Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 56

Thread: Something To Think About

  1. #21

    Default Ownership of Score Sheets: Organizers' Power

    Hi Ken:

    You are right. Legally, the organizers of a tournament “ own “ the score sheets:

    CFC Handbook:
    http://www.chess.ca/section_4.htm

    Article 8,
    " 8.3 The score sheets are the property of the organizers of the event. "

    So SCC, as the organizer, has the right to demand that if someone plays in the championship section, then they must hand in their originals.

    But it is up to the organizers what they will do with the score sheets. They can publicize them or keep them private.

    But the executive did not want to follow this path of argument at all. They do not want to enforce their right to the scorsheets. They are willing to let the two opponents decide the fate of the score sheet.

    The current policy is " voluntary ". If a player wants to hand in his score sheet, CFC is pleased to receive it to share with the members. If a player does not want to hand in his score sheet, the SCC respects their wishes to keep the game out of the hands of the members and the general Canadian public, through our database, sent to Hugh Brodie, for inclusion in his CanBase Database.

    Currently, the policy is however, as well, that one opponent cannot prevent the other opponent from making the game public. Each player has absolute ownership of the game score, and one does not need the permission of the other to make the game public. The desire of one to share the game with the public, trumps the desire of the other to keep it out of the public domain.

    The SCC executive is thinking of changing this second principle, to favour the player wanting to keep the game private. One player objecting will keep the game , at least, out of the hands of SCC.

    I will let you know if they change the policy this way.

    Bob
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; 03-05-2009 at 12:50 PM.

  2. #22

    Default

    I understand all of this detail, bob. The bottom line is the SCC has created this mess with their policy.

  3. #23

    Default

    LoL this is too funny... consider this

    I was on rec.games.chess newsgroups and I called Winnipeg 'Winterpeg'. I offended a certain unbalanced individual who then 'chessbased' my name and decided to post/annotate my Very first tournament game ever! He even created a webpage where the title was 'retards playing chess' with this game. Scary eh? Of course his actions went with the typical internet bluster of 'when I see you I'm gonna beat you up'... gotta love this day of instant internet info!

  4. #24

    Default Club Tournaments - Voluntary or Mandatory? - A Decision

    Three issues have surfaced at Scarborough CC around:

    1. the handing in of game score sheets;
    2. the inclusion of games handed in in the club games database;
    3. the publication of some database games in the club newsletter.

    The current policy is that the handing in of games is " voluntary ". An issue of level playing field arose re our club championship, Championship section, if some were handing in their games, and not others. One player requested that the policy become that all games ( in the Championship section only ) must be handed in or " mandatory ".

    This issue led to the SCC executive reconsidering all policy on these three issues. They considered three options ( I have added my own personal commentary on the options ):

    Option 1:

    a) Handing in of games - " Mandatory " - all games must be handed in.
    b) Database & Publication – all games will be entered into the database, and made available each week to all members. The club is free to publish such games as they see fit in the club newsletter. No objections to entry nor publication will be entertained from any players.

    My Commentary: this is an absolutist position and is not practical. We would cause hard feelings if all games were mandatory, since some players are embarrassed by their games, and are private people, and do not want to be told what to do. Also, there is a possible problem of sufficient volunteer time to have time to enter all games. The club does, through a volunteer, free computer analysis of games handed in. With so many games requiring entry, all games could no longer be analyzed. Those hoping for the analysis , who's games did not get reached, will be unhappy at being left out.
    ( However there may be valid arguments that the Championship section of the Club Championship should be mandatory – a unique case - see option 3 below ).


    Option 2:

    a) The handing in of Games - will be " voluntary ". No one is forced to hand in their game.
    b) Database & Publication: Objection Based - Allow any individual to request that their games do not appear in the database or be published irrespective of whether their opponent wants the game entered and published ( if suitable ).

    My Commentary – again, in my view, an absolutist position. Games today are published from the top level down. Players of the caliber of our championship section are used to mandatory handing in of games in top sections of tournaments they play in, and know their opponents cannot object to the organizer collecting all games. If one opponent could prohibit the collecting of games into databases, where would modern chess be? And I think the community of chess players has an interest in this decision. They want the games available, and they do not want players being allowed to keep their games hidden.
    It is argued that what happens at the highest levels does not imply what should happen at a small friendly club like SCC . Well, I think even at our club membership level, this is true. I get lots of positive feedback on the database and the enjoyment players get playing over other members games ( it is about 20% of players who hand in their games, and they are keen, though the rest are rather neutral on the idea of the database - but they don't refuse to receive it each week ! ). If you asked the " submitting " membership, they would say they want to see their games, and that they don’t want a player to be able to hide the game IF the opponent wants it in the database and published. A player can keep his own score sheet private, but he cannot force the opponent not to divulge the game. The principle must reflect community interest OVER individual interest/comfort.
    This would make SCC a chess island on its own - nowhere in the chess world is such an extreme right given to the objecting player of a chess game.


    Option 3:

    a) submission of game scores - " voluntary " ( except a decision is outstanding on the proposal that next year the championship section of club championship will be the one case where collection is mandatory, as is done in top sections of weekend tournaments, etc. - it is too late to do this in mid-stream in this year's championship );

    My Commentary - this to some extent recognizes individual freedom – we will not generally force members to hand in their score sheets. And if 2 opponents both don’t hand in the game, then that is OK – it will never see the light of day by their mutual agreement ( the exception may become the club championship section ).


    b) Database & Publication - where a party wishes his game to go into the database , and be published, this shall be done, and the opponent cannot block either.

    My Commentary – the right of the chess community to enjoy and learn from games is paramount. If one player wants to share with the community, which the community hopes will happen, then their good intentions will not be overridden by some feelings of embarrassment or uncomfortableness of the opponent, nor the opponent’s desire to keep the game out of the database so others cannot use it to prepare against them. All top games are available now immediately in our chess culture, and players know their opponents will have the games to prepare against them. It is part of chess today. We cannot let those with negative intentions affect there being a benefit available to all.
    However, for the club championship this year, we should collect games from those willing to hand them in, but then we will hold them, and not enter them into the database, nor publish them, until AFTER the tournament is over - that way it is a level playing field - the cooperative player is not at a disadvantage as to opponent preparation against them, because of their handing in their games .

    The Executive has had an extensive discussion of the three options.

    They have chosen the second option - total voluntary - one opponent can block the entry and publication of the game by their opponent.

    They have also said that the total policy will be reviewed at the upcoming SCC AGM in September, to ascertain the decision of the members on this.

    What option would you have chosen, had you been on the executive? Or, do you think there is some fourth option?

    Bob
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; 03-06-2009 at 02:00 AM.

  5. #25

    Default Something to think about

    In all this debate a couple of points should be looked at:

    "the right to privacy of the game score"
    I do not think that this right exists if the game is played in public, at an open club or tournament, nationally and possibly internationally rated and under the rules and regulations of a national body.

    "Ownership of the score sheet"
    This was debated in the courts, as far as the contents of score sheets are concerned, going back to Steinitz and Lasker. The courts ruled that the contents are public domain and are not owned by anybody. One reference, if memory serves right, liked the moves to the details of a baseball game score, which cannot be owned by anybody. The courts did assert that annotations to a game can be owned by the annotater and put under copyright, but the raw moves, no. Maybe our legal guys, say Brad Willis or Les Bunning can have a little pro bono peek at those outcomes.

    "The Ruling"
    I do have great sympathy with the ruling, so I do think it misses the mark. Seems to me that a small minority is holding the great majority hostage in this club. Maybe a quiet chat between the club's leadership and those concerned could resolve the issue.

    Finally, I find it interesting that neither the Club's superb newsletter or its web site make a reference to any club games d-base. Maybe that d-base is private and located in Gagra

    Cheers
    Peter
    PS One can only wish that every community in Canada would have a chess club of the quality that the SCC presents.

  6. #26

    Default Further Points to Think About

    Hi Peter:

    Thanks for your kind compliments to the club, and newsletter.

    And I will research your points further - quite thoughtful and thought-provoking.

    Lastly, the database is totally public - we send it weekly to Hugh Brodie for inclusion in his Canadian database of games, CanBase.

    It is interesting that though the weekly club database goes to all members weekly, only about 20% of the members are willing to contribute to the database - the reasons I expect are many-fold. But the fundamental issue in my view, is that if you benefit from the club database, then you should contribute to it, no? This is apparently not a majority view - members are voting with their feet, so to speak. I don't have an answer to this one, so I suggest we keep doing what we're doing.

    But I already have movers lined up to try to change the decision from option 2 to option 3 at the Sept. club AGM. We'll then see what the members as a whole think.

    It is a very lively club !!!

    Bob
    Last edited by Bob Armstrong; 03-06-2009 at 10:36 AM.

  7. #27

  8. #28

    Default

    "My Commentary – the right of the chess community to enjoy and learn from games is paramount."

    Says who? That is a personal opinion held by you. It is not necessarily held by all. It is certainly not held by me.

  9. #29

    Default

    Roger,
    Games played in a rated tournament in public are in the public domain. There is nothing to prohibit a spectator from recording the game.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Mississauga ON Canada
    Posts
    509

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by roger patterson
    "My Commentary – the right of the chess community to enjoy and learn from games is paramount."

    Says who? That is a personal opinion held by you. It is not necessarily held by all. It is certainly not held by me.
    Care to elaborate on your opinion, then?

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •