Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 131 posts

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#61

Post by seanalltogether »

CJKinni wrote: post #53

A lot of the comments here on copyright seem to be looking for answers to distinguish this from other copyright issues. Rather than summing up every copyright argument for or against, I thought I'd link to a fairly relevant case: Feist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._R... . Feist is a case where a phone book company stole the data in a phone book, and began reselling it. It deals with publ…

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Basketball_Ass%27n_v.....

> The district court held that Motorola and STATS did not infringe NBA's copyright because only facts from the broadcasts, not the broadcasts themselves were transmitted. The Second Circuit Court agreed with the district court's argument that the "[d]efendants provide purely factual information which any patron of an NBA game could acquire from the arena without any involvement from the director, cameramen, or others who contribute to the originality of the broadcast" [939 F. Supp. at 1094].

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#62

Post by kevin_thibedeau »

Lordarminius wrote: post #2

There is a glaring inconsistency in this ruling when compared to the status quo for other sports. In baseball, football the Olympics etc the sponsors hold the broadcast rights and do with it as they deem fit. Why is this same right denied to the organizers of the World Chess Championship?

Broadcasters have rights to the content they create surrounding an event and by contractual agreement share those with relevant league in return for access to their facilities. Not to the factual events themselves. Nothing prevents an uncontracted source from reporting on the score at any time.

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#63

Post by greglindahl »

desdiv wrote: post #56
CJKinni wrote: post #53

A lot of the comments here on copyright seem to be looking for answers to distinguish this from other copyright issues. Rather than summing up every copyright argument for or against, I thought I'd link to a fairly relevant case: Feist. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._R... . Feist is a case where a phone book company stole the data in a phone book, and began reselling it. It deals with publ…

Your link doesn't work (HN ate the last period up). Here's a working link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications,_Inc.,_v._R...

Thanks -- I edited my link to Feist from an hour ago to have the extra period, too.

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#64

Post by andromeduck »

mattkrause wrote: post #52
njharman wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can copyright a particular arrangement of facts (or other non-copyright protected content) where that arrangement required creative thought (even if "arrangement" is just layout as simple as page numbers/breaks). Notes are facts, but sheet music (and other representations) of sequence of notes, aka a song, are copyrightable. Why are a sequence of moves not the same? This ruling seems more about biases people have…

No, you can't copy facts, period. You can copyright facts that have been 'fixed in a tangible medium of expression' as long as there's some minimal element of creativity. Sheet music is copyrightable because the notes have been "fixed" onto a piece of paper. A recording of a band is copyrightable because the music has been "fixed" in the record, tape, CD, or other file. You can copyright a specific description of a c…

So I could still go to a concert and publish the notes, pitches and timings of the sounds I heard because those are just facts not fixed to a medium like the chess moves here?

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#65

Post by greglindahl »

gnicholas wrote: post #54
ChicagoBoy11 wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are correct, but there is also a distinction between the posturing of sports giants like the MLB and the NFL and what would actually hold up in court in a possible legal challenge. My media law professor seemed pretty sure that, in a vast majority of these cases, those "prohibitions" would not hold up.

I'd be curious to know why they wouldn't hold up—did your professor give a reason or mention any particular cases that led him/her to reach this conclusion? In my experience (lawyer in Palo Alto for 7 years), parties can agree by contract to do or not do many many things. Even provisions that limit legal recourse, like the much-decried mandatory arbitration clauses [1] have held up all the way to the US Supreme Court…

"parties can agree", but I turned on my TV after the legalese was broadcast. The average website or software shrinkwrap has a lot better contract formation than that.

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#66

Post by rayiner »

DrScump wrote: post #40

In broadcast and print media, there are "facts" which are routinely embargoed (they cannot be released before a certain date/time). Financial results from publicly-traded companies are similarly embargoed, even though they be simple facts. Why can't this mechanism be employed as a condition of being permitted to attend the event?

There might be a contractual matter, but news and financial results cannot be protected under copyright or unfair competition theories. Without reading the case I imagine the "free riding" allegation is an unfair competition claim. I wrote a paper on this if you're interested in learning more: http://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent....

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#67

Post by dogma1138 »

mattkrause wrote: post #52
njharman wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can copyright a particular arrangement of facts (or other non-copyright protected content) where that arrangement required creative thought (even if "arrangement" is just layout as simple as page numbers/breaks). Notes are facts, but sheet music (and other representations) of sequence of notes, aka a song, are copyrightable. Why are a sequence of moves not the same? This ruling seems more about biases people have…

No, you can't copy facts, period. You can copyright facts that have been 'fixed in a tangible medium of expression' as long as there's some minimal element of creativity. Sheet music is copyrightable because the notes have been "fixed" onto a piece of paper. A recording of a band is copyrightable because the music has been "fixed" in the record, tape, CD, or other file. You can copyright a specific description of a c…

In the US, other copyright laws do allow you to copy right a database or any other compiled work, as long as there was work that was conducted in order to create it.

This means that if you compile a database of open source material the database itself can we protected by copyright even if all of it's content is not protected by any copyright and is in the public domain.

This is why for example in the UK a phonebook can be protected by copyright but not in the US.

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#69

Post by Retric »

logicallee wrote: post #47
Retric wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Chess is far more constrained than that. Pawns generally have 0 or 1 move with the maximum possible of 3 moves followed by piece selection which is knight or queen as bishops and rooks have the subset of a queens moves. There are a maximum of 8 pawns. Thus (8 * 3 * 2) = 48 Kings have a maximum of 8 moves. 2 Rooks a maximum of 14 = 28, 2 bishops 12 = 24, and 2 knights 8 = 16, queen = 36. And this is individually on an…

I appreciate your analysis - however you need to compare it not with the length of a Tweet but rather with the entropy in a melody: whereas there are typically "less than 50 legal choices" and an average game is "40 moves", a melody that has been held to be protected by copyright has fewer than 50 legal choices for each note, and requires fewer than 40 notes (by far) to be protected by copyright. I'd like to have you…

Melodies are less constrained than that, timing between notes (which includes 0) note pitch and duration are all open. Which is why musical notation is really complex.

Further they are not patents two people can in theory both have copyright on the same melody.

Re: U.S. judge rejects World Chess bid to block websites from airing moves

#70

Post by sigmar »

DrScump wrote: post #40

In broadcast and print media, there are "facts" which are routinely embargoed (they cannot be released before a certain date/time). Financial results from publicly-traded companies are similarly embargoed, even though they be simple facts. Why can't this mechanism be employed as a condition of being permitted to attend the event?

>The defendants E-Learning Ltd and Logical Thinking Ltd, which operate website Chess24.com, had argued in court papers that World Chess was seeking to stop websites from reporting on information already in the public domain and not protected by copyright law.

You can't publicly broadcast facts. Then say no one else has the right to rebroadcast those same facts.

Post reply on HN