That has exactly the same inaccuracies as the Mail report. Presumably both are copied from the same source.
Queens Gambit and Netflix
-
- Posts: 21353
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
-
- Posts: 3576
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
The court papers say she won the Challengers in 1963 and played in the Premier in 1964-65, beating the English players mentioned.Roger de Coverly wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 4:40 pmI imagine the games against British players had been at Hastings. Did she always play in the Premier, or was there an appearance in the Challengers?
-
- Posts: 10364
- Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
- Location: Somewhere you're not
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
I would very much welcome a court hearing in which the precise description of various second-tier British players of the 1960s was argued with the help of expert witnesses.Ian Thompson wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 2:59 pmPerhaps he was of a comparable standard to Mardle, N. Littlewood, Lee and Hindle, all of whom the court papers say were also highly ranked players.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."
lostontime.blogspot.com
-
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
If she only played 59 men by 1968, (including 28 in a simul), the suggestion that she never played men is fairly (but not totally) accurate. 31 serious games, at least 18 of which were at the two Hastings appearances suggests that she mainly played women's tournaments. Netflix got it wrong, but maybe not $5M wrong...
-
- Posts: 21353
- Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 2:51 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
Hastings followed by a tournament in Iceland seem on the face of it her first recorded games against male players. That's not to say she didn't play simuls against men in the Soviet Union, but chess there seemed segregated at the higher levels of competition.Kevin Thurlow wrote: ↑Fri Sep 17, 2021 6:23 pmIf she only played 59 men by 1968, (including 28 in a simul), the suggestion that she never played men is fairly (but not totally) accurate.
-
- Posts: 1838
- Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2011 12:16 am
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
Was the dialogue in the book?
-
- Posts: 3499
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
- Location: Under Cover
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
I've still not seen it! but have now watched a 15 second clip showing the relevant bit that Nona is complaining about.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUB6P59CUko
At the end of the programme do they show one of them disclaimers:
"All characters and corporations or establishments appearing in this work are fictitious.
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. "
A smart lawyer could argue that calling her a Russian (wrong) and saying she never played men (wrong again)
they were referring to a factious character.
Though never having seen it (apart from a 15 second clip) I have been asked dozens of times is it any good?
I've always replied in the positive based mainly on the reaction from here. I hope you lot are spot on.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gUB6P59CUko
At the end of the programme do they show one of them disclaimers:
"All characters and corporations or establishments appearing in this work are fictitious.
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. "
A smart lawyer could argue that calling her a Russian (wrong) and saying she never played men (wrong again)
they were referring to a factious character.
Though never having seen it (apart from a 15 second clip) I have been asked dozens of times is it any good?
I've always replied in the positive based mainly on the reaction from here. I hope you lot are spot on.
-
- Posts: 3576
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
... and another smart lawyer would argue that claiming that a fictional character with the same name as a real person, both of whom were women's world chess champion, was coincidental is ludicrous.Geoff Chandler wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 12:19 pm"All characters and corporations or establishments appearing in this work are fictitious.
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead, is purely coincidental. "
A smart lawyer could argue that calling her a Russian (wrong) and saying she never played men (wrong again)
they were referring to a factious character.
-
- Posts: 3499
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
- Location: Under Cover
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
Hi Ian,
It was a clumsy and needless error. The only winners financially will be our smart lawyers.
Netflix had a chance back in December to rectify it with an apology, now they could (and perhaps should) settle out of court.
It was a clumsy and needless error. The only winners financially will be our smart lawyers.
Netflix had a chance back in December to rectify it with an apology, now they could (and perhaps should) settle out of court.
-
- Posts: 3576
- Joined: Wed Jul 02, 2008 4:31 pm
- Location: Awbridge, Hampshire
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
I wouldn't be surprised if the Netflix lawyer argues that it hasn't done Gaprindashvili any financial damage at all. On the contrary, it's raised her public profile and increased her earning potential, not cost her the minimum of $75,000 her lawyers claim.Geoff Chandler wrote: ↑Sat Sep 18, 2021 1:37 pmHi Ian,
It was a clumsy and needless error. The only winners financially will be our smart lawyers.
Netflix had a chance back in December to rectify it with an apology, now they could (and perhaps should) settle out of court.
-
- Posts: 36
- Joined: Thu Sep 01, 2016 3:42 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
The "Queen's Gambit" director delivered 'the worst acceptance speech in history':
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 23241.html
On a non-chess topic Gillian Anderson, who played Margaret Thatcher in "The Crown", was asked a question by a reporter which ranks up there with the one put by an (American?) reporter who asked The Proclaimers where they met.
https://www.independent.co.uk/arts-ente ... 23241.html
On a non-chess topic Gillian Anderson, who played Margaret Thatcher in "The Crown", was asked a question by a reporter which ranks up there with the one put by an (American?) reporter who asked The Proclaimers where they met.
I was a victim of a series of accidents, as are we all.
-
- Posts: 5852
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
"one put by an (American?) reporter who asked The Proclaimers where they met."
The Corrs suffered a similar fate in England...
The Corrs suffered a similar fate in England...
-
- Posts: 607
- Joined: Mon May 16, 2011 3:45 pm
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
It's a bit surprising that the chess adviser for the series, Kasparov, did not pick up on that error.
Is there precedent for lawsuits based on statements made by a fictitious character?
Is there precedent for lawsuits based on statements made by a fictitious character?
-
- Posts: 5268
- Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
- Location: Millom, Cumbria
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
A charitable view is that the statement was originally intended to be, correctly, that NG never played against men *for the world title* - and that this somehow got "simplified". But if so, you would think Netflix would admit they "misspoke" rather than digging in as they have done.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)
-
- Posts: 3499
- Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
- Location: Under Cover
Re: Queens Gambit and Netflix
Hi Reg,Reg Clucas wrote: ↑Mon Sep 20, 2021 3:55 pm...Is there precedent for lawsuits based on statements made by a fictitious character?
There are some examples in the link below and how the ' "all persons fictitious" disclaimer came into being.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/All_perso ... disclaimer
It also has some funny examples:
South Park
"All characters and events in this show – even those based on real people – are entirely fictional. All celebrity voices are impersonated – poorly."
You Narzy(sic) Spy with the Three Stooges.
""Any resemblance between the characters in this picture and any persons, living or dead, is a miracle,"
Thunderbirds set in 2068
"None of the characters appearing in this photoplay intentionally resemble any persons living or dead… SINCE THEY DO NOT YET EXIST"
Also read the 'Effectiveness' section.
Fabian (Fabiano Anthony Forte) was awarded a small stake in a film even though he not mentioned but bore a close enough resemblance.
I recall how the friends and family were upset how one of the astronauts (now deceased) was portrayed in Apollo 13.
Do not know if a claim was made or settled.