Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
3:57 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum Internet and Computing MPDBS |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5 | | (41) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 08:12]; edited by Jacques Rotenberg [07-09-05] |
Well the point is not so far...
There is usual way, isn't it ?
Many things very useful to problemists are sold, many others are given.
Will anybody seriously think that something that is sold has to be taken against the will of the seller ? (whatever the name you give to such acts ?)
Suddenly comes here a discussion about that : "Should (could, would) Winchloe be given for free ?"
Don't you feel that the question itself is aggressive enough ?
Why not to ask the same about Alibadix, The problemist, Matplus, congresses, Fide Albums, and so on ?
If any agreement has to be found, go and ask the seller !
This is usual and friendly way
| | | (42) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 13:16] |
QUOTE
Many things very useful to problemists are sold, many others are given.
Will anybody seriously think that something that is sold has to be taken against the will of the seller ? (whatever the name you give to such acts ?)
If any agreement has to be found, go and ask the seller !
I think that Jacques's questions summarise pretty well this issue. We have some facts :
1. CP has started building a database some seven years ago or so. He implemented a number of tables which include stipulations, conditions, pieces, sources, composer names, etc. He wrote some sophisticated and intelligent code which can solve, format the solutions, detect mechanisms and themes and do a lot more. He devoted himself to this project, spending an enormous amount of time in improving the software and updating/maintaining the database in a most professional way. He considered that he should be compensated for all this work, so he decided to having it sold to those who were interested, instead of being offered free. Such an enthusiastic and competent person deserves to be praised.
2. MV has been also involved in chess software and publishing for a lot of years too, being an important asset in our little community. Recently he decides to revive his magazine, he builds a strong editorial team and implements a forum. He is eager to build a database (a life's dream as he says), since he has collected a lot of material during all these decades and knows that people need such a tool. Such an enthusiastic and competent person deserves to be praised.
So far, so good. The problem starts when MV starts building the database. He is a licensed user of CP's database, he realises that WinChloe tables are not protected, he is of the opinion that info should be freely available, so he decides to extract raw data from those tables and include them in MPDBS as they are. However:
- He is not asking for permission (because he believes that this is not necessary) and he does not specifically name his source. He is only referring to it as the first big collection. Even when he receives CP's complaints, he does not name it.
- He gives access to the Mat Plus subscribers, for he is a supporter that all this info should be free and he considers that it is irrelevant where he got this data from. One may agree with his motivations, but strictly (legally?) speaking the fact is that he has copied data of a commercial product for his own benefit.
- He includes in the server the solutions and the themes of the entries as they were in WinChloe, i.e. data which had been produced/processed with someone else's software and manual work, because of ignorance as he admits.
3. He receives a complaint of "intellectual property" theft and he gradually understands that things may not be so simple as he had thought, so he suspends the server stating that he will clean up the database.
In a pm to MV, I wrote that in my opinion, he is not allowed to include processed digital information from WinChloe into his own database without CP's permission. Perhaps he is entitled to use only the positions, sources and stipulations, and I would be happy if CP eventually authorises such a use (but I would also understand if he does not consent, because he feels that he has been ripped off).
I hope that finally there is a sort of agreement between them. Each one of us is free to believe and express an opinion, but in the end as I wrote, it is the driving forces that need to reach to a common ground.
| | | (43) Posted by Branislav Djurašević [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 15:50]; edited by Branislav Djurašević [07-09-06] |
Harry, very nice explanation about this matter, indeed. I suppose that
Milan wants to unify all known databases: WinChloe, Zivko's, Degener's,
Albreht's, PDB, etc. Such a huge database is also my dream for years (chess players possess it over 20 years: ChessBase, NicBase, Chess Assistant etc.), but I am not a computer expert to produce it, only a customer. Once it is established (hopefully officially), it will be a revolution (!?), not only will it be a collection of creativity of thousands of people in history who were devoted to our nice hobby, but also it is going to resolve our crucial problem of anticipation or plagiarism (who is the first who makes new scheme, mechanism, theme)...
| | | (44) Posted by David Knezevic [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 16:20] |
Some facts, for the change:
(scan from "2345 Anthology of chess problems")
This is THE copyright, they had yo pay somewhere to get it!
Now:
(snapshot taken on September 5th at 15:51 CET)
Now I have a moral dilemma: should I remain loyal to "Chess Informant"? I have been their collaborator since 1973 (see 1st Volume of Encyclopedia of Chess Openings, among proof-readers you'll notice the names of Miroslav Stosic and Milan Velimirovic). Even the authors had been forbiden by a contract with Chess Informant to use the material from "2345 Anthology..." , and had to ask for permission to publish it (non-commercially!) in a file and got it after 4(!) years. So I did it: all problems were completely processed and thems annotated as good as I was able to.
I checked with "Chess Informant", not mentioning the reason, if anybody else got the same permission and the answer was negative.
Instead of making any conclusion I will only express my opinion that the quantities are not the issue. There is no difference if you kill one or kill thousands - you are the murderer. There is no difference if you steal one or steal thousands - you are the thief.
Advice please: what I am supposed to do? To warn the "Chess Informant" so that they can take legal action? Being a person of high integrity my obligation is to do it.... "Hey, there is the rub, For" my moral obligation is also to be loyal to our small chess problemists community. So, what am I supposed to do? Now we all know the facts and eventually we may be all partners in crime. Your ball!
Sorry for burdening your browser
| | | (45) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 17:44]; edited by Jacques Rotenberg [07-09-05] |
Well, Milan
It is not the same at all.
From your book comes diagrams, names of authors, sources.
whitch is anyway free and does not belong to you either.
No text of yours, even the solutions are not yours.
Moreover the source of reading is clearly shown in this list, so that, in case of mistake or doubt, research is easy.
In fact even the names of authors and sources are re-wrote so that to be unified with the whole database.
So there is not here even a beginning of question of copyright
Moreover, many of the problems were already in the database, as usual in these cases
May I invite you to be prudent with the words you choose ?
| | | (46) Posted by David Knezevic [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 17:58] |
A men saw a friend in a luxury car. "Were did you get it?" he asked and the othre answered: "I bought it!". "Where you got the money for it?" asked the first one knowing the friend financial situation. "Well, I played a game of poker last night. At one moment when I paid and made a call the other player didn't want to show his hand and said: 'Gentlemen trust!'. Ah so, I thought! You will not beleive what amazing hands I had for the rest of the night!"
Jacques, I trust.
| | | (47) Posted by David Knezevic [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 18:05] |
On second thought, I don't need your opinion. I don't know what is the right thing to do, but I know what I am going to do.
I want to stress that the suspension of MPDBS was only my good will. There is nothing in the World that could have forced me to do it if I didn't wanted to. So, you who worry about WinChloe should appreciate that. And Christian should have taken batter care about his property in the first place!
Herewith I declare:
- I will not touch anything from WinChloe. At this moment it means: leave that database aside, forget about it. However, if any of WinChloe contributors allows the usage of his work, I will have no dilemmas to do it (of course after removing all the intellegence by WinChloe). I think, actually I know that it is fair. I will ignore any possible accusations.
- I will continue my work on a compiling the chess problem database. Let me remind you that there already was over 386.000 well processed problems in it. Some 50.000 were duplicates, so simple calculation shows that there is about 200.000 "non-compromised" records. And I have just begun the compilation!
I will now ask the Administrator (myself) to lock this thread. Please dedicate your attention and energy to more important things.
| | | (48) Posted by Administrator [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 19:54] |
OK, you want to continue the discussion, so this thread is unlocked at your request.
| | | (49) Posted by Jacques Rotenberg [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 20:00] |
Whose request ? not mine
| | | (50) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 20:35]; edited by Vladimir Tyapkin [07-09-05] |
Jacques, it was my request. I feel you may want to respond to Milan's last post. Besides, I am doing a legal research on the subject and would like to post it here as well.
| | | (51) Posted by Frank Richter [Wednesday, Sep 5, 2007 20:44] |
The whole story is very unattractive, but in the sense of the present.
@Milan: A small question: What will/can happen if you publish your unchanged database again? A court hearing? Who will be the claimant? Where it should take place? In France? In Serbia? It makes no sense...
Of course the best solution is a friendly agreement to support the idea of a freely accessible problem chess database. A lot of people dream this dream for many years! Now the technical possibilities are available. Please let us use this big chance in co-operation, not in conflict!
| | | (52) Posted by Vaclav Kotesovec [Thursday, Sep 6, 2007 15:41] |
I total agree with Frank.
I think problemists from all the world should be cooperate.
Milan - is possible convert your '200.000 "non-compromised" records' to WinChloe format and exchange all data between WinChloe and MPDBS ? Two big databases in different formats. This solution would be fair play and fantastic for all chess problemists!
(In addition, import PDB, Meson and others ...)
Sorry, my English is not perfect, but perhaps you understand.
| | | (53) Posted by David Knezevic [Thursday, Sep 6, 2007 16:47] |
Hello Vaclav, welcome!
QUOTE
Milan - is possible convert your '200.000 "non-compromised" records' to WinChloe
It is, but frankly I would feel like .... - I must spell: džei ei: si: kei [dash] ei: es es - then.
I will re-open the service as soon as possible, at the moment I am just too occupied with preparation of the next issue of Mat Plus. There are few tools that I still have to provide for entering new and editting/correcting/annotating old entries. I must say that I have not been too keen to bring all the problems to the uniform format, and that it is still to be done (not easy job!).
As far as PDB or Meson are concerned, I didn't have any contact with their authors/owners. Some 7-8 years ago I have bought the PDB CD titled "Reich/Wilts: PDB The complete Niemann + 9000 retros and additional fairies", filedate: 13.5.1999 12:00 and have it converted in several other formats. I was about to start the work on it (without asking the authors, I admit, thought it was not necessary!), i.e. to translate the German annotations to English, but I could have included it as is in no time. However, it certainly contains much more new problems current online version. My dream is to include Albrecht's collection, but I still don't have it and have to contact Mr. Degener about it.
QUOTE
Sorry, my English is not perfect, but perhaps you understand
Don't worry, I feel comfortable with any kind of English. I wish that my English is half as good as yours :)
| | | (54) Posted by Mihail Croitor [Thursday, Sep 6, 2007 17:30] |
what intermediate format for DB is better? pgn, pbm or pbz? i can begin to cooperate now :) at this moment i prepare small base of 2movers miniatures. At this moment i have near 2200 positions, and database grow ("manual, nonautomatic work" ;) )
| | | (55) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Thursday, Sep 6, 2007 18:38]; edited by Vladimir Tyapkin [07-09-06] |
Vaclav,
This kind of exchange would be ideal, but I am afraid it is not going to happen. Winchloe contributres feel that it is OK to use online resources available for free, like your archive or other freely available databases. However, they don't want their work to be used in Milan's database. If Cristian wanted that kind of deal he could've asked Milan. Instead, he accused him in copyright infringement and asked to remove 'his' problems.
| | | (56) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Friday, Sep 7, 2007 11:45] |
@VT: But the work WinChloe wants to keep for itself
(IF we can't reach a gentlemans agreement for the better of all
problem world) is the thematic annotation, the proprietary
format etc. As I said, a mere list of 100000 problems with
public data (composer, source, year etc.) is probably not
copyright-able, as well as a list of 1 trillion primes isn't.
Well, since this thread is beginning to make me depressive :-),
I will make a post to the German USENET law group, maybe some
experts can help to draw the line. So we can resolve at least
*that* aspect.
Hauke
| | | (57) Posted by David Knezevic [Friday, Sep 7, 2007 11:58]; edited by David Knezevic [07-09-07] |
While I was hesitating to contact Udo Degener, he contacted me!
Udo is still working hard on inputting the problems, he says that there is som 20-30000 waiting on a paper sheets, but at the moment there is about 120.000 twomovers there. He also says that when completed the database will be free for a non-commercial use (except that some donation which will cover his costs will be necessary, understandably).
Udo does not mind if I import the problems into MP database, which will also be non-commercial except, again, a symbolic contribution to cover the costs.
I think that we all owe a lot to Udo for all the hard work he has done for us, but I am sure he already knows how grateful we are!
| | | (58) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Friday, Sep 7, 2007 18:38]; edited by Vladimir Tyapkin [07-09-08] |
To Hauke and the others:
Here is the summary of my research on the subject of databases and copyright. First of all, I am not a lawyer and could be wrong. Reading legal documents is not an easy matter. Everything is applied to the USA unless mentioned otherwise. Words 'compilation' and 'database' are used as synonyms.
1) The copyright law don't make a difference between printed and electronic compilations/databases
2) There could be copyright protection on databases.
3) It is called compilation protection and different from regular copyright in at least three aspects:
a) It is not renewable and expired after 15 years from the day of creation
b) Even if database is under compilation protection, data extraction is not necessary a copyright infringement. The extraction should be significant to be considered a copyright violation.
c) It is enforced through contract law.
4) The key case in the USA is "Feist Publications, Inc. v. Rural Telephone Service Company, Inc". Feist was the company that used Rural's telephone directory for its own purposes without permission(or rather Feist ignored Rural's request to stop using their database).
5) Feist case was decided by The Supreme Court that overruled decisions of lower courts and sided with Feist
6) Since then, a so-called Feist test is used to determine if database can enjoy a (compilation) copyright protection.
7) Even if underlying data is not copyrighted, e.g. a collection of facts, database compilation could be copyrighted as soon as it passed the Feist test.
8) The Feist test is defined by the Supreme Court as "selected, coordinated, or arranged in such a way that the resulting work as a whole constitutes an original work of authorship"
9) The Feist test overruled the old test. The basic idea of the old test was not originality, but the amount of effort and work spent to produce the compilation.
10) To be able to exercise his rights, owner of the database should state in the contract what rights are available for the other party and what is prohibited. If, for example, the right to redistribute is not stated explicitly in user agreement, end user is free to use it as he sees fit. This was established by another court case "ProCD, Incorporated v. Matthew Zeidenberg and Silken Mountain Web Services, Inc"
11) European Union has more strict protection. In particular, no Feist test is required to claim originality.
Updates:
12) It is a fair use of a copyrighted work to reverse engineer that work in order to gain access to uncopyrightable facts. Decided in 'Assessment Technologies v. Wiredata'(from Wikipedia link posted by Siegfried below)
I may add some material later...
| | | (59) Posted by Vladimir Tyapkin [Friday, Sep 7, 2007 19:07]; edited by Vladimir Tyapkin [07-09-07] |
Now, my interpretation of the law in relation to our case.
1) If you are not a wincloe user, you did not enter into any agreement with Christian. You are a third party and cannot infringe on Christian's copyright under any circumstances because compilation copyright can be enforced only through contract. That is why Christian should take better care for his database and not allow to download it to everybody.
2) If Wincloe user agreement does not prohibit to redistribute database explicitly, any US Winchloe user can redistribute the database.
3) Any claims how hard it is to create and maintain winchloe database is not relevant argument for US courts anymore. Your database should prove enough originality and pass the Feist test to enjoy copyright protection.
4) Any claims by Harry that their use of printed or other compilations for Winchloe is not a violation of copyright are not true. Both these uses are subject of the same law. 'Change of media' argument is not relevant under copyright law.
5) Asking permission of owner is not necessary, it is enough to read user agreement and do everything that is not prohibited by it(That's exactly what Milan did according to his earlier post)
6) (somewhat unrelated) Do not use word 'theft' and ‘steal’ when refers to intellectual property. The proper term is ‘copyright violation’ or ‘copyright infringement’. The difference is significant. Theft and stealing applies to material(tangible) things. Stealing means depriving one from using his property. In this case, all owners still have their own CDs and can access the database. Milan did not take it away from anybody. Apples can be stolen, information cannot.
Feel free, to post your own findings and opinions, but let's keep discussion civil.
| | | (60) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Friday, Sep 7, 2007 20:40]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [07-09-07] |
Vladimir Tyapkin mentioned a case Feist Publications v. Rural Telephone Service, Inc - it has an own Wikipedia entry here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feist_Publications_v._Rural_Telephone_Service
| |
Read more... | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 3 4 5
MatPlus.Net Forum Internet and Computing MPDBS |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
