A little question please

[kev]

Let's say, that if I were to start my own on-line horse racing biz, and was to have info like pace performance ratings, form, class blah blah blah. I was using the DRF pp's to break this info down and the only thing I would being using that would be copied out of the form was the horses name, jockey, trainer, weight. Could DRF or Equibase stop me from doing this?? on any of this info, my break down of the info or the copied info. Thanks.

[Whitehos]

YES

[sq764]

If you were reproducing their data and reselling it, yes..

If you were simply using data from the form pp's, I don't see the grounds they would have..

[Buddha]

if it is as you say horses name, jockey, trainer, weight, that stuff is availble freely on the internet, so I don't see how they could stop you for just using that info. now if you were to use anything that is specific to the drf like tomlinsons, beyers, etc, sure they could make you stop publishing it.

[Steve 'StatMan']

The horses name, jockey, trainer, weight are available from a lot of places, for free. But I don't suggest you announce where you get those pieces of info. from.

Anything specifically created by them, or specific to their publication, that is not in the public domain, it would be best to stay away from. Even if it is in the public domain, that may be a point of argument at times. Clearly anything generated or created by someone else cannot be resold to someone else, and it is important not to sell anything that resembles anything of any other published and copyrighted source.

For example, if you offer a speed figure (call it a 'MyNumber'), it'd better not directly compare with a Beyer Number, or a BRIS number, or any other popular number, and there had better not be a continued pattern of 1-to-1 relationships. If your 59 'MyNumber Last Out' is nearly always given to horses with, say, a 72 Beyer or BRIS Figures, or even worse, a 59 Beyer or BRIS figure, that would be asking trouble.

On the other hand, if you read their PPS and like the 8-6-1, then you can tell people you like the 8-6-1. But don't write 'I like the 8 best because he has a 72 Beyer figure last out'. You can say you think he's faster by a length or two, but again, I'd avoid listing specifics of copyrighted information.

[Dick Schmidt]

Questions like this aren't settled by who is right, or has the law on their side. It is who can hire the most lawyors and continue to pay them for a long time.


Dick

[andicap]

Questions like this aren't settled by who is right, or has the law on their side. It is who can hire the most lawyors and continue to pay them for a long time.


Dick

Careful, Dick. That's a might "liberal" attitude you just expressed there. Basically the system doesn't work for most people, only the wealthiest.
I couldn't agree more -- it's the bedrock belief of progressives.

[kev]

Thanks guys for the info. Who all has there own PP's?? drf and equibase and trackmaster are all one right?? Bris, anybody else??

[BillW]

Thanks guys for the info. Who all has there own PP's?? drf and equibase and trackmaster are all one right?? Bris, anybody else??

Kev,

They are all licensed from Equibase, who is the sole source.
Bill

[Kreed]

I agree that if you use "their" RAW DATA you are in potential hot water.
but ... if you develop different measures ... even combinations .... then
what can "they" say? If you give anyone a workable factor they can't lay
claim to it, so RE-invent.

[BillW]

kree D,

They have a "data derived from ... " clause in their license. Considering they are a monopoly, they probably wouldn't hesitate to assume that you were guilty using their data as a source. :rolleyes:

Bill

[kev]

So Equibase has everything locked down. I guess you could cut a deal with them.

[BillW]

Kev,

Yes a licensing deal with Equibase is the path I believe. Ron Tiller hangs out here from HDW - he may chime in here.

Bill

[hurrikane]

I think CJ ran into this with his site. He still puts up his figs but not other info besides number of horse.
Maybe he could tell us what happened when the axe fell.

[cj]

Nothing happened except that they pointed out I shouldn't be posting the info. I was wrong, so I stopped.

[thoroughbred]

Of course, if you market your program in a way that the user needs to download their files, then you will be encouraged, rather than restricted.

[JackS]

After a race is run, it becomes history. Copying a historical fact should'nt be grounds for anything but it probably is.
If you hired someone to do your chart-making, history could have a slightly different perspective.
Qualified chart makers would almost without a doubt, have a different opinion (although slight) on every race run.
Your idea seems practical if you kept your business limited to one or two tracks and had these chart makers on your payroll. After all, you are now selling your professionally developed opinion.
Your printed format should also be unique to the DRF and others as a safeguard against any claim of plagerism.
Finally before you go into business, hire a lawyer to make sure nothing has been missed.

[Bruddah]

but it seems to me, those who expect producers of pp's, race results and other equine information, to allow them to profit from there work, without paying, should produce their own pp's and race results. I think, they would learn that the time and cost are extensive. After doing so, they would soon be willing to pay for the services. "There is no free lunch in this world." It's not a question of who is right or who is wrong. It's a question of allowing others to make a profit, so the information keeps flowing. Why kill the goose for a few dollars? Not a smart business model for those starting a new business using these resources. :confused:

[takeout]

kree D,

They have a "data derived from ... " clause in their license. Considering they are a monopoly, they probably wouldn't hesitate to assume that you were guilty using their data as a source. :rolleyes:

Bill
I've asked (ranted about) this before but...
What then, is “DRF data” and how do they get away with selling it to BRIS?

[rokitman]

And if it all comes from Equibase, how do they get away with a monopoly?

[BillW]

I've asked (ranted about) this before but...
What then, is “DRF data” and how do they get away with selling it to BRIS?

Equibase can license their data for anything (it's their data). I was talking about the end user consumer license, which I assume Kev was talking about also.

[BillW]

And if it all comes from Equibase, how do they get away with a monopoly?

I don't understand? Are you implying that monopolies are illegal?

[kev]

Hey, everyone thanks for your input. I guess that's the safe way of going, asking and reaching some kind of $deal$ with them. So only Equibase has all this data, pp's, charts, so on..........(beisdes the companys they bought out )??

[DJofSD]

Unless DRF/BRIS/EQUIBASE have exclusive rights to call the races, just hire your own chart caller and use that data.

DJofSD

[takeout]

I would think that the source, Equibase, would be all over reseller DRF (like a cheap suit) for reselling their data to yet another reseller, BRIS. Instead, they evidently condone it or at least put up with it. That is the part that I don’t understand. This is certainly NOT a level playing field for the rest of the resellers and I’m surprised that they are not up in arms about it. If any other reseller did this, Equibase would probably bring a lawsuit against them. So, how does DRF get away with reselling to a reseller, and how does BRIS get away with not having to buy their data from Equibase like all of the other resellers do?

[PaceAdvantage]

The BRIS/DRF pact was in place well before Equibase joined forces with DRF (back when DRF had its own database).

Therefore, when it came time to merge, I'm sure DRF made it part of the contract that they could continue whatever lucrative deal they had going with BRIS.

[takeout]

Okay… I think it’s starting to sink in a little now.

Equibase must’ve made an insanely bad deal (didn’t they have lawyers?) with DRF in 1998 and therefore the playing field has never been level for the real resellers (all of those other than DRF and BRIS) from the beginning.

I find this extremely odd on Equibase’s part. Their creation, I’ve read, was brought about in 1991 to insure that the industry would own its own database of information instead of it being in the hands of an outside company, DRF, that may or may not have the interests of T-bred racing at the top of its list. Then, in 1998, Equibase turns right around and jumps back in bed with DRF. Why? If Equibase was willing to let DRF keep this kind of a stranglehold on the PP industry, why did they bother competing with them in the first place?

[Victor]

Kev,

I can assure you that Equibase Company LLC takes its Intellectual Property very seriously. We include the following statement on the bottom of each web page on www.equibase.com (http://www.equibase.com/):





Proprietary to and © 2005 Equibase Company LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Republication or dissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of Equibase Company LLC.
Use (including viewing) of the material contained herein constitutes acceptance of these terms.



Equibase now has a Compliance Administrator in place with the sole responsibility of vigorously protecting Equibase Company LLC’s Intellectual Property. We work closely with all of our Value Added Resellers including the good folks at the DRF in this regard. We have also worked closely with our attorneys in the wording of User agreements which must be agreed upon in order to purchase products. If you have any questions please give me a call at Equibase.

[sq764]

Victor, this part is confusing, to some degree:

"Republication or dissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of Equibase Company LLC. "

Let's say you are looking at PPs, which include horse's name, jock name, etc.. Isn't it a little grey as to what is Equibase's 'property' and what is public knowledge that can be obtained anywhere?

Hope the question made sense..

[takeout]

Equibase now has a Compliance Administrator in place with the sole responsibility of vigorously protecting Equibase Company LLC’s Intellectual Property.
Considering the DRF/BRIS “arrangement,” I think that ship has sailed.

[Equineer]

Considering the DRF/BRIS “arrangement,” I think that ship has sailed.Are you suggesting that DRF, BRIS, TSN, HDW and others in the reseller distribution chain are stealing information from EquiBase rather than paying for it?

If you have evidence that EquiBase's intellectual property rights are being violated, everyone's interest would be served if you report it to Victor.

Just like Wal-Mart in retailing, the cost of thievery is a burden that ultimately gets passed on to honest customers of EquiBase and it's resellers.

[JustRalph]

Victor is a new member with one post. I would say he was directed to this thread by someone..............

Who ratted out the thread? ;) :D

[takeout]

Are you suggesting that DRF, BRIS, TSN, HDW and others in the reseller distribution chain are stealing information from EquiBase rather than paying for it?
No, I’m suggesting that Equibase has, in essence, already violated their own privacy rights (in large part) by giving away the store to DRF when they called a truce with them in ‘98. They should’ve slain the DRF beast when they had the chance, not jumped into bed with it. Then there would have been a level playing field. Now it’s gawd knows how many more years of DRF’s “my way or the highway” tactics as evidenced by their recent “it’s only 4 more fields of information” fiasco. And, with the DRF/BRIS “thing” Equibase has allowed a reseller to sell to another reseller! As far as why BRIS would want to keep paying DRF for data that DRF now gets from Equibase is beyond me. The whole thing seems way too convoluted to me (read shady) and always has. I would imagine that if anything is costing Equibase’s honest customers money, it’s Equibase themselves by allowing deals like these to have been made in the first place. By its own actions, Equibase has denied all of its other resellers a level playing field since day one.

[Steve 'StatMan']

Takeout, what make you think the DRF isn't one of Equibases best and biggest customers?

Before Equibase, DRF was the only collector of data. Then, as I understand it, Equibase was formed so that the racing industry owned the future data of the racing industry. But both are expensive undertakings, collecting the same data. Since neither company had the market, and were having a good struggle competing financially while taking on the large expense of accumulating essentially the same data, it was to both their best interests to work together, combine functions (i.e. DRF now buys charts and PPS collected by Equibase via their arragements) while maintaining their own database to their standards as well.

I'm sure they worked all that out between themselves years ago.

[Victor]

Its called google, you type in key words and it gives you all the threads that contain these words.
Thanks,
Victor

[Steve 'StatMan']

Now it’s gawd knows how many more years of DRF’s “my way or the highway” tactics as evidenced by their recent “it’s only 4 more fields of information” fiasco.

DRF is a racing newspaper, and they still own the stories they write, and pay to have written.

I'm sure they got interesting feedback just knowing how many online people would or would not answer those 4 questions they asked. Some things are a bit touchy with people.

[Turfday]

My website www.turfday.com is a licensed Equibase value-added re-seller and we pay Equibase a handsome sum every month for that right.

I have had the pleasure of working with Victor and meeting him in person. And he knoweth from where he speaketh. He is fair but firm.

And, as a value-added re-seller, I EXPECT Equibase to be a careful watchdog for those who are using their data without license. It protects my rights and investment as well.

[Dan Montilion]

Let me see if I got this right. Equibase has intellectual property the is sold to re-sellers who then add value. So... Does that mean the intellectual property has no value to begin with?

Dan Montilion

[Light]

Victor

If I bought a program from the track,and reproduced that info online,I can see the track having a case against me for reprinting their material without their consent. But if the track gave me permission to do so,what grounds would Equibase have to intefere?

[takeout]

Takeout, what make you think the DRF isn't one of Equibases best and biggest customers?
I didn’t say they weren’t. I said Equibase should not have jumped in bed with them. The fight between Equibase and DRF should have been to the death.

The industry goes to all of that trouble, grief and expense to start its own database, something that it never saw fit to do for what, about 100 years before that? They were obviously fed up with DRF’s ultimatums and things had gotten so bad at/with DRF that the industry was forced (kicking and screaming, I imagine) into starting its own database. Then, in the middle of the struggle, Equibase turns around and cuts a deal with their enemy. Go figure. I know Equibase didn’t want the DRF paper but there are lots of ways of dealing with that without giving the keys to the store back to DRF.

What I am continually guilty of forgetting is that none of this was ever about us, the PP customer. It was about info for track programs and industry-owned Equibase not being beholding to DRF and their ultimatums. Customers such as myself are a non-issue in all of these doings. No more than an afterthought at best. Bugs that go splat on a windshield. It’s a pity though, that while Equibase was liberating themselves, that they stopped short of doing the same for us.

[kev]

You say a handsome sum every month, but do you have full range of their database, cause I would only need the PP's from the DRF. The only thing I would take from DRF and add into my project would be, like I said before, horses name, jockey, weight, trainers name. I would be taking their running lines, times, and mixing them up in my own little way. Also only doing about 12 to 20 races a day. I would'nt need trainer stats, or whatever equibase might have to offer. I don't have a problem paying them. You guys/gals have given me some great insight into all of this. Thanks.

[BillW]

You say a handsome sum every month, but do you have full range of their database, cause I would only need the PP's from the DRF. The only thing I would take from DRF and add into my project would be, like I said before, horses name, jockey, weight, trainers name. I would be taking their running lines, times, and mixing them up in my own little way. Also only doing about 12 to 20 races a day. I would'nt need trainer stats, or whatever equibase might have to offer. I don't have a problem paying them. You guys/gals have given me some great insight into all of this. Thanks.

Kev,

Sounds like you need to write up what you need and present it to Equibase. I doubt they are willing to negotiate in a public forum. Best of luck with your project.

Bill

[kev]

Yes, you are right Bill, thanks.

[Steve 'StatMan']

If you're only interested in your local tracks, looking for Horse, Jockey, Weight and Trainer, many track publicity departments, racing offices and/or press box staffs will send you a copy of their Recap Sheets. It lists the totally basic information for the card (the above info, plus distance, surface, M/L odds, purse, etc.), just the track's own information - it doesn't have any copyrighted pps.

Some tracks make these available at information stands.

If you know the folks at the tracks you follow, and/or can convince them you are part of the media, and not just a single fan that can't wait for the free info to appear on the various interent sources, they may send it to you, if you're not normally on track. You'd still have to type it as you want it to appear, though.

[gurulj]

Why do you ask? Use what you want of data that is free ( or elsewise)
but not anything that is a quote verbatim. Then keep your mouth shut. Who's to say you have not compiled your own data for 50 years? Don't ask don't tell, as the armed services say.

Jerry
http://www.a1handicapping.com

BTW they (sellers) will license you to use their data if you like for a fee.

[Show Me the Wire]

Proprietary to and © 2005 Equibase Company LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Republication or dissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of Equibase Company LLC.
Use (including viewing) of the material contained herein constitutes acceptance of these terms.



Victor:

I am one confused Monkey with all this evolution talk, so could you explain your disclaimer to me.

Does it mean. after I looked at the track's overnight and because you Equibase publish the name of a horse in a specific race on your site, I am prohibited from dissemination of the horse's name because I looked at your site for particular information and I saw the horse's name as a consequence of my visit?

I really would like to know your answer to this specific question.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

perception is reality

[kingfin66]

Are you talking about building a horse racing site where you sell or give away your selections? If so, you would be purchasing some type of racing form to use to make your selections, then would either post the selections on the site in a members only area, and/or e-mail them to your customers. At least this is how the multitude of horse racing selection services on the internet deliver their product. If this is what you intend to do: (1) I honestly can't see what is wrong with it, but I'm not an attorney (2) Equibase, or anybody else, would not know what you are doing anyway unless, of course, they bought your product.

It seems wierd that Equibase would try to say that your posting names, saddle cloth numbers, jockeys and trainers is illegal when you can just get the info from TVG or many other places.

[JackS]

It would seem to me that if your were going to produce your own PP's, you could use the DRf's or anybody elses as long at the format was different and the lines were not exact reproductions. Final time could be represented as example 110.24 vice 110.23. This will always be a computer generated estimate so in the end , it becomes an opinion that is slightly different.
No ones opinion can be perfect including Equibase or the DRF or anybody else.
I don't think anybody would ever bother to take any action against anyone even if they suspected their info was being used.
How in the world would they ever prove it?