The moves in chess games can not be copyrighted and Agon has backed off from its claims on which they went to court in Moscow against Chessbomb, chess24 and ICC. They have instituted press restrictions for press in attendance. The press may not relay moves outside of the venue during the games. If caught, the remedy will likely be expulsion and possibly damages for lost revenue ((assuming they can prove such damages) unless there is a liquidated damages clause in the press credentialing agreement.
What is more likely to happen is that sites like Chess24 and ICC will have one of their people purchase the $15 access package to obtain the moves in real time and relay them to their site followers. As long as they don't relay Agon's broadcast commentary they'll have no actionable issues. However, their Terms of Use state:
"YOU ALSO AGREE THAT INFORMATION ABOUT CHESS MOVES OF THE GAMES IS EXPENSIVE TO PRODUCE AND GATHER AND TIME-SENSITIVE AND THAT UNCONTROLLED COPYING OF THIS INFORMATION DURING THE RESPECTIVE CHESS GAME MAY REDUCE THE INCENTIVE OF THE ORGANIZER TO STAGE SIMILAR EVENTS IN THE FUTURE. YOU FURTHER AGREE NOT TO COPY OR COMMUNICATE ANY INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CHESS MOVES OF THE BROADCASTED GAMES DURING SUCH GAMES BY ANY MEANS TO ANY PARTY OUTSIDE OF THE MATCH VENUE.
YOU AGREE THAT YOUR RETRANSMISSION OF INFORMATION ABOUT CHESS MOVES OF THE GAMES IN VIOLATION OF THE PRECEDING PARAGRAPH IS LIKELY TO CAUSE IMMEDIATE IRREPARABLE HARM TO US THAT WILL NOT BE FULLY COMPENSABLE BY MONEY DAMAGES, AND THEREFORE YOU AGREE THAT WE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO IMMEDIATE INJUNCTIVE RELIEF TO RESTRAIN ANY SUCH VIOLATION."
How enforceable this will be is problematic in view of Agon's attempting to restrict via contract material which is not subject to copyright protection and which is newsworthy under the Second Circuit's NBA judicial decision.
That said, under the decision of the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, which covers Manhattan, it is doubtful that the relay restriction on accredited journalists would be enforceable under their NBA case decision. That's why Agon is trying to restrict the press via contractual agreement. Is this an enforceable contract provision or an unenforceable adhesion provision? Stay tuned in the event the issue is litigated which may well be unlikely given the easy workaround discussed above.
Overall, IMO, Agon and it's minions are basically a greedy group of business people looking to restrict access to that which they have no copyright interest by using adhesion contracts to limit the dissemination of non-copyrightable, newsworthy information. Agon might consider placing its Terms of Use in a place where the sun doesn't shine.
