Chess Copyright

Can someone shed some light on what is allowed and what isn't for chess copyright?

I am wondering because I have many videos that are typically sold, and I know (of course) I can't post publicly the copyrighted content.

But would I be allowed to post a cool game I watched in the video? (Annotated by me, but somewhat similar because I saw it explained in the video)

Or opening explination: Posting the lines with explination?

I'm pretty sure chess moves/ideas can't be copyrighted, but I'd still like to know more.

I would like to know please, I don't know for sure what I can post and what I can't.

i mean if you can find that game on a online database means that the players joined a tournement which had stated that they will share the games public. With peoples made up games or puzzle compostion its illegial unless you have permission of course. with that cool game if you can find it on chessbase or any database thats copyright approved then sure its safe to use that game.

Thanks.

Does this include opening moves? Say learning an opening?

Wait, why would the compositions be illigal?

I dont think you can copyright a chess position

Every chess position is a national treasure.  No coyright lmfao.

If a person publishes a chess problem, in a book or newspaper for instance, you would at least have to give attribution to the source material before posting or publishing it yourself. Fair use would mean you could do that, especially if you don't intend to make money off of your publishing.

Videos would be the same way, Fair Use laws allow you to post a small portion of the video if you intend just to comment on it briefly. Reselling it with your own commentary would not be allowed if you didn't create the original video yourself. The photographer/videographer or their assignee would retain copyrights for such material.

If you post to YouTube, again for example, they might issue a Take Down notice per the DMCA. If you believe your use is covered by Fair Use laws, you would have to prove that to the people you posted the video through.

Thank you.

What if I am not posting the video, but posting the same game/idea that was in the video because I learned it from the video?

If all you are doing is writing about a game, I don't think you'd get in much trouble as long as you specified who the players were. So you could put up the PGN and add your own commentary, for instance. That's common and I don't believe there would be a case for infringement. Like newspapers posting the results of baseball games.

I'm not a lawyer, so don't use me as a legal defense if you get into trouble. I think about all they can do is ask you to delete your post/webpage.

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.

Kid sued and thrown on the street for breaching copyright on a chess position...

Yeah, I've never understood why some players want to have games copyright restricted. Well I mean I guess I understand it, they probably assume this would mean more income for them. But I don't think they've thought it through. The very idea opens a whole new can of worms.

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? 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.

The idea of chess games/moves being copywritten is laughable.  You might as well try to copywrite/patent the way you eat a baked potato.

"I'm going to sue!  Butter first, then cheese and bacon bits, sour cream and chives last is MY order of adding baked potato toppings..."

I heard you cant eat a custard cream like an oreo anymore.  Oreo guys have claimed that style of injestion.

On page 341 of De Groot (2008), "Thought and Choice in Chess" discussing the Berne Convention on Copyright says "The jurists who in 1926 had to rule on the question raised by FIDE stated quite clearly that it would not be possible to establish a copyright on a game of chess.  Chess was not considered an ouvere artistique and did not come under the protection offered by the Convention de Berne."

Does anyone know who these jurists were and in what court this was decided?

And yet someone is trying to do so.  We (the Chess Federation of Canada) are being sued in small claims court in Burlington, Ontario by someone alleging that they own the copyright to a game that was published on our website newsfeed.

I think it only infringes copyright if you try to pass it off as your own work, however there shouldn't be any problem if you include some disclaimer

The PGN of the game cannot be copyrighted but if someone writes a detailed annotation of the game, that annotation can be copyrighted but parts of it can be quoted in someone else's annotation. Also  part of the annotation may be in public domain. This whole question can become endlessly complicated just as some people will argue endlessly about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin but the whole thing beomes so trivial that no one bothers with it.      

talk about "copyright"....Kaynight...