Nice 74

Historical knowledge and information regarding our great game.
Post Reply
Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Nice 74

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri May 14, 2021 3:52 pm

"No it doesn't, because there is also such a thing as "fair use", the display or quotation of excerpts for legitimate purposes."

I know - but I don't think an entire page or article constitutes an "excerpt".

In fairness, these things are rarely pursued. Publishers possibly regard such incidents as a free advert!

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Fri May 14, 2021 4:21 pm

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 3:52 pm
I know - but I don't think an entire page or article constitutes an "excerpt".
Well it does if you're demonstrating an entire page or article has been copied from one source to another, doesn't it? (How else would you do it, do you think?)
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Nice 74

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri May 14, 2021 8:58 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 2:48 pm
and had peope made this point in 1977 there would have been no need for people to still be making it forty years later.
Simple as that, really.
On that we are in total agreement.

Even if you are not obliged to do so the simple, respectful, morally correct
and the just in case you are legally bound thing to do is to acknowledge.

All it would have taken was one sentence in the 'Thank You All' bit.
(The Acknowledgements....and who reads those anyway......er......it's not in there is it?)

So we come to that grey day in 1977, Ray is putting the finishes touches to his book.

"I'd also like to thank the British Chess Magazine for allowing me to reproduce..."
....hang on.....I do not need the BCM's permission to repro my own stuff.....and so it started.

Why Ray did not give BCM a thank you nod I have no idea. Ask him.

Edit: Now I'm thinking, have I always acknowledged.

Once when I first hit the net, I used one of Edward Winters pictures, Janowski, I think we both have
a soft spot for this underrated player, I honestly thought the net was public domain.
Had a polite email, and added a thank you at the bottom. After that I always do. (unless I have genuinely forgotten)
Though I rarely use other writers notes, it's important that I know that I should acknowledge.

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Nice 74

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Fri May 14, 2021 10:04 pm

"Well it does if you're demonstrating an entire page or article has been copied from one source to another, doesn't it? (How else would you do it, do you think?)"

Well, it would be an attempt at a defence of course. I consulted a copyright expert, who said that in the principle of "fair dealing", which is similar to the USA's "fair use", the original owner of the copyright would have to demonstrate that they had lost because of the copying of the work, and in any of the cases here, it is unlikely that sales of back issues of BCM would drop dramatically as a result of the copying. In the original case of Ray, it may be that he retained copyright of course. Also, in your demonstration, you could argue that you are not gaining financially with the copying.

The copyright point remains, as there are many cases, where people lift material, especially photographs (as Geoff has already said) and just think they can publish them.

I'm not sure your argument above holds, it is clear (to me at least) that drinking six pints of beer and driving at 100 mph is very dangerous - you don't actually need to do that to prove it.

Anyway, apologies for interrupting the anti-Ray Jihad.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Sat May 15, 2021 6:23 am

Geoff Chandler wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 8:58 pm
Why Ray did not give BCM a thank you nod I have no idea.
Because it's his habit to cheat, Geoff, to see what he can get away with. You know this, and in fact everybody knows this, and it's just a question of whether we are invested in pretending otherwise.

(On one level this stuff is almost funny. "Why does Ray do this thing that Ray always does, I have no idea, it's a mystery, why not ask him." I say almost funny rather than funny as such.)
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 10:04 pm
In the original case of Ray, it may be that he retained copyright of course
No, it may not, because it would be so stated, and it isn't - which is why I said this, above.
JustinHorton wrote:
Fri May 14, 2021 2:48 pm
Which is not solely the author unless specifcally asserted otherwise on publication. (This does happen, sometimes.)
There is no "may be" and I do not see the value in imagining one into existence let alone dignifying it with an "of course".



Once again, it's as simple as that. Ray passed off a load of work he'd previously had published as new, which he did because it's his habit to do that, and in doing so he cheated the readers, and cheating people is what he's been doing ever since, on varying levels of seriousness but all of it pretty trashy.

It's very easy to establish that this is true. It's much harder to establish why all manner of people over a long period of time have chosen to obscure this truth by blowing smoke every time the question of Ray comes up, but as I say, that's what makes the story of Ray the story of English chess. What an unflattering portrait it is.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 5821
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Nice 74

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sat May 15, 2021 10:22 am

"There is no "may be" and I do not see the value in imagining one into existence let alone dignifying it with an "of course"."

The first part is not true; and as for the second part, it is very worthwhile considering all possibilities, even if they are rejected later. I know you have a thing about Ray, but the unbiased observer may think that using the same annotations for the same game is not desperately important, although it is lazy.

I asked before

"just out of idle curiosity, do you think there are other worthwhile targets in English chess? There have been dodgy financial deals, favouring of some players at the expense of others, child abuse and support of child abuse etc..."

and you claimed twice not to understand the question.

Do you understand now?

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Sat May 15, 2021 11:17 am

Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 10:22 am
it is very worthwhile considering all possibilities
But not ones which rely entirely on supposition
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 10:22 am
I know you have a thing about Ray
It's a "being able to see the elephant in the room" kind of thing
Kevin Thurlow wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 10:22 am
using the same annotations for the same game is not desperately important
And that's how the whole process works, people giving it oh-it's-not-important from the mid-Seventies up to the present day, and I don't propose to have any respect for it.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Sat May 15, 2021 11:26 am

I mean I do want to insist on this. The "oh it's not very important" defence is garbage, for a number of reasons, but perhaps most importantly because it's precisely because Ray was allowed to gey away with the supposedly trivial items that he was emboldened to believe he would get away with the more serious acts he committed later. (Moreover, once people start turning a blind eye, it is more difficult to speak up later on, not least because they will have to explain why they didn't do so earlier.) But every time, it was oh, nothing to see, not at Nice, not with Batsford and not at Baguio.

That's the history and that's the reasons for the history, and it's important to say so and to recognise it.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Nice 74

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat May 15, 2021 11:41 am

Hi Justin,

Still do not care if he re-cycles his stuff, I'm agreeing it would have been so easy
to have prevented this thread and others like it from ever appearing. (yet again)

I'm of course disappointed he does it, maybe that is because I cannot fathom out why he persists in doing it.
(Apart from the fact it is easy to just paste in something to his piece in The Article rather than rewrite it,)

Whilst it is the polite thing to do, not acknowledge that something he has written has appeared
somewhere else before, in this case magazine to book, I suspect it is legally, if not ethically, sound.
He is hardly going to write;' I'd like to thank myself for giving myself permission to re-use this bit.'

I'm not too sure Ray's transgressions in print portray English Chess in an unflattering manner.
He has done a lot of good for the game. Upsetting a few people because he does a bit of slap-dash
in print in his own name is hardly the fault of English Chess.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Sat May 15, 2021 11:42 am

Geoff Chandler wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 11:41 am
Upsetting a few people because he does a bit of slap-dash in print in his own name is hardly the fault of English Chess.
No, the fault of English chess is forty years of this kind of buffoonery.
Geoff Chandler wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 11:41 am
I'm of course disappointed he does it, maybe that is because I cannot fathom out why he persists in doing it.
Yes you can. He's a career cheat, it's his habit and his modus operandi, and you know this and in fact we all know this.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 3486
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Nice 74

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat May 15, 2021 1:48 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Sat May 15, 2021 11:42 am

No, the fault of English chess is forty years of this kind of buffoonery.

Yes you can. He's a career cheat, it's his habit and his modus operandi, and you know this and in fact we all know this.
Cannot see what English Chess has to do with Ray cutting and pasting his own stuff into his own articles.
The only people who seem to continually care about it here are you (against) - me (who thinks it's a storm in an inkpot ).

I do not know what it is you expect English Chess to do regarding Ray, the ECF are not into banning
freedom of speech (even if it re-cycled in from elsewhere.) What action do want to them take?

'...a career cheat' Oh Dear.

Ray is now 73, he has done no real harm to anyone, all that has suffered it is his own reputation.
Is it not time to just let it go. Hope you do not come chasing after me when I'm 73 - three years from now.
You have made your point, in some cases good points, but do you have to every time his name is mentioned.
This re-hashing of old material is contagious, you are doing it.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 10364
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Nice 74

Post by JustinHorton » Sat May 15, 2021 2:01 pm

I think a drastic reduction in the quantity of whining and humbug would do just fine
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
Gerard Killoran
Posts: 1006
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Nice 74

Post by Gerard Killoran » Sat May 15, 2021 3:00 pm

Hi Geoff

take some time to read this before you try to defend Keene any further

http://streathambrixtonchess.blogspot.c ... ambit.html

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 5205
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Nice 74

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat May 15, 2021 3:15 pm

I was aware of that piece, but had never read it properly before.

Not much to add really, is there?
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Nick Ivell
Posts: 1138
Joined: Wed Aug 31, 2011 6:33 pm

Re: Nice 74

Post by Nick Ivell » Sat May 15, 2021 3:35 pm

Of course that whole affair stank, but was not Miles initially complicit?

Post Reply