Ray Gordon

[Marc At DRF]

I sent this note to Ray privately, and haven't heard back. I apologize if this is somehow inappropriate, but I'd like to get it straightened out. Ray:

"The guy at the Racing Form authorized me to use ONE day's past-performances, April 13, to document my system (with an e-book you can include PDF files and links instead of clogging up a paper book, which you can't even hyperlink off of). "

Ray, who at the Racing Form authorized you to use that PDF?

And who authorized you to use Beyer speed figures to promote your book. Please let me know immediately.

Thanks,
Marc Attenberg
Director of Online Marketing and Development
Daily Racing Form

[Dick Schmidt]

Hmmm. I can see a fast fade coming on.


Marc,

As a point of information, I was told back when I published books and magazines that the Racing Form was OK with any use of past performances as long as the Racing Form was attirbuted. I was told this by the managing editor of the west coast editions of the Form when they were located in Los Angeles. They used to let me go through their "stacks" of back Forms looking for "clean" copies. Of course, at that time the only way to reproduce a PP was to photocopy or print it. What is the Racing Form's position now on reproducing material? Does it vary by media? Can I still print past performance and results charts? Use them to illustrate a point on the web? Modify them and re-sell the outcome?

I doubt I'll ever write another racing book, but it would be nice to know.

Dick

[smf]

Ray,

Marc asked you specifically "who" at The Form gave you authorization. Simple question, really.

:cool:

[takeout]

This thread is unbelievable. Once again DRF has me stupefied. And this on the heels of realizing that their pdf results charts now contain the same incomplete race-condition data that their PP lines do. One can't help but wonder what is going on over there.

[Tom]

Originally posted by takeout
This thread is unbelievable. Once again DRF has me stupefied. And this on the heels of realizing that their pdf results charts now contain the same incomplete race-condition data that their PP lines do. One can't help but wonder what is going on over there.

What are you refering to in the charts?

Personally, don't use DRF charts anymore - you have to download them one race at a time instead of "all" which is a deal breaker for me. the Trackmaster charts have much more information than DRF will ever have.
Thanks

[Marc At DRF]

For the second time, apologies for taking this public. I didn't heard back from Ray for 6 hours after sending the private note, and I wanted to contact him.

I've heard from him privately since, and the matter has been resolved.

Note to Dick Schmidt: We grant the rights to publishers to use our PPs or the Beyers much of the time, but not always. If we think the source making the request is reasonable, credible, etc, we liberally grant these rights. Again, often, but not always.

Note to Takeout: Look again at our PDF charts. Momentary blip that you referred to has been corrected-- PDF charts are back to how they always were.

[Boris]

Originally posted by RayGordon



This doesn't matter to me now as I chose to yank the book because the method is profitable enough for me to use privately.




Now that's funny. So what's the maximum ROI you allow your competition, uuurrrr, customers?

[Show Me the Wire]

RayGordon:

I am going to weigh in your side regarding DRF's claims of proprietary issues. I believe DRF and Beyer do not have a strong position to stand on if you wish to continue publishing your method. First of all the information contained in the pp's is not copyrightable. What is copyrightable is the format. Your use of the DRF pdf format is a violation, because format is protected by their copyright. If you advised people to use a data seller such as DRF, and told them what information to use from the pps, DRF would have a very difficult time proving your selection process is based on copyrightable format and not the non-copyrightable information contained in the format.

Secondly, I believe Beyer himself would have a difficult time establishing a proprietary violation. Once the information is published it is absurd to say you cannot use the published material as a foundation to create a unique product. It is akin to saying a restaurant purchases base food products and then the restaurant is prohibited from using the ingredient in its preparation of the end product. An example would be a restaurant purchases Kraft (registered trademark) foods barbecue sauce through the seller's restaurant wholesale division and then they receive a letter from Kraft (registered trademark) stating you cannot enhance our product in any way or sell it as a sauce you prepared for a profit. Kind of ridiculous thinking isn't it?

Beyer's figures are the base product, which can be enhanced into a totally different product akin to the example above. Additionally, Beyer gave up substantial proprietary rights to his figure making when he published his methodology in his books for everyone to see. Since we have this figure making knowledge independent of the published figure it would be difficult for Beyer to prove he has been financially harmed by you or anyone else using the published number to create a unique intellectual property.

Moreover, using the DRF's thinking Beyer himself violated intellectual propriety rights by crafting his speed figures from his friend's mathematical work.

Based on the above I believe DRF is barking loudly to prevent people from knowing how vulnerable all these data providers are to fair usage of mostly non-copyrightable material.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[smf]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by RayGordon
[B]

I didn't think my request was unreasonable at all, and I thought thirty years of handicapping of my thirty-five on this planet might make me a little credible!


Hey Gordo,

Look at your profile. Your birthday sez jan1, 1980. Someone already pointed out you have a problem with basic math. Looks like they were right.

Please don't leave this place. A stupid liar is as entertaining as a comedian.

Last Post: 04-24-2002 12:58 PM
More difficult: Handicapping or Wagering??
Contact RayGordon: Click here to email RayGordon
Send RayGordon a Private Message!
Homepage: http://www.**********.com/horsepix.htm
ICQ Number:
AOL Instant Messenger Handle: Amoderncaveman
Yahoo Instant Messenger Handle: hypnoguy34
Birthday January 1st, 1980

[Show Me the Wire]

RayGordon:

If you believe you truly believe DRF, then I have some land to sell you.


Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[smf]

Originally posted by RayGordon
Your birthdate is something identity thieves can use, so I don't give it out online.

If that's "stupid" so be it.


Then why even put up a birthdate to begin with?

You don't have to prove yourself a con with every post. Ooops, yes you do. My bad.

[Show Me the Wire]

Marc:

As RayGordon so succintly stated your publication is very respected, and surely your company has looked up some of these issues in the past. Based on your own personal knowledge is the information contained in your pps copyrighted, is it the format or is it both that are copyrighted?

Thanks in advance.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[Tom]

I guess I have to agree that if someone has a method of using a Beyer number in a calculation, then he is free to do so. Just by calling it a "BEYER" gives credit to Andy and you are not actually
using the material anyway, you are talking about ways to use data in a media format that you bought and paid for. Are we not allowed to talk about Beyer numbers now without permission?
Am I in trouble if I mention the time of a Derby prep race that I read in the Form? Are people that use the morning line from the form in their programs in trouble? For God's sake, if I throw my form away on my way out of the track, will DRF come after me for
illegal "distribution?"
I think we are getting pretty ridiculious here.
Maybe DRF should spent its time revising the charts that had the little glitch in them and providing the correct versions to the people that actually paid THEM for the products.

[ranchwest]

Maybe Marc at DRF can clarify specifically how Ray is in violation. Marc, are you asserting that in obtaining the DRF we are agreeing to a license on the usage of the Beyer number? I'm not at all clear what the position is.

[Marc At DRF]

I'll respond once more, but not after this.

Tom, the charts are fixed, as I mentioned.

The objection was to Ray promoting a commercial product-- a book he was trying to sell-- without getting permission to use the figures either in the book or the promotion of the book.

The Beyers are an exclusive feature of the DRF. If you're going to use examples of your new wagering methodologies in a book you are hoping to profit from, you need to get permission from us.

As for the "format" trademark infringement question, yeah, some of it protected, but I frankly don't feel like poring over it right now.

Again, I'll decline further comment on this.

[GameTheory]

I guess you won't be answering this, but why in the world won't you provide any more comment? So you'll tell someone when they're breaking the rules, but you won't tell them what the rules are?

Sounds like you a purposefully trying to intimidate and confuse people from doing what you don't like, because you know you don't have a legal leg to stand on...

[Marc At DRF]

One more try, then I really am done. Promise.

The rules aren't that unclear, it has to do with commercial purposes. You're all welcome to discuss the relative merits of anything DRF does, whether our figs or product is any good, or whatever successful methods you might have... But when it comes to the selling of a "system," that's we get protective of our legal rights. Nobody has anything to worry about, otherwise.

Once again, I swear, I'm done.

[ranchwest]

Yeah, unless you can find an attorney who would take it on a contingency.

[Show Me the Wire]

Marc:

Thank you for your answer. I understand you don't want to give a more detailed answer because it would only show the vulnerable position of all data suppliers. You know you cannot copyright the pp information because it is not yours to copyright. you are only collecting the information and summarizing it. The actual format of the summary though can be copyrighted, which is what you do. However, it is nice to have so much misinformation out in public about your copyright, because you could claim a copyright infringement and people like RayGordon snap into compliance with your wishes.

As for your right to publish Beyer figures exclusively, I agree with you 100%. Your statement about exclusivity once again encourages misinformation. Your exclusive rights means Beyer cannot provide his figures, to be published as Beyer figures, to any other profit motivated publication for Beyer's personal financial gain without your permission.

It does not necessarily preclude a third party (a party not part of the agreement between you and Beyer) someone from using Beyer speed figure methodology to create a unique intellectual property. Beyer may have a contractual obligation with you to try and enforce his intellectual property rights, but I think he would have a difficult time proving any infringements if a third party uses his methodology to teach others or create a unique product. I have stated those reasons in another post and I do not want to beat a dead horse.

Marc I am not singling your product out as the bad guy. Actually I am a devoted user of the DRF and I have stacks of your forms to prove it. But this is a big but, I do not like it when, any data collector and disseminator of data, allows misinformation to make people believe the data providers have more rights than they actually possess.

I know it is unlikely you will respond to my post, because there is no need for a response.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[Handle]

Aside from the use of the form in a RayGordon's book, I'm not sure that there is a copyright issue here. Copyright protects just that -- the right to distribute copies of something.

In regards to using the Beyer Speed figures in a System -- and this is where Marc said DRF gets protective -- the DRF would have to have a patent on the Beyer Speed Figures to restrict any usage on it in another person's system (again, I'm not talking about distributing the Beyer Speed Figures -- that is a copyright issue). If this is the case, then it _might_ be similar to a situation where a manufacturer of a car attempts to use a patented invention (say, for a new chassis design) in their vehicle. They couldn't do so without permission from the patent owner. Again, this _might_ be similar to using the Beyer Speed Figure in your own system.

How to determine if this is the case. Well, the DRF could tell us. Since that doesn't look like its going to happen,
thinking about it leads me to ask a couple of questions.

First, what is patentable? This isn't from an authority, but it seems to be accurate:

"Utility patents may be granted to person who invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof. There are three basic requirements for utility patents; nonobviousness, novelty, and utility. Nonobviousness is a judged by taking the frame of mind of an average person in a given field with knowledge of all prior art (previous knowledge and inventions). Generally, if something provides new and unexpected results, it may be patentable. Novelty simply means that you cannot patent something that is already known or patented. Utility patents do not apply to theoretical phenomena or ideas, the invention/discovery must be useful. "

From that, it would seem that a handicapping method, such as the Beyer Speed Figure method, is patentable. But there are more limitations. For instance:

"You cannot patent anything which has been patented or described in a printed publication in any country for more than one year before the date of filing in the United States, or which had been in public use or on sale in the United States more than one year prior to filing. "

For arguments sake, lets say that Beyer or the DRF holds a patent on the Beyer Speed Figure methodology. This means that you cannot sell a system that uses this method to create Beyer Speed figures. It does not mean that you cannot sell a system that requires the user of that system to put a number into the system (a number that happens to be the Beyer Speed Figure).

So, all in all, it seems to me that the __usage of Beyer Speed Figures__ in a system cannot be restricted by anyone.

Now, what about using the "Beyer Speed Figure" name to market a particular product? That's a different issue -- a trade mark issue. Can I go around and say, "Use my software application -- it likes Coca-Cola"? Same thing as saying "Use my handicapping method -- it uses Beyer Speed Figures".
There is a good description of the foundation of Trademark law here:

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/inp27.htm

Here are few excerpts:
"A trademark is an indicia used to indicate origin".

"A trademark functions as a guarantee of a consistent level of certain characteristics, such as quality, so the public when making a purchase "will get the product which it asks for and wants to get.""


"With the law behind protecting the interests of trademark owners, infringers are prevented from free riding on the efforts of others."

I think this sums it up well. When RayGordon says that he uses Beyer speed figures, and "improves" on them, he is both conning the public into thinking they are getting something equivalent to the Beyer Speed figures and he is also attempting to "free ride" on the efforts of others -- he's done so much in his statements to the effect that he's been using the Beyer speed figures for so long, and that he has "brought them to the next level." Saying that is fine, using it as a marketing ploy is trademark infringement.

So, my very un-professional opinion of the matter is that DRF cannot prevent you from developing a system that makes use of the Beyer Speed Figures. It can probably prevent you from using the Beyer Speed Figure to market your product.

-Handle

[Show Me the Wire]

Handle:

Patents do not apply to intellectual property.
Intellectual property is covered by trademark and copyright.

I agree there may be a markerting problem and that is were the problem lies. RayGordon is advertising his method as though it is implicitly approved by Beyer and DRF. This may be intentional or unintentional on his part. His marketing strategy could cause confusion about the quality of the original product and the DRF would have the right to sue RayGordon to stop him from this marketing strategy.

The DRF will not come out and say this, because they want to continue to ennjoy the benefit of misinformation as to what is and is not protetected.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[takeout]

Originally posted by Tom
Maybe DRF should spent its time revising the charts that had the little glitch in them and providing the correct versions to the people that actually paid THEM for the products.

This brings to mind the question of whether or not these types of things ever get corrected in the database. I would guess not. In DRF's case, they don't archive so how would one know? Their data is used in the BRIS stuff, though, so things like this might potentially have their ramifications somewhere down the line.

Tom: Agreed. That one-at-a-time chart thing is pretty much of a deal breaker.

[rrbauer]

The Beyer number methodology is in the public domain. I can use it to do speed numbers, you can use it to do speed numbers, etc.

There's probably potential for a problem if I use the methodology to do speed numbers and publish them as Beyer numbers. I don't believe there is a problem if I used the methodology to do speed numbers and published them as Bauer numbers.

[Show Me the Wire]

Why would highly informed business men pay for the exclusive rights to publish information in the public domain? Maybe they didn't know Beyer published his formula?

You have to love it!!!

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[GameTheory]

Well, they probably wouldn't, except Beyers are not made by automation -- they are actually made by Beyer & his associates (actually, only his associates I assume) and contain adjustments made the judgement of a human.

[Tom]

Originally posted by GameTheory
I guess you won't be answering this, but why in the world won't you provide any more comment? So you'll tell someone when they're breaking the rules, but you won't tell them what the rules are?

Sounds like you a purposefully trying to intimidate and confuse people from doing what you don't like, because you know you don't have a legal leg to stand on...

Home run, GT.....
This whole thing smells fishy to me...why did DRF bring this up in open forum? Six hours is not a long time to wait for a reply to an email. I think there is an agenda here and I think stinks.
The reason to sell the Beyer numbers is to let people use them in their handicapping, then someone has an idea how to use them differently, and the rules of the game suddenly change. Now forget for a moment all the bad vibes between Ray and others on this board......what kind of a threat is Ray's book to DRF? What could it possibly do other than increase sales of their product?
Suppose he did make a buck off the deal? So what?

David 0 Gloliath 1

Get another stone, Ray ~G~

[tanda]

Patent law is considered part of intellectual property law along with copyright and trademark law.

A patent gives the patent owner property rights in an idea. A property interest in a idea is indeed intellectual property.

Copyrights are the property rights to a form of expression, not the substance of the expression.

[Show Me the Wire]

Tanda,

You cannot patent mathematical formulas. You can patent an idea, such as a light bulb. The DRF is not claiming RayGordon violated patents, but presentaion of an idea, their format and their contractual rights with Beyer.

Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[ranchwest]

Ray's relationship to DRF has nothing to do with DRF's contract with Beyer.

[anotherdave]

I agree with Tom. No matter what anyone thinks of Ray, the posting on this open board was unprofessional in my opinion. Six hours is not a reasonable period of time to give to respond to an email.

AD

[Kentucky Bred]

Hi All:

Let me get my two cents in. I look at this from a very different perspective than some although I agree with everyone of you in this matter.

I have a background in law and have operated some decent size businesses and IMHO the DRF is taking one of the most insane positions I've heard in sometime. First, the environment for horse racing information is explosive. It's EVERYWHERE Marc at DRF! Equibase, Brisnet, TRN, itsdata.com...Oh did I forget 5 or 6 other sites where you can go to get PP's with alot of bells and whistles attached. The Racing Form has been under assault for at least 5 or 6 years. You destroyed the Racing Times--but the simulcasting programs and computers are hurting you--big time.

You have got one thing--Beyer numbers. You were wise enough to negotiate this a few years back. Problem was, guys like me were having a field day with Beyer numbers when they were being published in the Racing Times. Why...nobody bought the paper. It wasn't even allowed to be sold on the racetrack. Once the Beyer's went "public" with the form, value dropped almost immediately. Now, in my humble opinion, they are worthless numbers.

Now a man comes along that tells anyone who will listen (and a few who won't), that he has a strategy that REQUIRES you purchase the Daily Racing Form at what $5.25-$5.75? depending on which track you go to. To me this is a no-brainer. Give any person who can demonstrate they are promoting a handicapping strategy that MUST USE the racing form, the rights to tell everyone to go out and buy the form!

You know--In writing this, I asked myself, how long it has been since I bought The Daily Racing Form. I can't remember. I wonder why?

Kentucky Bred

[Show Me the Wire]

Originally posted by RayGordon


I never claimed that Beyer or the Form endorsed me. I said that I used his figures to make a power rating. I already had permission to use the PDF files, of which THAT DAY'S Beyers are a part.

Isn't it nice to know that if there is in fact a method that does as well as this one that there are those who don't want me to be able to teach it in an easy manner? I could do a book without past-performances but that would be hell for the reader.

I just wish I'd known all this two weeks ago when I THOUGHT I had permission to do what I was doing. A lot of labor went down the drain.

RayGordon,

Let us not get carried away here. Do not confuse my questioning of DRF's tactics as support for your claims. Also, I do not believe the DRF is invoved in some type of conspiracy to prevent people from utilizing a system that will make winners out of the systems users. I do not know if your systeem is good, bad, or average and I really could care less.

This discussion is about the informed business men who opted to try and claim proprietary interests in information that is in the public domain and not about the merits of your system.


Regards,
Show Me the Wire

[GameTheory]

On a earlier point...


I don't know the law in this area, but there is something called a "process patent". A few inventors of certain artificial intelligence algorithms that I dabble in like classifier systems supposedly hold such patents, although they usually say something like, "This algorithm is presented to the [academic research] community at large and we encourage independent further research, but let it be known we are the holders of such & such a patent, and it can't be used for commercial purposes without a license fee or something."

Now, a classifier system is just a fancy way of re-organizing information to achieve a prediction or whatever. It is mathmatical formulas PLUS ways to use them. I'm sure it is too late now and Beyer didn't even really invent "his" method, but couldn't someone claim a patent like this with a process for making speed figures?

(I can hunt down some examples of the above-type patents & their holders if you're interested.)

[PaceAdvantage]

Time to politely put an end to this soap opera.....if anyone disagrees, email me privately.....


==PA

[PaceAdvantage]

One last bit of info.....ShowMeTheWire's last two posts have been deleted by REQUEST of ShowMeTheWire himself.....


==PA