Life In 19x19

Harleqin wrote:Perhaps they bought a GoGoD CD?

And you think that gives them the right to put the games on their web site?

imabuddha wrote:

Harleqin wrote:They most likely simply copied those short descriptions.

[snip]

You might assume that they simply imported the whole GoGoD data into their database.

Which is the more likely assumption, that they took the time to copy (some of?) the game descriptions and paste them into the corresponding SGF files which they obtained from other sources, or they just copied all the GoGoD game files?

Occam's razor suggests the latter.

Rather than speculate, why not ask them?
It is possible they do not know the origin of all games.

Harleqin wrote:Perhaps they bought a GoGoD CD?

So by your logic it would be OK for a purchaser of Microsoft Office to post a copy of it on their website?

Javaness wrote:Rather than speculate, why not ask them?
It is possible they do not know the origin of all games.

I'm not the rights holder so I'm not going to ask them. The intent of my prior post was merely to point out that the most likely explanation was wholesale copying of GoGoD games.

It also indicates that unless the Twitter account is an elaborate fabrication (something I find implausible) they did not import sgfs wholesale from GoGoD in one burst. That does not answer all questions raised here, of course.

Who owns game records? Are they "ownable"? Aren't those are all over the place? My version of SmartGo program just came with 45 thousand games in it! Do I own these games, because they exist in my hard drive? If not, how can there be someone's property without their knowledge?

Toge wrote:Who owns game records? Are they "ownable"? Aren't those are all over the place? My version of SmartGo program just came with 45 thousand games in it! Do I own these games, because they exist in my hard drive? If not, how can there be someone's property without their knowledge?

This has been discussed here and on GD many times. It has to do with the actual organization of records, which is, indeed, copyrightable.

kirkmc wrote:This has been discussed here and on GD many times. It has to do with the actual organization of records, which is, indeed, copyrightable.

- What gives someone a right to copyright something?


Person1 -> creates thing 1

Person2 -> creates thing 2 -> copyrights it

thing 1 = thing 2
Person1 is a violator, because he created something without someone else's permission.

Apparently copyright defies all logic and common sense.

Toge wrote:- What gives someone a right to copyright something?

The answer to your question differs by country.

In the USA your example is incorrect.

If you really want to know more then this is a good place to start --> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyright

SL also has some info:
http://senseis.xmp.net/?KifuCopyrightDiscussion
http://senseis.xmp.net/?path=CopyrightA ... Discussion
http://senseis.xmp.net/?JapaneseCopyrightLaw

Toge wrote:

kirkmc wrote:This has been discussed here and on GD many times. It has to do with the actual organization of records, which is, indeed, copyrightable.

- What gives someone a right to copyright something?


Person1 -> creates thing 1

Person2 -> creates thing 2 -> copyrights it

thing 1 = thing 2
Person1 is a violator, because he created something without someone else's permission.

Apparently copyright defies all logic and common sense.

That's actually how patents work (though it's not quite that simple). You don't technically need to "copyright" anything any more; it is an automatic process. (At least in the US.) However, you may be asked to prove anteriority if a dispute arises. So many authors register works with different groups for such proof if it becomes necessary.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophy_of_copyright

Philosophy of copyright is another great page for this discussion. I think historical games are closer to "discovery" or "fact" than they are to "invention", because the one who has the record didn't likely play the game himself. Former cannot be patented, latter can.

True, the games are more or less "discovered" and not "created", and therefore not copyrightable (in US and European law, in Asia this may be different).

But the thing that's protected by copyright is not the game itself, but the database of games. The database of games is "created" by someone. That's "creative work". So using an individual game out of the database is legal, but just taking the whole database and importing it into yours is not.

I'd be curious to see what you guys think of http://gokifu.com, where anyone can upload a game record. Should they be held responsible if users submit games that are from commercial databases?

nagano wrote:I'd be curious to see what you guys think of http://gokifu.com, where anyone can upload a game record. Should they be held responsible if users submit games that are from commercial databases?

They could add a "report" button just like youtube. But I don't know how to check if a report is valid...
And of course it's unclear if individual games are protected by copyright at all. In particular this might depend on the presence of commentary on the game.
It might be a wise decision to buy some commercial databases and create a blacklist out of them.

So games are not creative work, but game collections are. Copyright law is not at all ridiculous or misguided.