EPT[Update] KeSPA Speaks Out On Intellectual Property Rights…
| Forum Index > BW General |
|
blazinggpassion
United States27 Posts
| ||
|
Asta
Germany3491 Posts
On May 05 2010 03:36 Lokian wrote: We all know, Blizzard is a high-morale type of game company. I don't think Blizzard had any bad intention in their negotiations. Whatever is necessary to expand e-Sports internationally. I believe this kind of thinking is mostly why people support Blizzard. And I think that it is naive. Blizzard is not some club of programmers who create games for fun. They are professionals and even if they are good guys, they can not run their company in whichever way they like it. They have to make business decisions the same way other big companies do it. That they have this good of an image is mostly due to all the public relations work they do for their fans, but they rarely get judged by their business decisions. On the other hand is KeSPA, which is a governing body for a sport. As with all other organizations, they will be fighting for their profit, but they are mostly dependent on the success of their sport. They will of course fight against organizations trying to take some of the sports popularity and market that on their own (like GOM). And like all other governing bodies they won't always be popular with the fans because they are mostly working with sponsors and broadcasters. But after all, a strong governing body is usually very important for a sport. Some bad examples include Boxing (4 world titles iirc) and also eSports outside of Korea (everyone trying to stake their claim with their own rules and malicious organizations like the cpl). That there even is an argument between Blizzard and KeSPA is only because Blizzard is holding somewhat of a monopoly for popular games in Korea. For example, in football, there are a lot of products that are needed to play, like the ball or shoes or other clothes (I'm sure there are better examples). None of the creators of said products can claim any right to decide how professional football shoot be run. But that's only because they are replaceable. If there were a lot of games that would be as popular as Starcraft, then this whole discussion wouldn't exist. What is actually going on is that Blizzard Managers are trying to get as much out of their quasi-monopoly because they realize that control over the sport of Starcraft 2 would not only get them a lot of money in the short run. They'd also strengthen their monopole even more and increase their brand value incredibly for future games. | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:26 blazinggpassion wrote: I wonder how many Blizzard employees are posting here trying to change public opinion that seems to be swaying in favor of Kespa.. (possibly many of the few who are supporting Blizzard on this issue) In a pro-Blizzard thread, you'll get mostly Blizzard supporters posting. In a pro-KeSPA thread, mostly KesPA supporters. Let's not delude ourselves here and be more constructive. | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7903 Posts
On May 04 2010 07:34 rotinegg wrote: i don't know who's side of the story to believe I don't like Kespa, but I'm quite sure that they are not lying. Blizzard has become a huge fatass company while Kespa is in comparison a little association fighting for survival in an uncertain market. Always trust the smallest party. The idea that moral has something to do with Blizzard activities is a joke. Like every medium/big company, Blizzard is trying to make a lot of money short term for its shareholders, period. | ||
|
Vasoline73
United States7803 Posts
Kespa may suck but at least they have experience running the only truely successful esport | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:31 Vasoline73 wrote: Anyone who believes Blizzard is actually interested in maintaining a real esports scene is crazy. Kespa may suck but at least they have experience running the only truely successful esport Is it crazy to assume Blizzard will try to make money? As long as there's money in eSports, I'd be pretty persuaded to believe such a powerful company would keep it going strong. And don't go using misinformation like SC:BW being the only "truly successful eSport", etc. What makes Halo and WC3 unsuccessful, exactly? | ||
Milkis
5003 Posts
On May 05 2010 02:51 emucxg wrote: guys, check this out http://esports.dailygame.co.kr/news/view.daily?idx=26140 >>블리자드의 협상 요구안 가운데 이해되지 않는 부분은 또 있다. 각 기업이 계약을 통해 확보하고 있는 선수들에 대한 권리도 요구한 것으로 확인됐다. There is another portion of Blizzard's negotiation requests that isn't very understandable. It has been confirmed that Blizzard demanded rights to the players that are on the contracts with the corporations. >>블리자드가 2007년부터 한국e스포츠협회와의 협상에 내놓은 요구 사항에는 '모든 대회를 통해 프로게이머와 계약할 수 있는 권리를 갖는다'라는 조항이 있는 것으로 알려졌다. 이는 현재 프로게이머와 계약을 체결하고 있는 기업들을 무시하는 처사라 할 수 있다. Since 2007, Blizzard's negotiation contract contained an article that states that "Blizzard will have the right to form contracts with players through any competitions. This could be read as a term that simply ignoring/demeaning the current corporations that already have contracts with the players >>1999년부터 프로게임단이 창설되고 기업이 운영하는 게임단이 확대되면서 선수들의 초상권과 성명권은 한국e스포츠협회에 귀속되어 있다. 기업이 선수들과의 계약을 통해 연봉이나 인센티브 등을 지급하고 있는 상황에서 블리자드의 선수와 관련된 요구는 무리하다는 비판이 일고 있다. Since 1999 when the progaming leagues were created and corporations started sponsoring professional teams, KeSPA held the rights to give or take progaming licenses. There is much criticism that Blizzard's requests regarding the players is "too much" since the corporations pay players salaries and incentives. >>블리자드의 요구 사항이 수용된다면 공군을 제외한 11개 프로게임단은 프로게이머를 육성하더라도 블리자드와 또 하나의 계약을 성사해야 한다. 연봉은 기업이 주고 블리자드가 필요할 때면 내줘야 하는 상황에 처한다. 이는 프로게임단을 운영하고 있는 기업에 대한 권리 침해로 해석할 수 있는 부분이다 If this term is accepted, then all progaming teams with the exception of Airforce ACE needs to create an additional contract with Blizzard even if they are only nurturing/raising players. Even though the salaries are paid by the Corporations, (This is my interpretation here since it's missing WHAT it is referring to. I'm going to guess that they're referring to players) the players must be "given" to Blizzard when Blizzard needs them. This could be read as a violation of the rights of the corporation that runs the the proleague team. Edit: Oops, i guess someone translated it already. Should have paid more attention ^^; | ||
|
Yurebis
United States1452 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:26 urashimakt wrote: That puts Blizzard in the right in my book, but opinions will always differ. If they can open up e-sports to the world anywhere near as well as it was opened up to Korea by KeSPA, you see, I've read a lot of those assertions, but what exactly has KeSPA done, besides licensing (restricting unregistered players from playing) and regulating (restricting certain actions by the part of players and maybe organizers, idk) if it was nothing but restrictions, how can one open a market by restricting it? Opening a door by putting a lock on it? I thought a market was opened by demand, which is the profit opportunity... but other people seem to think otherwise, and unless I'm misrepresenting what KeSPA does, I'd really like it if someone taught me something here. | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:41 Yurebis wrote: you see, I've read a lot of those assertions, but what exactly has KeSPA done, besides licensing (restricting unregistered players from playing) and regulating (restricting certain actions by the part of players and maybe organizers, idk) if it was nothing but restrictions, how can one open a market by restricting it? Opening a door by putting a lock on it? I thought a market was opened by demand, which is the profit opportunity... but other people seem to think otherwise, and unless I'm misrepresenting what KeSPA does, I'd really like it if someone taught me something here. Restrictions = fewer players = bigger payrolls for the sought after players. Other than that, not sure. I'm no economics major or whatever would know about it. | ||
|
DreaM)XeRO
Korea (South)4667 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:34 urashimakt wrote: Is it crazy to assume Blizzard will try to make money? As long as there's money in eSports, I'd be pretty persuaded to believe such a powerful company would keep it going strong. And don't go using misinformation like SC:BW being the only "truly successful eSport", etc. What makes Halo and WC3 unsuccessful, exactly? considering how small the professional esports scene is i think they should keep said profits to themselves to keep themselves afloat. Blizzard already makes money on wow and the upcoming SC2 and D3 why they want MORE is just greed | ||
|
Milkis
5003 Posts
you see, I've read a lot of those assertions, but what exactly has KeSPA done, besides licensing (restricting unregistered players from playing) and regulating (restricting certain actions by the part of players and maybe organizers, idk) if it was nothing but restrictions, how can one open a market by restricting it? Opening a door by putting a lock on it? I thought a market was opened by demand, which is the profit opportunity... but other people seem to think otherwise, and unless I'm misrepresenting what KeSPA does, I'd really like it if someone taught me something here. If there's demand for a more indepth explanation, I'll give one in the future. But you should think of KeSPA like the NBA or the MLB or something like that. There's a lot of transaction costs into making a successful, organized league, and that's why such organizations are needed. | ||
|
MaYuu
Sweden516 Posts
Now, ten years later and when I've sold million of copies of the football and not giving a fuck what happens really since I got these other "footballs" selling like crazy, I'm releasing Football 2.0 and demand that I have rights over every player in every team. I also want a fee for every dime earned by the TV companies that are airing the teams competing and I also want that people now start paying me if they want to host a tournament or competition using football 2.0. Sounds fair right? | ||
|
Biff The Understudy
France7903 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:45 DreaM)XeRO wrote: considering how small the professional esports scene is i think they should keep said profits to themselves to keep themselves afloat. Blizzard already makes money on wow and the upcoming SC2 and D3 why they want MORE is just greed Don't be naive. It's not about greed, it's about how works a company. A company is own by shareholders who invest and want money back for their investment. The shareholders don't give a fuck about what the company does, they just decide who runs the company and the only responsability the managers have is the responsability towards them to make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time (actually that's called capitalism). There is no reason wy Blizzard should work differently than General Motors, Total or Mc Donald. Even if you think their products are awesome. | ||
|
Yurebis
United States1452 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:29 Asta wrote: And how do business profit more if not by giving consumers what they want?I believe this kind of thinking is mostly why people support Blizzard. And I think that it is naive. Blizzard is not some club of programmers who create games for fun. They are professionals and even if they are good guys, they can not run their company in whichever way they like it. They have to make business decisions the same way other big companies do it. That they have this good of an image is mostly due to all the public relations work they do for their fans, but they rarely get judged by their business decisions. On May 05 2010 05:29 Asta wrote: Not really necessary then?On the other hand is KeSPA, which is a governing body for a sport. As with all other organizations, they will be fighting for their profit, but they are mostly dependent on the success of their sport. They will of course fight against organizations trying to take some of the sports popularity and market that on their own (like GOM). And like all other governing bodies they won't always be popular with the fans because they are mostly working with sponsors and broadcasters. But after all, a strong governing body is usually very important for a sport. Some bad examples include Boxing (4 world titles iirc) and also eSports outside of Korea (everyone trying to stake their claim with their own rules and malicious organizations like the cpl). On May 05 2010 05:29 Asta wrote: That there even is an argument between Blizzard and KeSPA is only because Blizzard is holding somewhat of a monopoly for popular games in Korea. For example, in football, there are a lot of products that are needed to play, like the ball or shoes or other clothes (I'm sure there are better examples). None of the creators of said products can claim any right to decide how professional football shoot be run. But that's only because they are replaceable. If there were a lot of games that would be as popular as Starcraft, then this whole discussion wouldn't exist. If Blizzard wants to be an ass and deny everyone the right to broadcast starcraft 2 unless they pay them 100 million dollars, they can do that, but no one is gonna broadcast and starcraft 2 will die, and they will lose profit. Players aren't stuck with one game. Sadly for korea, starcraft progaming seems to be stuck with the joke that KeSPA is. On May 05 2010 05:29 Asta wrote: Yeah, but they can't squish too hard or no profit will be made. They have to respond to the market demand, and do the most efficient job they can to supply enough to make better profits. Progaming isn't particularly that inelastic of a market that they can charge anything and sponsors will have to accept. If they charge too high, sponsors will look to sponsor cheaper venues (like broodwar maybe), simple as that...What is actually going on is that Blizzard Managers are trying to get as much out of their quasi-monopoly because they realize that control over the sport of Starcraft 2 would not only get them a lot of money in the short run. They'd also strengthen their monopole even more and increase their brand value incredibly for future games. hardly a monopoly at all w\ a game that hasn't even come out yet... | ||
|
Yurebis
United States1452 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:50 MaYuu wrote: Lets say I start selling, lets say, a new form of football. I have copyright of the football and and I sell it all over the world. The football is the shit in every country for about 4 years but then it start to fade away (sort of like pokémon cards) So I stop supporting and investing money in it. The only exception is one country where this football is THE BOMB. It's on live TV millions of people are watching people play with this ball and this is their bread and butter. They live eat breath this ball. Now, ten years later and when I've sold million of copies of the football, I'm releasing Football 2.0 and demand that I have rights over every player in every team. I also want a fee for every dime earned by the TV companies that are airing the teams competing and I also want that people now start paying me if they want to host a tournament or competition using football 2.0. Sounds fair right? I'm not a proponent of IP rights but, if you are, then it should be fair to you. Did you not say you created it? If they don't want to follow your rules, then they can go play something else. (Or just ignore you and maybe get incarcerated by their local government ofc) You're at most only denying them their right to play something that wouldn't have existed if not for you, so you're not stealing from them (on an IP perspective) | ||
|
zerglingsfolife
United States1694 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:50 Biff The Understudy wrote: Don't be naive. It's not about greed, it's about how works a company. A company is own by shareholders who invest and want money back for their investment. The shareholders don't give a fuck about what the company does, they just decide who runs the company and the only responsability the managers have is the responsability towards them to make as much money as possible in the shortest amount of time (actually that's called capitalism). There is no reason wy Blizzard should work differently than General Motors, Total or Mc Donald. Even if you think their products are awesome. This is correct. Every for profit company's most important goal is improving shareholder wealth. Blizzard is no different | ||
|
Yurebis
United States1452 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:48 Milkis wrote: If there's demand for a more indepth explanation, I'll give one in the future. But you should think of KeSPA like the NBA or the MLB or something like that. There's a lot of transaction costs into making a successful, organized league, and that's why such organizations are needed. Alright, but, government-run too? Like, run it my way, or don't run at all? I still don't quite know if KeSPA is governmentally backed or not... I just assumed it was because of how shitty the quality of it's services are LOL On May 05 2010 05:57 zerglingsfolife wrote: This is correct. Every for profit company's most important goal is improving shareholder wealth. Blizzard is no different and how can you increase profits if not by increasing the efficiency or quality at which you provide your products and services to consumers? | ||
|
MaYuu
Sweden516 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:57 Yurebis wrote: I'm not a proponent of IP rights but, if you are, then it should be fair to you. Did you not say you created it? If they don't want to follow your rules, then they can go play something else. (Or just ignore you and maybe get incarcerated by their local government ofc) You're at most only denying them their right to play something that wouldn't have existed if not for you, so you're not stealing from them (on an IP perspective) Thats also known as pure greed. There probably wouldn't even be a football 2.0 if it wasn't for that country. And I wouldn't had made that much money of the ball if it weren't for them. But hey, lets milk some more money even tho it could mean ruining a part of that country's culture. | ||
|
Milkis
5003 Posts
Alright, but, government-run too? Like, run it my way, or don't run at all? I still don't quite know if KeSPA is governmentally backed or not... I just assumed it was because of how shitty the quality of it's services are LOL It's not government run. MLB and NBA practices similar practices regarding "run it my way or don't run at all". | ||
rotinegg
United States1719 Posts
On May 05 2010 05:50 MaYuu wrote: Lets say I start selling, lets say, a new form of football. I have copyright of the football and and I sell it all over the world. The football is the shit in every country for about 4 years but then it start to fade away (sort of like pokémon cards) So I stop supporting and investing money in it. The only exception is one country where this football is THE BOMB. It's on live TV millions of people are watching people play with this ball and this is their bread and butter. They live eat breath this ball. Now, ten years later and when I've sold million of copies of the football and not giving a fuck what happens really since I got these other "footballs" selling like crazy, I'm releasing Football 2.0 and demand that I have rights over every player in every team of both football 1.0 and 2.0. I also want a fee for every dime earned by the TV companies that are airing the teams competing and I also want that people now start paying me if they want to host a tournament or competition using football 2.0 and 1.0. Sounds fair right? fixed | ||
| ||
