5 ms·

Do you know if this ruling applies to word lists of the English language such as those used in tournament Scrabble?

bee_rider 3y ago
As loathe as I am to say anything nice about our copyright system or scrabble (a territory capturing game without the most obscure and silly rules for capturing space), it does seem like the sort of thing that ought to be covered.
- callalex 3y ago
  That may have been true in the past, but the game is now over 75 years old. There is just absolutely zero chance that the inventors of the game would have been more motivated to invent if they were given a longer exclusive term. Since the stated goal of copyright is to advance the progress of the arts, there is no justifiable reason the public should continue granting exclusivity to the game at this point in time.
  - clausecker 3y ago
    The word lists are frequently updated to cover innovations in language. E.g. you'll be allowed to play VAX and ZONKEY starting in 2024.
  - bee_rider 3y ago
    The game itself, sure. The list, I’m not sure. I mean if someone is actively curating a tournament list, that seems like ongoing working that ought to be protectable somehow. Then again, various sports maintain a tournament scene without protected rules, so I may be wrong about this.
    - MichaelZuo 3y ago
      If scrabble world lists are copyrightable then why wouldn't telephone directories be copyrightable?
Turing_Machine 3y ago
I believe it was settled long ago that mere lists (e.g., telephone directories) with no creative content are not copyrightable in the United States. I'm not familiar with the Scrabble word lists, but if that's all they are I'd guess they'd fall under that ruling. Dictionaries, on the other hand, are copyrightable because there's creative work involved in writing the definitions.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- pbhjpbhj 3y ago
  I feel like there would be a case to answer if it went to court in the UK, Scrabble words are not an entirely arbitrary selection, nor are they all words in [most] regular dictionaries AFAICT. The list has been curated in order to provide a specific set of rules for a game: there seems to be a creative act of compilation. To say it another way; it's a factual presentation - but the fact (of which words are in the list) was created for the game. This makes it unlike an almanac, say, where the list is dictated by past events. It's perhaps similar to the Guinness Book of Records, where the choice of records to present is creative (along with the usual creative aspects of a book, composition of pages, choice of accompanying images, etc.). One consideration a court might take is that the list cannot be generated without copying from the established Scrabble Dictionary because one otherwise would not know whether to include or exclude any particular word. A list of 'all existing English words of 1-3 letters', say, would be fine though.

As loathe as I am to say anything nice about our copyright system or scrabble (a territory capturing game without the most obscure and silly rules for capturing space), it does seem like the sort of thing that ought to be covered.

callalex 3y ago
That may have been true in the past, but the game is now over 75 years old. There is just absolutely zero chance that the inventors of the game would have been more motivated to invent if they were given a longer exclusive term. Since the stated goal of copyright is to advance the progress of the arts, there is no justifiable reason the public should continue granting exclusivity to the game at this point in time.
- clausecker 3y ago
  The word lists are frequently updated to cover innovations in language. E.g. you'll be allowed to play VAX and ZONKEY starting in 2024.
- bee_rider 3y ago
  The game itself, sure. The list, I’m not sure. I mean if someone is actively curating a tournament list, that seems like ongoing working that ought to be protectable somehow. Then again, various sports maintain a tournament scene without protected rules, so I may be wrong about this.
  - MichaelZuo 3y ago
    If scrabble world lists are copyrightable then why wouldn't telephone directories be copyrightable?

Turing_Machine 3y ago

I believe it was settled long ago that mere lists (e.g., telephone directories) with no creative content are not copyrightable in the United States. I'm not familiar with the Scrabble word lists, but if that's all they are I'd guess they'd fall under that ruling. Dictionaries, on the other hand, are copyrightable because there's creative work involved in writing the definitions.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
pbhjpbhj 3y ago
I feel like there would be a case to answer if it went to court in the UK, Scrabble words are not an entirely arbitrary selection, nor are they all words in [most] regular dictionaries AFAICT. The list has been curated in order to provide a specific set of rules for a game: there seems to be a creative act of compilation. To say it another way; it's a factual presentation - but the fact (of which words are in the list) was created for the game. This makes it unlike an almanac, say, where the list is dictated by past events. It's perhaps similar to the Guinness Book of Records, where the choice of records to present is creative (along with the usual creative aspects of a book, composition of pages, choice of accompanying images, etc.). One consideration a court might take is that the list cannot be generated without copying from the established Scrabble Dictionary because one otherwise would not know whether to include or exclude any particular word. A list of 'all existing English words of 1-3 letters', say, would be fine though.