|
On April 27 2010 02:36 Tanatos wrote:http://www.fomos.kr/board/board.php?mode=read&keyno=106191&db=issue&cate=&page=1&field=&kwrd=I can read and write Korean and English, but I really can't make interpretation between two languages. I think this article is very interesting and if you can make translation, if would be helpful for English community. Basically, this article talks about next e-sports partner for Blizzard, since KeSPA left the negotiation table. It mentions, GRETEC, who owns GomTV, and CJ media, who owns Ongamenet media, as likable choice. But actually CJ media also owns GRETEC, something this article didn't mention, so currently CJ media is on top position to negotiate with Blizzard. GomTV, well known for having GomTV Classic and The Named, the WOW league, have experience of having lots of professional game tournament and also have very close relationship with Blizzard. CJ Media, the Cable TV company who owns a looooooooooooots of Cable TV channels directly and indirectly throughout all kinds of matters. Ongamenet and GomTV, which are recently bought by CJ, are very small portion of this company compare to total. But currently CJ Media is the board director company of KeSPA, because they owns both CJ Entus and Hite Sparky, I have no idea how CJ is going to response. But well, if they smell money, they will go after it.
I think the summary you've provided in the OP is generally the gist of the article; I don't see any need for a word-to-word translation.
To note though, the tone of the article seems to be pure speculation as to what the article writer thinks are possible next partners of Blizzard based on precedence/influence/experience, and no real evidence based on insider knowledge or whatever.
|
On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property.
If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property?
I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
|
On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
Realistically speaking its not enforceable. Blizzard will not make much headway with this.
|
Well even aside from whether it's enforceable or not, does it even make sense?
It's called copyright not makemoneyright.
|
On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
This doesn't have much to do with copyright but rather the EULA. I don't have the beta, so I can't read the SCII EULA but I'll bet that it addresses broadcasting and user generated content.
Also SCII requires a user to go through battle.net and there is nothing against the law if Blizzard decides to block particular games from being played, but again, that is something contained in the EULA.
|
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a license just specify the terms under which you can make a copy? You are normally not allowed to make a copy, except under the conditions of the license. For example, if you have a piece of software without a license, you can't make any copies of it. But if it's licensed under the GNU GPL, you can make copies if you provide the source code with each copy.
So licenses aren't used to specify the conditions under which you can distribute copies?
|
On April 27 2010 03:33 krndandaman wrote:
lol so basically korea controls starcraft
He whoe controls the starcraft, controls the korea....
|
United States47024 Posts
On April 27 2010 04:28 Phrujbaz wrote:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't a license just specify the terms under which you can make a copy? You are normally not allowed to make a copy, except under the conditions of the license. For example, if you have a piece of software without a license, you can't make any copies of it. But if it's licensed under the GNU GPL, you can make copies if you provide the source code with each copy.
So licenses aren't used to specify the conditions under which you can distribute copies?
The issue here isn't quite one of copyright, but the fact that the Terms of Use for Battle.net 2.0 specify that the features of Battle.net cannot be used for commercial purposes without Blizzard's express permission. This is not an issue with Starcraft 1, because Starcraft 1 can be played and broadcast without ever engaging in activity that touches on the Battle.net ToU, but SC2's lack of LAN forces you to go through Battle.net. It gets hairy when you acknowledge that there's no real established standard with regard to how legally binding ToUs/EULAs for software are.
|
infinity21
Canada6683 Posts
On April 27 2010 04:07 Jaester88 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 02:36 Tanatos wrote:http://www.fomos.kr/board/board.php?mode=read&keyno=106191&db=issue&cate=&page=1&field=&kwrd=I can read and write Korean and English, but I really can't make interpretation between two languages. I think this article is very interesting and if you can make translation, if would be helpful for English community. Basically, this article talks about next e-sports partner for Blizzard, since KeSPA left the negotiation table. It mentions, GRETEC, who owns GomTV, and CJ media, who owns Ongamenet media, as likable choice. But actually CJ media also owns GRETEC, something this article didn't mention, so currently CJ media is on top position to negotiate with Blizzard. GomTV, well known for having GomTV Classic and The Named, the WOW league, have experience of having lots of professional game tournament and also have very close relationship with Blizzard. CJ Media, the Cable TV company who owns a looooooooooooots of Cable TV channels directly and indirectly throughout all kinds of matters. Ongamenet and GomTV, which are recently bought by CJ, are very small portion of this company compare to total. But currently CJ Media is the board director company of KeSPA, because they owns both CJ Entus and Hite Sparky, I have no idea how CJ is going to response. But well, if they smell money, they will go after it. I think the summary you've provided in the OP is generally the gist of the article; I don't see any need for a word-to-word translation. To note though, the tone of the article seems to be pure speculation as to what the article writer thinks are possible next partners of Blizzard based on precedence/influence/experience, and no real evidence based on insider knowledge or whatever.
On top of the 2 groups mentioned, the article offers three other possibilities which are a new company coming in, Blizzard running leagues by itself, and a re-negotiation with KeSPA. You are right that the tone of the article is quite speculative.
|
christ this is all so fucked up
and no, of course making money from broadcasting sc raises intellectual property issues
|
On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
This is like saying renting movies to people and selling tickets to a movie you rented are the same things.
|
so, is there any other group in korea which isn't somehow affiliated with Kespa somehow for blizz to negotiate with in regards of running tourneys and stuff?
|
On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
Currently they can't, but that's what they want to do, only on a much bigger scale.
What you describe is essentially what the proleague does, but obviously they are much bigger, hold tournament, and generate piles of money, mainly in advertisement.
Blizzard recognizes that there is massive potential in their game that Korea essentially isn't tapping (ie. ticket prices, jersey sales, the foreign scene, etc.)
For Starcraft 2, Blizzard wants to tap into this market, grow it, and reap some of the benefits.
My understanding (and this is just from my personal business assumptions and experience and what I have read) Blizzard wants to charge a small percent of Royalties on all major money tournaments, because it is their game, and their intellectual property.
KeSPA's stance is that even though it is Blizzards game, they essentially built the industry, and therefore shouldn't have to pay anything to Blizzard, because otherwise SC2 might not even exist.
Both sides clearly have very valid points, and they are essentially at a stalemate because KeSPA is basically against the principle of having to pay for something they built, not so much the money.
Blizzard ceasing negotions with KeSPA is a big deal to us, because it means that there is a possibility that pro starcraft will cease to exist. I am interested to know what the Korean community thinks about this, because I would imagine that they thought they were done negotiating with Blizzard awhile ago.
|
On April 27 2010 08:40 Half wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square. This is like saying renting movies to people and selling tickets to a movie you rented are the same things.
not true.
Movie renting companies pay royalties to studios everytime they make a profit on a studio movie.
|
So basically CJ owns those major esports stations but also a high authority in Kespa?
I dont know what to say... D:
|
On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square.
LOL, it's fundamentally different.
Broadcasting a Starcraft game means you are multiplying Starcraft contents, images, animations, sounds etc. and distribute them to thousands of people.
|
" Until three years ago, the star of a copyright to Korea "HanbitSoft> had bought the rights "
Did Blizzard sell some StarCraft rights to HanbitSoft, or what do they mean? It sounds quite interesting though.
Google Translated
+ Show Spoiler +
Why is not blizzard 10 years ago, three years ago been a need for intellectual property? Until three years ago, the star of a copyright to Korea "HanbitSoft> had bought the rights. So Blizzard did not care Because there rights were sold. Spindle waves created by HanbitSoft Kes geusanghwangeseo lost it, but I do not like Hahn matter As the star of a copyright "the forerunner of Blizzard Korea Goku> is beneficiary. Finish the launch WoW and Blizzard Korea Co., Ltd. established Goku and "Blizzard's Korea office> is becoming a star as one of the rights to return again and this is Blizzard is about 3 years ago. From then until now and will negotiate intellectual property.
Korean
+ Show Spoiler +왜 블리자드가 10년전이아니고 3년전부터 지재권을 요구하게 되었는가? 3년전까지만해도 한국의 스타1 판권은 <한빛소프트>가 판권을 산 상태였다. 그래서 블리자드는 판권을 팔았던 상태여서 상관하지도않았었다. 그상황에서 한빛소프트주축으로 케스파도 만들어졌지, 하지만 한빛사정이 안좋아지면서 스타1의 판권이 <블리자드코리아의 전신 손오공>넘어가게된다. 마침 와우도 런칭했고 손오공은 블리자드코리아 유한회사를 설립하고 <블리자드의 한국지사>가 됨으로써 스타1의 판권이 다시 블리자드로 돌아가게되고 이게 약 3년전이다. 그때부터 지재권협상을 지금까지하고있는거다.
Also. I don't really like Blizzard. As usual they fail everything that's in relation to the e-sports community.
|
On April 27 2010 14:39 mrdx wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2010 04:10 Phrujbaz wrote:On April 27 2010 04:05 ZBiR wrote:
Because they make a profit from Blizzard's intellectual property. If I run an internet cafe and I install starcraft on all the computers I have (and buy a copy for each computer), do I still have to pay royalties to blizzard since I'm making a profit off their intellectual property? I thought copyright and all that was about making copies, not about how you use the copies that you bought fair and square. LOL, it's fundamentally different. Broadcasting a Starcraft game means you are multiplying Starcraft contents, images, animations, sounds etc. and distribute them to thousands of people.
Ah this sort of makes sense. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
