Website founded by
Milan Velimirović
in 2006
22:14 UTC
| |
MatPlus.Net  Forum General Composition and Copyright |
| |
|
|
|
|
You can only view this page!
| | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2 | | (21) Posted by Miodrag Mladenović [Saturday, Jun 30, 2007 14:17]; edited by Miodrag Mladenović [07-06-30] |
>Could it be Martin Greif? He has issued a series of problem books with no author names or sources, and
>rather old-style solutions (I seem to remember they indicated double and discovered checks).
Yes, one of them for sure is Martin Greif. While I was in the States I saw dozen of his books at their major bookstores (Border, Barnes & Nobels etc.). I never bought any of those books since I did not like diagrams without author names. I think that I also saw a book containing chess problems by Judit Polgar's father (I forgot his name). He is selling a huge book with hundreds of chess problems without author names.
I also know that Dimitije Bjelica who used to be Karpov's PR was displaying some where known old Russian endgames like his own positions from his games. He was doing that all of the time at our national TV. It was terrible. I tried to do something but unfortunatelly there was nothing I could do to prevent this. Later on, Dimitrije Bjelica used to be director of Children Chess Olimpyc games in Spain (I am not quite sure if I wrote exact name of the event). Very bad for chess that he is involved in events like this one.
| | | (22) Posted by Michael McDowell [Saturday, Jun 30, 2007 15:05] |
I have one of Greif’s books, called “200 Challenging Chess Puzzles”. No authors or sources are given, though they are all clearly 19th century problems. I recognise two of them - one is by Shinkman, the other by Sam Loyd’s brother Isaac. Both were published in the Dubuque Chess Journal in the 1870s, so that magazine may have been the source for Greif’s material. As an example of Greif’s extensive knowledge of problems his introduction (which is aimed squarely at players) concludes “Finally, several of the puzzles are not only tricky in their own right, but tricky by design – that is, while the correct solution might call for, say, four moves, you might in fact give mate in only three. The challenge lies in finding the stipulated number of moves, even if there is an easier way! With this caveat in mind, enjoy these 200 classic challenges to the full.”
Grief died in 1996, so fortunately we’ve been free of his rubbish for over a decade. If you would like to read about him, try here - http://astroqueer.tripod.com/charts/martingreif.html
I have seen a couple of Laszlo Polgar’s books where along with game-type positions he included lightweight problems, mostly miniatures. No details were given over the diagrams, but the author’s name and the year (though not the place) of publication was given with the solution.
| | | (23) Posted by Zalmen Kornin [Sunday, Jul 1, 2007 21:46] |
Yes, the name was Marfin Greif(f), and I'm really astonished that the unexperienced local editor was following the mistake from someone from the northern half of the ball - as repeating a mistake is not making something right, I'm really glad that apparently that was the first and only of the "200" series to land in our book dealers. Of course I was wrong myself in the presumption that should be someone from 'this or that country', just because the original title was in English - some of the best authors of books on chess problems (past or present) are American or British - and *junky* chess literature can be produced as well in every other place...
On the Polgar books - it was also a surprise to find a huge book on *chess training* some years ago in 'common' book stores here, and I acquired it mainly because of the hundreds of #2 miniatures that it contains. In fact the names and dates appears only with the solutions, but they're there - the places are not, as Michael remarks.
| | | (24) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Tuesday, Jul 3, 2007 14:23] |
I got some kind of a "legal" case now. Hopefully you can help.
Composer C sends a composition to magazine M but decides otherwise later and takes it back. He sends the same composition to magazine M2 but in the meantime M publishes the (taken back) composition. In M2 the composition is published half a year later.
a) Does the publication in M still count as first publication (e.g., as anticipation for the publication in M2)?
b) If not, which date of publication is the priority date?
| | | (25) Posted by Harry Fougiaxis [Tuesday, Jul 3, 2007 15:09] |
Refer to the Codex, Chapter VI, Article 22.
| | | (26) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Tuesday, Jul 3, 2007 17:27]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [07-07-03] |
But this doesn't help since the author took it back, thus disallowing it to appear (so the appearance in itself was illegal). And of course I knew Article 22.
PS: It wasn't me who withdrawed the problem (as an answer to MMcD's post below), I just have to judge it (in M2).
| | | (27) Posted by Michael McDowell [Tuesday, Jul 3, 2007 18:20] |
I think the Codex is perfectly clear – the earliest publication counts. You haven’t said whether you informed the editor that you wished to withdraw the composition. If you did not then the editor can hardly be blamed for publishing. If you did and the editor published anyway then you are unfortunate, but at least you know not to send anything to that particular editor again, if you feel so strongly about it. Also, if an editor simply received a request to withdraw a submission with no reasonable explanation given, he would be entitled to feel annoyed. Remember that columns are often prepared long in advance, and if an editor is being asked to make changes at the last minute then the composer is being unfair.
I have had one similar case where I asked to withdraw a problem submitted to a magazine because it happened to meet the theme of a QCT at a meeting I was attending and I felt I couldn’t risk losing the problem. If the editor had refused I would not have complained, but fortunately he was understanding and happy to fall in with my wishes.
A (slightly tongue in cheek) question. If you discovered afterwards that someone else had published the identical composition between your two publications would you still claim that the first publication was illegal?
| | | (28) Posted by Steven Dowd [Tuesday, Jul 3, 2007 20:51] |
Greif -
Yes, he even took several very good 3 movers and extended them to four moves by adding a useless check - one was a problem by Havel! Sad, really.
| | | (29) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Sunday, Jul 22, 2007 13:47]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [07-07-22] |
Well, thinking again about it all, Article 27, 2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights yields the answer to it all. I'll see what I can do to strengthen rights of composers without weakening rights of authors of books / anthologies / etc.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights
QUOTE
(2) Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Well, if I get around to do it, you can expect some proposals by me in 2007 and 2008, and this will be a point. Do we have any lawyer specialised on international rights here?
| | | (30) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Thursday, Sep 4, 2008 07:02]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [08-09-04] |
*necromancing the old thread*
Same problem for awards: Can awards be freely re-published or are these copyrighted? For example, I received four books with awards yesterday (WCCT 2,3,4 & Klüver MT) and I wonder if the awards can me made publically available (which would be very nice for WCCT awards - for Klüver MT, I'll write an article soon, I think).
Do I have to write to each author first or do we have an agreement about that that allows for example making the awards available for download? Please, someone in Jurmala ask bernd ellinghoven - or inform me if he has e-mail access there -, since he made the books with awards for at least WCCT 3 & 4, and probably 2 too!
Thanks,
Siegfried
EDIT: Small correction
| | | (31) Posted by [Thursday, Sep 4, 2008 21:25] |
Siegfried asked:
>Same problem for awards: Can awards be freely re-published or are these copyrighted?
Copyright isn't very difficult: it is basically about protecting form. The form than an author or artist gives to a work is protected, the contents of that work is not. (It has gone overboard somewhat lately, but the basic idea is simple. )
The form of the award -- the words, the structure etc of the report -- is protected. The fact that X won first prize, and that the second was shared between Y and Z cannot be protected by copyright. That isn't form. It may be protected by other means, though.
>Do I have to write to each author first or do we have an agreement about that that allows for example making the awards available for download?
I don't understand: why would someone want to download the fact that someone has won the first prize?
Are you asking about the actual problems that won? ... those *are* protected by copyright. All problems are indubitably artistic creations, and are, as such, protected by copyright. Problems that took part in a tourney are no different from problems published in a book, a chess column or a periodical in this respect.
But then, convention is a different matter ...
| | | (32) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Thursday, Sep 4, 2008 23:16] |
My opinion on copyright should be well known by now so I won't go into detail here but instead just clarify:
By "author" I meant the judges as authors of the awards. Chess luckily is not so corrupted by the false god of money that composers prevent reproduction of their works. I'm fully aware of that fact. I know that theoretically I do break international laws by reproduction of studies and problems without asking the author first but any author who would try to sue me knows that in a few weeks every composition magazine will write about that and his reputation goes down through the bottom. Here's a word for the wise: Gens una sumus - we are a family.
Of course there is no protection on sheer facts but to me it matters if a book with WCCT awards is protected since it's the difference between just scanning and uploading or scanning, asking all judges for permission to use their texts first, and then see if I can upload it.
Best,
Siegfried
| | | (33) Posted by [Friday, Sep 5, 2008 14:57]; edited by [08-09-05] |
>I know that theoretically I do break international laws by reproduction of studies and problems without asking the author first
Not theoretically. You *are* breaking it in fact. The only question is if anyone decides to prosecute or not.
>Of course there is no protection on sheer facts but to me it matters if a book with WCCT awards is protected since it's the difference between just scanning and uploading or scanning, asking all judges for permission to use their texts first, and then see if I can upload it.
If you scan and publish a book that falls within the protection time limits set up by applicable copyright law, you are infringing that law, unless the book has explicitly and publicly been put into the public domain. The only authority who can tell you otherwise is the author of the work. That is most likely the author(s) of the book, or the organization who gave him/them the job of doing it.
| | | (34) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Friday, Sep 5, 2008 16:19] |
That's why someone has to ask bernd ellinghoven if he agrees to the upload. He has printed the books.
| | | (35) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Monday, Apr 26, 2010 14:51]; edited by Sarah Hornecker [10-04-26] |
What is the usual price that should be paid per composition reprinted in a book?
Just in case I finally get around to write mine.
And don't say "nothing". I believe that au contraire to games, compositions are a protectable piece of art, of creativity, and should give the artist aome royalty.
| | | (36) Posted by Juraj Lörinc [Monday, Apr 26, 2010 19:25] |
But if you are outright rejecting answer "nothing", then your question does not make sense.
What IS the usual price PAID per composition in a book? Nothing.
What SHOULD be the USUAL price? Nobody knows. Anything above nothing is highly unusual.
| | | (37) Posted by shankar ram [Wednesday, Apr 28, 2010 16:28] |
Here's my attempt at defining what could be "paid" (other than "nothing"), in descending order of "value":
1. money! xx.yy $ per problem
2. complimentary copy of the book
3. "soft" copy of the book, perhaps with only the pages where the author's problems appear
4. discount on the book's purchase (was done for cyclone, i remember)
5. intimate author about problems published (again, was done for cyclone, along with copies of the daiagrams)
6. these days, books have websites of their own, with free sample chapters, contents and indexes. If the author's index is published here, the author at least knows how many of his problems appeared. As to "which?", that would be possible only if the index included details like source and year.
shankar ram
| | | (38) Posted by Sarah Hornecker [Wednesday, Apr 28, 2010 18:21] |
I would make the book freely available anyway. So that's not the issue.
| | | (39) Posted by Hauke Reddmann [Thursday, Apr 29, 2010 10:47] |
Personally, I would be satisfied with knowing what was
written about my problem (surely soemthing nice, it would
be new to me that problems are used as scarecrows...
waitaminnit, *I* did that once :-)
Hauke
| |
No more posts | Page: [Previous] [Next] 1 2
MatPlus.Net Forum General Composition and Copyright |
|
|
|
ISC 2024
