USCF gouging members who just want to learn the rules

I've only bought 3 chess books in the last 7 years.  I download the rest off the internet.  If it is indeed true that the USCF rules book is not copy protected, then why hasn't someone yet posted a pdf of the book somewhere?

Continental Chess Association provides a concise (2-page) summary of the key tournament rules that every tournament player should know. Please let us know if you spot a rule that differs for USCF play.

http://www.chesstour.com/ContinentalChessAssociationRules-Updated-3-23-14

This biggest difference is that FIDE is not a non-profit company, where the USCF is.

!

No doubt FIDE titles are more important as the USCF only provides national master and senior master OTB and correspondence titles, but in the original post, the question concerned the charge for the rulebook, not titles.

The USCF is officially a non-profit 501 (c)(3) organization in the US. It received that status in April of 2014: https://www.uschess.org/content/view/12603/760

I use to play USCF tournaments back in the 1970s. I was thinking of starting to play tourneys again and thought I'd brush up on the rules, when... what tha???, no rules on the USCF site.  A quick internet search found this thread and the interesting saga behind the lack of online rules.

Then, I went to the continental chess association's two page rules (linked earlier in this thread), hoping for an answer to my main question, but again, no luck.

So, perhaps somebody here knows the answer (though I'd rather have read it for certain on the USCF website!) - I'm pretty certain games must be notated during play, but does it have to be algebraic notation?  My lack of fluency in algebraic would be a big distraction during play, so I'd prefer to use descriptive. Is that allowed?

-Mark R.

FIDE requires algebraic but the USCF allows descriptive.

@mroyer: Indeed, the USCF website only lists the changes to the rule book. For the actual rule book you would have to go the the USCF store and purchase it for $19.95.

Thanks Martin.

I seem to recall reading in one of the USCF forums that there is a legal contract or copyright issue in force that prevents the rules from being placed in the public domain. I don't recall the details of the discussion but there are issues between the author, publisher and USCF that prevent USCF from acting in the manner the OP has suggested.

If it came down to it, just print off the main FIDE rules for the basics. There really isn't much different on the basics between those and the USCF rules.

I recall the same. I may try to dig up the conversation from the USCF forum.

I went to USCF and located the old thread that discussed publishing the rules in electronic form. Basically it boiled to this... 1. The delegates have voted to go public with the rules. The USCF executive board has a green light to proceed. 2. There is a very old contract with McKay publishing that pre-dates the advent of electronic media. The USCF needs to renegotiate this contract before they can proceed. This discussion on the USCF forum is well over a year old and I do not see any current movement in regards to making it happen. Obviously McKay would prefer not to see anything changed. I suggest those that are interested, go to USCF and create a forum account and discuss the subject in that arena. You would certainly get more attention there than here.

As I understand it, this isn't about willingness or not by the USCF but about copyight issues. It appears that the USCF cannot publish the rules for free as it doesn't hold the rights to it. The only thing you do find on the USCF website are changes to the rule book.

See post #79 just a bit above. I know it is bizarre but welcome to the world of legalities.

I just went to the USCF website. If you login in to it and go to the USCF Issues forum, search for "Rulebook motion". In it you can find the discussion about it. After skimming 6 pages of back and worth, the only thing certain is that McKay aka Random House has a contract with the USCF, that there have been talks between the ED and McKay but no mentioning of any outcome of those talks. Everything still appears to be in legal limbo.

I am certain there were earlier discussions as well but I am too lazy to look it up.

> Anyone else agree with me?

Nah. Don't agree.

I  understand the legal issues and it is what it is - we all move on. Nobody in the 1970s could possibly have imagined the importance electronic copyrights would have 2015, so we live with it.

That said, ideally (ignoring the legal issues for the moment), players should make a reasonable attempt to know the rules of the game and of the tournament in which they're playing. It shouldn't be a financial burden to do so. Neither should it be the burden of a tournament director to explain tournament-rules to players - they have more important things to do on game-day. Sure, the director should be happy to handle a question or clear up a confusion when it crops up, but this shouldn't be the expected, normal procedure - it should be the exception.

I think your OS/Pilot analogies are a bit off. As players, don't need to know how the pieces or board were fashioned by the manufacturer to use them during the game/tournament. We do need to know tournament rules, however.

-Mark R.

In the US tournament announcements should have all the timing details and most TDs will remind people of the time control at the beginning of an event. Players need to be sure they know what rules they are playing under (beyond the basics) and if unsure, need to find out. Kind of weird this seems to suddenly have become a problem.

What I miss from US weekend tournies that were once common place are the wall charts ... why have so many TDs stopped using them ?  

As for the details of a tourney these used to always also be posted prominently somewhere in the playing room for all to see/check .  Isnt this still done ?