Chess history trivia

[John Townsend]

Yes, very good, Christopher. He was from Nottingham.

[Gerard Killoran]

Attention. A new question. Google at the ready:

The Dundee 1867 tournament was attended by Steinitz, De Vere, Blackburne and others. But who represented the Midlands?

Spens, Robertson and Dr J. C. Fraser all represented the Scottish Midlands

[MJMcCready]

Gerard,

Yes, I know of the on-line scans of Chess Characters, and I absolutely deplore what has been done.

However, that's an entirely different matter. Mr McCready's contribution to the present thread should be judged on its own merits.

I take your point but I think I am justified in saying that my motives are sound. I wasn't thinking about the owner of the material but rather the writer himself. And I think we can all agree that our beloved Diggle loved to be read. I think he would be happy to know that those from the club he was once a member of are able to read his great work, and in my opinion that supersedes the wishes of the owner (whoever that may be). If I thought Mr. Diggle was unhappy with a newer generation being able to access his writings, then I would remove them yes but since he wrote so well and was very funny indeed at times I consider it life-affirming...I thought of it as a celebration of great literature that is not easy to get hold of. That was what I thought at the time, anyway that's another matter but if you do wish to discuss this you can always PM me. Apologies if I am a bit naive but I don't see anything wrong in showing great work to others with a similar interest, especially when some of it relates to a county that so few have ever written about; namely my own.

[MJMcCready]

Given that a thread already exists for Chess history trivia, I would suggest we don't want to start a new thread or heading whenever a question contains some distressing information.

In the past, a question which referred to the burning down of Parsloe's by a 15-year-old boy, who was sentenced to death, escaped censure and the thread was even favoured by contributions from Gerard:

viewtopic.php?f=27&t=7915&p=292562&hili ... 7s#p292562

Would it be okay to ask questions about chess players who have jumped through windows?

[Matt Mackenzie]

I would say how Vera Menchik met her end was fairly well known, but not so much Agnes Stevenson.

(IIRC the latter's demise featured as a news item in the first ever issue of CHESS)

It's on her Wikipedia page, which like other sources, can be found by a simple Google search using the facts given in the question.

Perhaps we should rename the thread, "Google this".

You could do this for all sorts of stuff, but where's the fun in that?

I think a lot of the time, the idea is that you might know it *without* googling.

[John Townsend]

Polite note to M.J. McCready:

Re: Chess Characters:

Clearly, you appreciate Diggle's writing, as do many of us, but that does not give you the right to reproduce what is not yours. You do not have the right to use either Edward Winter's format, as publisher, or the content.

I feel it would be best all round if you took down the Diggle material.

[MJMcCready]

Polite note to M.J. McCready:

Re: Chess Characters:

Clearly, you appreciate Diggle's writing, as do many of us, but that does not give you the right to reproduce what is not yours. You do not have the right to use either Edward Winter's format, as publisher, or the content.

I feel it would be best all round if you took down the Diggle material.

Do you? What do you think Diggle would say? I'm not being facetious but I think he would prefer to be read, and perhaps naively so, I think that counts for more. Do you think the owner wants the best for Diggle or is he acting out of self-interest? If I were to say to the owner (which I think is Mr. Winter right?) would Diggle want a much broader readership is he going to take offence? I just assumed he is bound to want that, seeing he was such a great writer.

[John Townsend]

Mr McCready,

Diggle was a great believer in the rule of law and respect for other people's work, so your present stance on this matter is certainly not what he would have wished. On the contrary, he would have deplored it.

[John Upham]

Mr McCready,

Diggle was a great believer in the rule of law and respect for other people's work, so your present stance on this matter is certainly not what he would have wished. On the contrary, he would have deplored it.

Was EGW GHDs approved publisher? How did EGW assert his "rights" to publish GHDs material?

I know that EGW had it in his head that he could copyright the scan of something. I'd be curious to know if he was correct: I somewhat doubt it.

Not quite sure how he was able to convince himself of that.

Obviously he would felt hard done by having obtained primary source material at some expense and then some wag downloaded his published scan. I'm sure that would have annoyed him. However, copyright is a different matter.

[Gerard Killoran]

The two volumes of 'Chess Characters: Reminiscences of a Badmaster' were published by 'Chess Notes, Geneva, 1984'.

Wikipedia also gives:
Geoffrey Harber Diggle (6 December 1902 – 13 February 1993)

So they were published during the lifetime of the author.

I'm sure Diggle would have had something to say if he'd been bootlegged.

[John Upham]

The two volumes of 'Chess Characters: Reminiscences of a Badmaster' were published by 'Chess Notes, Geneva, 1984'.

Wikipedia also gives:
Geoffrey Harber Diggle (6 December 1902 – 13 February 1993)

So they were published during the lifetime of the author.

I'm sure Diggle would have had something to say if he'd been bootlegged.

It's a fair cop: I'm convinced.

[MJMcCready]

Mr McCready,

Diggle was a great believer in the rule of law and respect for other people's work, so your present stance on this matter is certainly not what he would have wished. On the contrary, he would have deplored it.

I'd certainly be very happy to see evidence of this. If you could link examples which show what you say that would be appreciated.

[MJMcCready]

The two volumes of 'Chess Characters: Reminiscences of a Badmaster' were published by 'Chess Notes, Geneva, 1984'.

Wikipedia also gives:
Geoffrey Harber Diggle (6 December 1902 – 13 February 1993)

So they were published during the lifetime of the author.

I'm sure Diggle would have had something to say if he'd been bootlegged.

It's a fair cop: I'm convinced.

He hasn't ben bootlegged, there's no element of profiteering involved in his work, and also, using pejorative terms isn't going to get you very far. I sincerely hope you aren't going to try and tell me England has ever had a greater writer on chess than Diggle, you don't believe that do you. All exemplifications of his work are celebrations of how great he was. Most writers like to be read, and as I have already said, that supercedes law, which is often whimsical. Without doubt it should be the case that the more of us we Brits who read Diggle the better we are for he. In case you don't know, he once delivered a line that cannot be beaten. Art is, for the most part celebrated, and all efforts that lean towards that all done for the right reason. Copyright law is whimsical and pays no attention to the wishes of the author. You can't say Edwards Winter owns Newsflash and Diggle's writing. Diggle wrote it, it belongs to him. Yes possession is 9/10ths of the law as they say but the bottom line is the owner has taken something that doesn't belong to him (usually to profit from him) but since art is usually an object of celebration and not profit, my reasons for making his works accessible to a wider audience are justified in my opinion. I can tell from how Diggle writes he likes to be read, the are many stylistic devices in play that show that.

[Kevin Thurlow]

"Most writers like to be read, and as I have already said, that supercedes law,"

Tell that to the judge...

(@ pedantry lovers, yes I did see the typo)

[MJMcCready]

I think you are missing the point somewhat, publishers produce what writers give them. Because they acquire publications for business related reasons the principle motive being profit, why do you assume that a law estimates the true value or worth of a piece of literature? As you must surely know, when someone purchases the rights to something they want to profit from it. Why do you consider that to be of more significance than exemplifying Diggle's great writing. You still haven't said what Diggle would want, I very much doubt he'd object, since he spent quite some time in my county, wrote about it numerous times and always with affection. Just out of interest, what do you think copyright laws are based on, could it be to enable those who own content to have full control over it's distribution thus act out of self-interest? I'm sure we can agree that most great writers like to be read, can we not? And sincere apologies if I sound repartitious but if you read Diggle closely, you will see stylistic devices which clearly indicate he has broad audience in mind. How about we move away from this, if I may say so, rather petty disagreement over where ownership lies and discuss why Diggle was so well received and also great to read? I ask this because discussions over Diggle should centre around ownership but rather how great he was. You must surely realize that.