Yorkshire vs ECF disparity

[Kevin Thurlow]

I spoke to a copyright expert, who said individual results could be considered "facts", but a total list would be copyrightable. However, as the grades are kept on a database, it could be an infringement extracting a series of results. See http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/1997 ... e/data.pdf

So it is unclear. It could depend on whether ECF wanted to take expensive legal action with no great hope of victory.

[Michele Clack]

I imagine legal action would be the last thing the ECF would want at the moment. However, Yorkshires actions do seem questionable in this matter. Certainly not something to be proud of.

[Adam Raoof]

Let's not get too carried away - as Jon says on the Chessnuts site, "Chessnuts shows ECF grading codes, and uses the ECF grades of players visiting Yorkshire. I am grateful to the ECF for allowing this use of their copyright data."

[Michele Clack]

Hm call me old fashioned but it still doesn't seem very good to me, unless of course all the people using the Yorkshire system are ECF members as well. Mind you looking at another thread it seems like they have found a way to do monthly updates. Perhaps the solution would be to put them in charge of the ECF grading!

[MartinCarpenter]

Oh, if you're wandering about the reason for Yorkshire having a separate list then that goes back quite a while and features the sort of chess politics that you really don't want to know about

Until this year very few Yorkshire players were members but I think a good number should be members this year with the Yorkshire league and congresses all being signed up. A lot of the local leagues aren't.

The monthly (gamely in fact) grade updates are something of a double edged sword because yes they're fun but they do also give a lot of randomness in the grades except when people are playing a lot of games every year. So you tend to use the yearly grades for everything important anyway.

[Michele Clack]

Ah I see. Let's not open old wounds then! Sounds good that a lot of Yorkshire players are now joining the ECF. A very positive step forwards.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Chessnuts shows ECF grading codes, and uses the ECF grades of players visiting Yorkshire. I am grateful to the ECF for allowing this use of their copyright data."

which takes care of any copyright argument...

[E Michael White]

But doesn’t explain the ECF/A Raoof granting licensed usage without payment.

.... copyright expert, who said individual results could be considered "facts", but a total list would be copyrightable.

Don’t forget grades contain intellectual property as regards overall estimates of parameters for:- level, deflation, relevance, spread, persistency and response. It’s not just adding up numbers as some of the statisticians would have you believe.

[Martin Regan]

A hobbyhorse of mine

I start from the premise that those who create their own grading list are simply stealing the results of the work of hundreds of ECF volunteers from down the years.

Had I stayed on I had intended to test this - it was the core of my idea of how to give a membership scheme strong foundations.

I had one of the top IP lawyers in the City look at this (at my considerable expense) and the advice was as certain as you can get from lawyers. If I recall the protection lay in the specific player grades under EU data and IP protection laws - the three figure system was also protected (though the mathematical formula was not) and although copyright was iffy - there was also a strong case under UK "passing off" legislation. But it was the IP protection that was most solid.

Funnily enough, I think I first mentioned this (threatened this ) to Sean, when a league he ran was thinking of doing its own grade, though I could be wrong in that. I was certainly intending to turn the ECF's attention to the Yorkshire grading list.

[Sean Hewitt]

Funnily enough, I think I first mentioned this (threatened this ) to Sean, when a league he ran was thinking of doing its own grade, though I could be wrong in that. I was certainly intending to turn the ECF's attention to the Yorkshire grading list.

Indeed! My advice was that we were fine as we did not in any way use ECF grades - so we wouldn't have done. However, that of course all proved unnecessary. I have no idea if Yorkshire do, or Cumbria intend to use ECF grades in their calculations. Even if they do, taking remedial action is likely to be expensive.

[Roger de Coverly]

I have no idea if Yorkshire do, or Cumbria intend to use ECF grades in their calculations.

Yorkshire certainly do, but they acknowledge the permission of the ECF. This was earlier on this thread.

[Andrew Wainwright]

This whole thread leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.

When a game that we all love playing comes down to legal disputes over grading systems it is enough to make the most devoted lover of the game want to walk away all together.

I don't know what Martin wanted to achieve by starting this thread but in typical forum fashion all it has led to is everyone putting the boot in because Yorkshire dare to not pay game fees in their local leagues and have their own grading system (which by the way is one of the best run chess sites I have every come across).

I attended the Yorkshire AGM and spoke in favour of the YCA Saturday league paying game fee. However, I do not support the local Yorkshire evening leagues paying game fee. My reason for, what some might consider a contradictory stance on these two points, is the difference in the people who play evening leagues chess and those who play weekend chess. I firmly believe that the standard play congresses, counties and weekend leagues should support the ECF, but John Smith who is a pensioner and enjoys his one game of chess a week at his local pub should not have to fund the ECF through game fee. He gets nothing from the ECF and just wants to play a game he enjoys with his friends.

The Yorkshire grading system is an asset to chess and does wonders for the organisation and promotion of the game in the region. I know of no one in chess who does more for the game than Jon who runs the site for the YCA. Therefore I find it really frustrating when people who sit on the sides feel able to criticse, comment and threaten legal action without knowing any of the background facts.

I am probably one of the only Intellectual Property solicitors on this forum with first hand knowledge of this area of law. How ironic that I'm the only one who seemingly doesn't want to talk about the legalities and would rather discuss more constructive topics to promote chess.

After the ECF's recent track record though it would not surprise me if this farce turns into their next pointless crusade. When will someone save the ECF from themselves?

If the ECF decide to take this further then all it will lead to is a complete separation of Yorkshire from the rest of the country, with a completely stand alone grading system. If that happens then I know of at least one Yorkshire man who will never play in an ECF graded event again (and I will never run any of the tournaments which I run as ECF graded events either). Please explain how that outcome will help to promote chess?

[Roger de Coverly]

I firmly believe that the standard play congresses, counties and weekend leagues should support the ECF, but John Smith who is a pensioner and enjoys his one game of chess a week at his local pub should not have to fund the ECF through game fee. He gets nothing from the ECF and just wants to play a game he enjoys with his friends.

That doesn't just apply in Yorkshire. In the rest of the country, there's a recognition of some sort of requirement to have a national chess organisation and that should arguably apply to anyone who plays with clocks in an organised competition. That doesn't mean every individual should need to be an ECF member, nor does it have to mean that the person playing one game pays the same as one playing one hundred. It does however mean that everyone playing enough to qualify should have a grade, not for their own sake, but for their opposition.

The Yorkshire local leagues have opted out of offering financial support to national chess for something like twenty years. A reason why they have been able to do this, whilst other near identical leagues in other parts of the country have not, is because of the established local grading system

[Adam Raoof]

This whole thread leaves a very sour taste in my mouth.

When a game that we all love playing comes down to legal disputes over grading systems it is enough to make the most devoted lover of the game want to walk away all together.

I don't know what Martin wanted to achieve by starting this thread but in typical forum fashion all it has led to is everyone putting the boot in because Yorkshire dare to not pay game fees in their local leagues and have their own grading system (which by the way is one of the best run chess sites I have every come across).

I attended the Yorkshire AGM and spoke in favour of the YCA Saturday league paying game fee. However, I do not support the local Yorkshire evening leagues paying game fee. My reason for, what some might consider a contradictory stance on these two points, is the difference in the people who play evening leagues chess and those who play weekend chess. I firmly believe that the standard play congresses, counties and weekend leagues should support the ECF, but John Smith who is a pensioner and enjoys his one game of chess a week at his local pub should not have to fund the ECF through game fee. He gets nothing from the ECF and just wants to play a game he enjoys with his friends.

The Yorkshire grading system is an asset to chess and does wonders for the organisation and promotion of the game in the region. I know of no one in chess who does more for the game than Jon who runs the site for the YCA. Therefore I find it really frustrating when people who sit on the sides feel able to criticse, comment and threaten legal action without knowing any of the background facts.

I am probably one of the only Intellectual Property solicitors on this forum with first hand knowledge of this area of law. How ironic that I'm the only one who seemingly doesn't want to talk about the legalities and would rather discuss more constructive topics to promote chess.

After the ECF's recent track record though it would not surprise me if this farce turns into their next pointless crusade. When will someone save the ECF from themselves?

If the ECF decide to take this further then all it will lead to is a complete separation of Yorkshire from the rest of the country, with a completely stand alone grading system. If that happens then I know of at least one Yorkshire man who will never play in an ECF graded event again (and I will never run any of the tournaments which I run as ECF graded events either). Please explain how that outcome will help to promote chess?

I am genuinely confused. There has never, as far as I can tell, been any suggestion of legal action either on this thread or in any of the meetings I have attended. I have a great deal of admiration for Jon Griffiths and if some leagues don't want to be ECF graded then I would be disappointed, but really, it's not the end of the world. The events will still be graded. Just not by the ECF.

[Sean Hewitt]

I firmly believe that the standard play congresses, counties and weekend leagues should support the ECF, but John Smith who is a pensioner and enjoys his one game of chess a week at his local pub should not have to fund the ECF through game fee. He gets nothing from the ECF and just wants to play a game he enjoys with his friends.

Andrew - If every evening league in the country took that view, what do you think would happen to the costs charged to Gold and Silver members?