Ridiculous Hot News And Copyright Battles As World Chess Seeks To Block Others From Broadcasting Moves
from the that's-ridiculous dept
A few years back, we had a few stories about ridiculous situations in which the Bulgarian Chess Federation was trying to claim copyright on chess moves and had even sued a website for copyright infringement for broadcasting the moves. Of course, chess moves are not just factual information, but they're historically written down and shared widely, because that's part of how people learn to play chess (and get better at it). Studying the moves in various games is part of how people practice chess, and no one is expected to claim "ownership" over the chess moves, because they can't.And yet... we've just come across two separate cases, involving one particular organizer of chess tournaments, trying to abuse the law to block reporting on chess moves -- in both Russia and the US. Both cases are ridiculous, and thankfully, both have failed so far. The Moscow case actually kicked off back in the spring, when the organization Agon, which runs World Chess Championships and the website WorldChess.com, sued some websites, including Chess24, for posting the chess moves of live events. Thankfully, the Commercial Court of the City of Moscow rejected the lawsuit a few weeks ago, though Agon has said it will appeal. There are a number of reasons why Agon lost the case, but the key one:
Art. 14.7 of the Competition Act does not apply in particular since the Plaintiff did not establish a regime of commercial secrecy for the information about the chess moves. On the contrary, this information was in the public domain (as the Plaintiff himself admits on page 6 of the statement of claim). Consequently, information about the chess moves is not a trade secret and is not protected by law. Accordingly, the Defendant did not receive, use or disclose information that was a trade or other secret protected by law i.e. he did not violate Art. 14.7 of the Competition Act.Then, just days after that ruling in Moscow, a very similar case was filed in the US by World Chess -- which is owned by Agon. And, it also targeted Chess24, one of the same companies it had sued in Moscow. In the US, it's clear that there's no copyright claim to be made in chess moves -- too many cases clearly preclude trying to claim a copyright in factual data, especially factual data about sports/competitions. Instead, World Chess focused on the pretty much dead and discredited "hot news" claims against a few other chess sites. The entire complaint can basically be summarized as "but... wah... it's not fair!"
Defendants have made a pattern and practice of copying and redistributing in real time the chess moves from tournaments covered byWorld Chess shortly after the moves appear on World Chess’s website, and unless restrained by this Court will do the same with respect the November 2016 Championship.World Chess not only asked for an injunction against Chess24 -- but also demanded that the court order the domains of the defendants be transferred over to World Chess. The defendants hit back with a detailed explanation of how ridiculous World Chess's lawsuit was:
By its Application for a Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction, Plaintiffs World Chess US, Inc. and World Chess Events Ltd. (collectively, “Plaintiffs”) seek to prevent legitimate chess-oriented websites from reporting on, discussing, and analyzing one of the major chess matches of the year – even though the information Chess24 seeks to report on will already be readily available to the public. Plaintiffs attempt to do so by claiming that because they are the organizers and promoters of the chess match they have an intangible, enforceable property right in the facts surrounding that match, and therefore have the exclusive right to publish and report on what the players are doing. The claims made by Plaintiffs run contrary to the well-established law of this Circuit and public policy.Chess24 points out that World Chess is clearly just trying to do an endrun around well-established copyright law, and that's a big no-no.
Plaintiffs know that the moves made by professional chess players are precisely the type of factual material that is not protectable by copyright law. But it also cannot be protected under theories of common law misappropriation. The law is absolutely clear in this Circuit that state law claims for misappropriation of unprotectable facts – including live sports plays – are preempted by Section 301 of the Copyright Act. In an effort to avoid preemption, Plaintiffs have relied on an extremely narrow exception for so-called “hot news misappropriation.” That exception plainly does not apply here. In fact, Plaintiffs almost completely ignore the dispositive case in this area -- NBA v. Motorola, 105 F.3d 841, 846 (2d Cir. 1996). In Motorola, the Second Circuit expressly rejected the exact same claim that Plaintiffs attempt to argue here, involving almost the exact same factual circumstances. Specifically, that case held that the NBA could not prevent Motorola from attending and watching basketball games and selling play-by-play accounts of the game to its mobile customers. In contrast to this dispositive case law, Plaintiffs are unable to cite even a single case upholding an injunction like the one sought by Plaintiffs in even remotely similar circumstances.Oh, and also, Chess24 points out to the court that (1) Agon/World Chess just lost a nearly identical case in Moscow and (2) it waited until just days before the tournament in question started to try to force a quick injunction:
Even more telling is the fact that although Plaintiffs have been in litigation with Chess24 in Moscow since March (Plaintiffs recently lost that case), they waited until just four days before the start of the WCC to bring this motion. Plaintiffs’ decision to file their lengthy motion at the eleventh hour is not just sharp tactics; it confirms that there is no actual irreparable injury in need of remediation.There was a hearing in court, and the judge, Victor Marrero, rejected World Chess/Agon's request for an injunction. As of writing this, the court has only posted the short order without the full explanation, which is expected to be published later. But, given the facts here, it seems fairly obvious why the court rejected the case -- and it's all of the many reasons that Chess24 laid out in its brief.
Hopefully, these companies can finally get it through their heads that you can't copyright chess.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: chess, chess moves, copyright, hot news
Companies: agon, chess24, world chess
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
It's not who's right, it's who's rich
Hopefully, these companies can finally get it through their heads that you can't copyright chess.
Legally no, however you can continue to sue one or more companies asserting such so long as you have more resources than them, and either drive them under from legal costs or force them to 'settle' to avoid the same, at which point the same effect is attained.
Ours is a legal system where it matters less if the law is on your side so much as 'Do you have more money than the other person and a willingness to use it?' Legally they may have no case, but if they can sue the other side into submission and scare anyone else from doing the same the end-result will be the exact same as though they could legally own the facts of a chess match.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: It's not who's right, it's who's rich
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Big Blue
Agon may simply be butt hurt that they don't have the same kind of control over their 'events' that the NFL has over their games. Maybe they should be suing their lawyers over their failure to make the entry form contractually binding with respect to copyright.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Big Blue
They shouldn't be too upset--the NFL doesn't have the control they think (or at least claim) they have, either. "Any accounts of this game without the express written permission of the NFL are prohibited" is simply a false statement of the law, and I'm equally free to tweet, blog, broadcast, or whatever, my account of any game I choose with no permission whatsoever--and for the same reason that Chess24 won here.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Big Blue
However there is no such thing as "sporting rights " legally.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Big Blue
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Big Blue
Let's not forget the Olympics organization, by virtue of controlling wealth, is infamous for getting venue cities to pass insanely unconstitutional laws on their behalf. You don't have to enter the grounds to be ordered by police to conform to their conditions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Chess is just very easy to cover in cyberspace since the physical arena for the game is almost completely irrelevant. Agon can never make chess on tv that valuable a commodity. Free alternatives are too easy to set up for them to spin a monopoly-value production around it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That way, you either win the prize money, or your opponent copies your move and you sue him for the amount of the prize money!
I mean, without that copyright protections, no one would have any incentive to play chess!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
If you can copyright dance moves...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
the results
I'm rooting for the champ and benefit from analysis by third parties after the game. I don't even go to the world chess website because the games can take hours to play. Two of them have taken 6+ hours already.
Now here's an idea let's start a fantasy chess league! :P
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I checked out their website.
Them boys and girls over at Agon Limited* are aiming to develop and commercialize chess - yada yada yada - expand broadcast coverage. And we all know that anyone that broadcasts anything think they own every single little bit of everything related to the efforts of every body but them.
Not because of the law, but because they really, really want to.
* Already attempting to limit possible damage to the principles when the collective is sued.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]