Disclaimer: I do not know enough about the details to comment on this case. However, I hope it can be resolved amicably for the good of chess.
Precedent in chess history, chess moves copyright violation goes in court Danailov shares details about the case
Presented by Chessdom
During the Anand – Topalov WCC 2010, a message appeared on the official site stating, “Warning! It is absolutely prohibited the live broadcast of the moves or video during the game on other websites, media or software without the explicit permission of the organizers of the match. This prohibition is being violated by ChessBase”
A few weeks after the end of the championship Chessdom.com received news directly from a German source that the case is already presented in court. Regarding the moves copyright case and the recent exchange of media releases between teams Topalov and Anand, we contacted the manager of Veselin Topalov and one of the central figures behind the organization of the WCC – Silvio Danailov. He was disturbed by the fact that millions of euros were invested in the most watched online World chess championship in history, while Chessbase is putting themselves above the law and taking the moves without permission. Read on for full details:
Q: Mr. Danailov, we understood that the case against a German company that has presumably violated copyright rules has been presented in court. Can you share with us details on the issue?
A: Good afternoon, yes, this is true. Before the start of the World Chess Championship we explicitly stated that no company can use the moves without the official site’s staff permission. And this was violated by Chessbase, they put themselves above the law in Europe, above the general FIDE ethical rules.
Q: Until now there is no such similar case in chess history. Do you believe it will be successful?
A: I believe in European law and in our Attorney who is presenting the case – Mr. Rainer Polzin. What’s more, I am candidate for President of the ECU and as such I have to stand behind the rights of professional chess. Such actions, as the one by the German company Chessbase, affect the sponsors of events negatively, which damages sponsorship, from there future organization and level of events. In the long run the biggest damage is made on the chess fans, who are the most important part of the game – they certainly deserve to enjoy high level events and have chess sponsorship on all levels.
Thus, by defending our rights through European law, we will be defending all fans and the future of chess.
Q: Our information states that the case entered court on May 27th, that is way after the end of the event. Why was it not presented after the first rounds?
A: In such proceedings there are steps to follow. We tried to reach an agreement with Chessbase and offered them to follow the rules all other sites were following – a commercial contract. They refused and started transmitting the games. A warning letter was sent to them after the first games, requesting immediate stop of broadcast. But such action was not taken from their side, so the case is now in court.
Everything is very technical and there are many details. In the modern age of communications this process is easy to trace, the amount of work is big though.
This was the most watched chess championship online in Internet in the history of all championships. For all this to happen the sponsors paid, but Chessbase can take the moves for free, and resell to their clients ? This is not normal, by law and by human norms. In simple language this is robbery. And for such actions there will be consequences.
Q: As we mention the World Chess Championship, the last interview that we had a few days ago reached mainstream media in many countries including India. The manager of Anand, Mrs. Aruna Anand, answered in TOI before we had the chance to talk to her.
A: First of all let me clarify one thing: with all my respect Mrs. Anand is not a manager, she is a secretary. Manager is a very serious profession, the manager promotes and popularises chess , looking for sponsorship money and organizing world class events. Basically what she is doing is pick up the phone, send emails, faxes, booking tickets, etc.
About her reaction, it looks to me a little bit nervous, but what to do, the truth hurts sometimes.
Note: Click here for history of copyrith of moves Danailov – Chessbase conflict
Wow. This looks bad.
This is revolutionary in my opinion. But I think players need to be compensated for their work, maybe even a small royalty if you use, say the Najdorf to be paid to Miguel Najdor directly or his heirs. This way, if you create a novelty, you will be paid for. USCF can submit all the games for the tournaments it hosts and players will be billed for the openings they use. If you play a variation from Kasparov, for example, expect to pay a lot. But if you use the Ruy Lopez, maybe only a few pennies will go to his heirs.
All I can say is BRAVO DANIALOV for this new money making innovation!
This is a historic case. It will define the right of organizers and sponsors in the future.
You have to applaud Danailov for fighting for the rights of the players.
Here lies the noble game of chess. Once popular now dead due to legal antics of danailov.
“with all my respect Mrs. Anand is not a manager, she is a secretary.”
Quite a gentleman he is. Seems to be an educated, polite and a nice person. A real Manager.
Chess moves can’t be copyrighted but a live transmission can. Chessbase is wrong in this case.
Personally , i’m really not a fan of Danailov , but on this he has a valid point .
The world championship match broadcast rights belongs to the sponsors , as far as i’m aware Chessbase was not a sponsor and made money for free by stealing the right to broadcast without having a commercial agreement with the people who paid and made the event actually happen
I also want to say that Chessbase are far from saints . I bought many times for 100 Euros for Deep Fritz , Deep Shredder , Chessbase 9 these last 5-6 years (and i als0 bought them many dvd’s in openings , endgames etc , nearly bought for 400€ of softwares ) , yet last time they obliged me to buy a serial in order to be able to watch the Anand-Topalov game because my serial was expired and you couldn’t access the broadcast room as a guest
So in a way , seeing that they are sued because they tried to screw the Bulgarians (thinking they wouldn’t be able to do anything legally ) is kinda karma , because when it comes to miling its customers , chessbase are second to none .
Danailov is right. Chessbase should have asked for permission. This has nothing to do with Danailov is well liked or not. It’s about fairness and the law.
makes me want to buy a chessbase product.
If you applaud this you deserve what’s coming.
(did he paid chessbase for promotion?)
(if the transmission from his site would be better why I would watch the match on chessbase?)
(I would like to make chess available even on milk boxes, not to restrict it even furter)
(if you think the player would be paid from “royalties” you day- dreaming. The few cents would go directly in his pocket)
Chessbase shouldn’t have broadcast the games live without permission from the organizers of the match.
By doing so, future sponsors may just decide to illegally broadcast the games themselves since its free that way.
Ultimately, it’s the chess players and fans that lose out…
“Chess moves can’t be copyrighted but a live transmission can”
If chess moves can’t be copyrighted, a live relay of chess moves can’t be copyrighted either.
If copyright law doesn’t apply, there isn’t any other law.
And seriously, nobody wants this anyway. What if Chessbase runs Rybka in the background, and quickly copyrights the best move while the player is still pondering. Would the players then be sued for actually playing that move ?
I think this case is a good thing. Rarely is legal action a good result for anything in sport, but in this case it should hopefully decide this issue of what is copyright and what is not copyright.
If the court makes a clear decision, then we will know. Otherwise nothing will have been gained and this issue will not have been resolved at all.
So in this case I disagree with Susan. While it would be nice to have an amicable agreement between Bulgaria and chessbase, it will still leave the whole copyright issue up in the air, which still needs clarifying.
It may be that chess moves are deemed to be ‘prior art’ or it may be they are just deemed to be news items.
Commentary, analysis, evaluation, chat … are not part of that prior art – but difficult to do without the actual moves!
An interesting case, and another example of chess being an interesting demonstration vehicle for learning purposes.
A lot of people sympathise with Vaselin Topalov, a truly heroic chess champion, for his association with Silvio Danailov. You do not need enemies, when you have managers like this. Managers of all kinds exist (Roger Federer may have one- though of a different calibre, we suppose) and, as far as legacies are concerned, truly time will tell. Though his comment on Aruna does not deserve a reply, Danailov should realise by now that Ms Aruna does not just serve as a Manager to Anand, she in fact takes up a lot more responsibilities on behalf of the World Champion that lets him free to devote himself to chess. All this, without the kind of conflict of interest that the redoubtable Bulgarian manager seems to articulate/represent in a world chess championship challenger’s camp. Aruna Anand is an icon in her own right, and is appreciated for her role by millions of chess fans regardless of what Mr. Danailov is capable of conceding.
I think that there is a difference between filming the chess scene and showing it to public (like in football or any other sport) and simply transmiting a move on internet. The later does not happen in any other sport. It is not even like audio cricket or tennis commentary. People, who are watching a chess game, can phone the move to their friends and then it can be spread further by other means, e.g. more phone calls and there can be no objection to that.
So I think Chessbase has a chance to win the court case.
One simple thing i want to know, is that chessbase was providing only moves or video Transmission? If it is just a moves,i don’t think what the heck all is this about? Because even in Susan Blog we were following Live moves, even chess.com had live moves with analysis of experts ( some matches only premimum members allowed live coverage), chessdom had such coverage, then why only chessbase?
Though i am happy no other sites are blamed but still why only chessbase? Most importing thing is that, official site was providing free moves, so of course any site can use those free moves. I don’t understand whats wrong with it?
Ok, if chessbase was broadcasting live video of the match without permission, then we can say it is illegitimate but moves?
May Susan P. use the chess base 10 logo here? Could be a violation of copyrights. Just a thought.
Danailov comments Mrs Anand are distasteful and lack of respect for a loving dutiful wife , and against women in general
Danailov rocks! Chessbase will be pushed into bankruptcy because of this error and soem people will get fired from its headquarters.
I think Danailov the manager lacks focus and is busy organizing all kinds of junk and distracting Topalov with all kinds of meetings and interviews.
If you accept his definition of a “manager”, then a lot of people will not qualify.
Aruna Anand (whether you call her a manager or a secretary it does not matter) simply achieved what she set out to do.
I think Danailov is also a bit sore that he lost to a woman’s superior management skills.
–br
There needs to be some way for chess events to generate monies.
I think many spectators will pay to watch if there was a way for them to do so.
Currently, ICC and others are using these events to attract more following. They are giving the commentary away for free. That serves ICC and others well, but not the event organizers.
If Danailov wins, it will serve event organizers well.
Another idea is to for FIDE to use its muscle on the GMs who are commenting on these games. Since GMs are associated with a federation, and are paid by the federation, they may be asked to comment only on sites that have paid the event organizers. Doing otherwise could be deemed a violation with associated penalties.
Just some thoughts…
Oh, by the way, what was that remark on Aruna Anand? That’s really a sad way to behave. No wonder other players don’t like the Topalov team.
I’m totally on Danilov on this one. Whether I like him or not, is another matter (for example, what was the need to the nasty remarks on Mrs. Anand ?).
Those of you who keep mentioning the copyright on the chess moves, and on the ideas behind them (and keep making cheap jokes about this) are completely missing the point. The point is not reporting the moves, but reporting them DURING the game itself. In a few months, there will be the soccer world cup. Try to broadcast any of those matches live with your own private tv station (assuming hypothetically that you have one), without paying the royalty to FIFA, but asking your watchers to pay YOU for your broadcast. See how quickly you will end up in jail. Or try to do the same for the NFL Super Bowl, or for the Olympic games. Don’t you see how indefensible this position is ? I repeat, please stop making the cheap jokes on the copyright on the idea behind a move, and see what the real issue is. As someone before me just said, it is very appropriate and beneficial for chess that this issue is brought to court, and settled once for all.
I hope Danailov loses his shirt.
He is bad for chess as are all legal nut jobs and chess gadflys.
@Anon, Monday, May 31, 2010 7:07:00 PM CDT
You’re missing the point by comparing chess moves to a live soccer broadcast.
If you want a fair analogy, compare relaying chess moves with a guy sitting in the soccer stadium with a cell phone, and describing the movement of the players to a co-worker, who puts the information on a web site. This is completely legal.
Now, if chessbase were to include a live video feed of the game, this would be a violation of copyright law.
Describing the game, through a series of moves, is not a violation of copyright law.