Author: K. Burcham
Date: 23:04:15 07/15/02
Go up one level in this thread
On July 16, 2002 at 01:47:57, Dann Corbit wrote: >On July 16, 2002 at 01:44:57, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On July 16, 2002 at 01:39:57, K. Burcham wrote: >> >>> >>>I expect that they consult everything at their disposal. That would include all >>>the latest FIDE, SSDF and correspondence games looking for a bust, as well as >>>Encyclopedia if Chess Openings, Modern Chess Openings, Batsford Chess Openings, >>>books on theory for each of the individual openings, and anything else they can >>>get their hands on. It's their job, after all. >>>Dan >>> >>> >>>ok this is what I was talking about. everyone here knows these guys >>>are consulting other GM moves and lines---all these moves and lines have been >>>played by GMs. These GM have spent years studying to be able to play these >>>opening lines on a GM level. then these non GM level "book builders" come along >>>and move around a few positions in the lines and call this "his own book". >>>I do not doubt at all what you say that these special program books add elo. >>>I am amazed that these guys claim "ownership" with these books and are offended >>>by someone else using them. >>>what would a 2700 GM think if they read here where some "book builder", with a >>>FIDE rating of 1800, posts one of the GM lines or close enough to it and claims >>>that some other programmer stole the "book builders" moves or lines? >> >>The moves of an opening book can be copyrighted only as a collection. >> >>If someone takes an opening book and makes a few modifications, then claims it >>as their own, that is a copyright violation and punishable by law. You cannot >>go beyond what is "fair use" in copying intellectual property. In the same way, >>you cannot take a novel, change a few sentences, and claim that you wrote it. >> >>On the other hand, PGN collections without annotations, are not copyrightable. >>And information gleaned by hand from a large number of sources to create an >>opening book clearly constitues fair use. > >I should qualify the above statement. There is some question whether a >particular set of games can be copyrighted as a distinct set (e.g. Fisher's "60 >memoriable games"). A game in isolation is clearly not copyrightable, and a >large collection of games gathered from several different source is not >copyrightable. > >If an individual game were copyrightable, could you sue for copyright violation >if someone else played the same line? >:-) > >>I doubt if most of the book builders are anywhere near GM level, but that is >>irrelevant. They are not inventing the move sequences. They are only compiling >>them. There is an enormous difference. If the GM cannot copyright his new "variation" in his own original work, then why do these "book builders" assume ownership in their work? It would seem if a GM has studied a new line and ends up playing it in a world tournament, he knows that if other GM approve of his new opening theory, this new line will be used by all GM and the GM that had the new variation will never have that advantage again. Yet these "book builders" want to hold on to their lines for their own advantage. So if after a comp tournament we all go home and study--study---study the opening lines used, and incorporate something played by another program in our own program, some say this is stealing, or not the correct thing to do. kburcham
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.