a copyright violation.  If they are simply duplicating the moves on an analysis board on their own site and discussing them with independent commentary, then it is not a copyright violation.

    Watch ESPN sometime when they're covering the end of a big game being shown on another network.  They can't show video feed or highlights until after the play is over, but the commentators can watch a tv in the studio and give a play-by-play as its happening to the viewers.

  • 2 years ago

    revs63

    chess world....FIDE? allegedly blemished with CORRUPTION? :d of moves!

  • 2 years ago

    shiro_europa

    Whoa! So much nonsense at once.

  • 2 years ago

    BigHickory

    The politics of organized chess is disgusting.  I'm utterly amazed at the multitude of scandals, lawsuits, and controversies swirling around FIDE and the USCF. 

    Fortunately  tens of millions of average players like myself can love, admire, and enjoy the game of kings while completely ignoring these pompous fools who think they own chess.  My sympathy goes out to the high ranked players who get stuck dealing with these idiots while pursuing their dream.

  • 2 years ago

    Conza88

    Woah... both delusional concepts!

    16. KNOWLEDGE, TRUE AND FALSE - The Ethics of Liberty by Murray N. Rothbard

    Rethinking IP Completely - Stephan Kinsella

  • 2 years ago

    ogerboy

    Danilov has no chance.

    And I am still not over what Topalov did in the match against Kramnik, Danilov stripped a talented player of all his reputation as a human being.

  • 2 years ago

    preachingforjesus

    someone said "I don't know how copyright law works in Bulgaria or Germany, but Danailov's claim would be thrown out in any decent US court."

    this is absolutely incorrect! in the US live coverage of an event is completely copyrightable.  If this occored in the US, the only buden on Topalov's team would be to show that Chessbase was responsible for the breach.  I belive that live coverage of a game is indeed the sole property of the players, and that commentary by individuals ar organizations that do not have permission from the players or thier duly appointed representatives should not be allowed untill after the game is completely over.

  • 2 years ago

    forrie

    Chess moves by itself cannot be copyrighted.

    Just like kicking a soccer ball by a soccer player cant be copyrighted.

    However the broadcasting of the EVENT surely belongs to the organizers.

    If I held a million dollar event I would at least wanted the broadcasting rights.

  • 2 years ago

    danitz

    Aren't they gonna sue Anand as well for wearing glassess during the match? how bout the volcano? it caused delays in the match.

  • 2 years ago

    davidmelbourne

    Legalities aside, chess struggles to raise funds/commercialize its self.

    Putting on the World Championship is expensive. Organizers need to have some ability to recoup costs, and charging for live access to the game should be an option open to them. 

    Also, the constant demonizing of Danilov> is it really justifiable?

  • 2 years ago

    WGM Natalia_Pogonina

    I doubt this case can be won. Chess moves can't be copyrighted. These guys are trying to convince people that "the right to broadcast moves" can be copyrighted though. But that is nonsense. Nowadays anyone can sit in the playing hall and post the moves online using his cell, handheld computer, etc.

  • 2 years ago

    banjoman

    It was ridiculous to follow the games at chess.com "a few moves behind," when everyone knew perfectly well what was being played.  There was one commentator (whom I shall not identify) who bravely refused to play by these ridiculous rules, and simply commented on the game as it was happening.  But with all the other commentators I was completely annoyed and stopped watching after a few minutes.  Nobody wants post facto analysis of earlier moves when you can follow the game live somewhere else.  

    I hope that during the next big match the relevant laws will explicitly allow chess.com to provide real live commentary.  If not, I think all the chess sites should band together with Chessbase and call Danailov's bluff.

  • 2 years ago

    eainca

    [COMMENT DELETED]
  • 2 years ago

    NrthrnKnght

    as I posted before here on chess.com the moves reported were delayed even by a split second it is still a delay...chess.com had/have nothing to worry about.Live broadcast was done by Danailov and his henchmen errr cronies errr businessmen errr nevermind.

  • 2 years ago

    xstagex

    I really can not see the link with the news to this article. It is like saying 9/11 was bad to justify something else...

  • 2 years ago

    smartens

    I don't know how copyright law works in Bulgaria or Germany, but Danailov's claim would be thrown out in any decent US court.

  • 2 years ago

    philidor_position

    @SonofPearl: I hadn't noticed the chess com broadcasters here were doing that on purpose. It's funny how a few minutes difference can make a law suit. And I agree about the official relay and website. The interviews were all about Danailov and Topalov, and almost all commentary was in Bulgarian.

  • 2 years ago

    Fonix

    It's nice to see that the 'litigious society' syndrome is not exclusive to America. 

  • 2 years ago

    SonofPearl

    @ phildor_position - Chess.com broadcast delayed coverage, always running a few moves behind the 'live' position (Susan Polgar did the same).

    I also linked to the official website in every news report during the match, to encourage people to visit it.

    I understand that the organisers wanted to get some bang for their buck, but once the moves are available online, I don't see how reporting them is violating copyright.

    The best way to attract chess fans to their website was to provide great coverage, which sadly IMO they didn't do.

  • 2 years ago

    WaterAlch

    "Secondly, the incumbent FIDE president Kirsan Ilyumzhinov is reportedly set to sue his challenger Anatoly Karpov for defamation.  Part of Karpov's stated aim is to rid FIDE of corruption, the existence of which Ilyumzhinov denies."

    Not sure what the term defamation actually means, but this here reeks of good humor irony if my hunch is correct.

    "Knocking the pieces off the board when you lose does not change the result"

    Love it! :D

Back to Top

Post your reply: