|
Personally trying to reconcile two points of view:
1) I loathe Kespa, don't trust them worth a damn, and would not shed a tear if they ceased to exist right this moment. Some other, hopefully better, organization would form and pick up the slack.
2) I have major issues with claiming any jurisdiction over secondary markets by Blizzard. Blizzard, in my opinion, is well within their rights to claim royalties of any amount really. It is their game, they can sell it for whatever price they want and charge whatever they want to allow it to be broadcast on TV. That is where their rights cease in my opinion, regardless of what BS copyright law might say. Claiming ownership on all broadcasts and secondary market creations is absolutely wrong and I do not wish to support that activity in any way.
|
That's exactly how I feel about it Plethora.
Yes, Kespa suck. However I feel that right now they're the lesser of the two evils. Let's get rid of the Blizzard juggernaut now, before they screw us with a monopoly. Anyone with money sense can see that's what they're aiming for.
Once we've eliminated that problem, then we can deal with Kespa. Fighting on two fronts is a waste of time and energy when we can solve this problem in a quick and efficient manner. I don't see why it can't be done. After all it's the community that made this all possible in the first place.
|
IMO KeSPA does not deserve any praise for what they did for Starcraft in Korea. Blizzard made the game, the fans and players promoted it. KeSPA was just there to take advantage of the situation. If it was not KeSPA, it would have been some other big corporation that just wanted to take control and make profit off of something that naturally became popular.
|
On May 15 2010 05:37 CScythe wrote:
IMO KeSPA does not deserve any praise for what they did for Starcraft in Korea. Blizzard made the game, the fans and players promoted it. KeSPA was just there to take advantage of the situation. If it was not KeSPA, it would have been some other big corporation that just wanted to take control and make profit off of something that naturally became popular.
Someone had to take the risk and initiative. There are numerous other games that failed where there were tons of losses when it was tried to be made popular.
|
On May 15 2010 05:42 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2010 05:37 CScythe wrote:
IMO KeSPA does not deserve any praise for what they did for Starcraft in Korea. Blizzard made the game, the fans and players promoted it. KeSPA was just there to take advantage of the situation. If it was not KeSPA, it would have been some other big corporation that just wanted to take control and make profit off of something that naturally became popular. Someone had to take the risk and initiative. There are numerous other games that failed where there were tons of losses when it was tried to be made popular.
On May 15 2010 03:18 Kashmir wrote:
That's exactly how I feel about it Plethora.
Yes, Kespa suck. However I feel that right now they're the lesser of the two evils. Let's get rid of the Blizzard juggernaut now, before they screw us with a monopoly. Anyone with money sense can see that's what they're aiming for.
Once we've eliminated that problem, then we can deal with Kespa. Fighting on two fronts is a waste of time and energy when we can solve this problem in a quick and efficient manner. I don't see why it can't be done. After all it's the community that made this all possible in the first place.
What?
|
On May 15 2010 05:43 FabledIntegral wrote:Show nested quote +On May 15 2010 05:42 FabledIntegral wrote:On May 15 2010 05:37 CScythe wrote:
IMO KeSPA does not deserve any praise for what they did for Starcraft in Korea. Blizzard made the game, the fans and players promoted it. KeSPA was just there to take advantage of the situation. If it was not KeSPA, it would have been some other big corporation that just wanted to take control and make profit off of something that naturally became popular. Someone had to take the risk and initiative. There are numerous other games that failed where there were tons of losses when it was tried to be made popular. Show nested quote +On May 15 2010 03:18 Kashmir wrote:
That's exactly how I feel about it Plethora.
Yes, Kespa suck. However I feel that right now they're the lesser of the two evils. Let's get rid of the Blizzard juggernaut now, before they screw us with a monopoly. Anyone with money sense can see that's what they're aiming for.
Once we've eliminated that problem, then we can deal with Kespa. Fighting on two fronts is a waste of time and energy when we can solve this problem in a quick and efficient manner. I don't see why it can't be done. After all it's the community that made this all possible in the first place. What?
ITT: Very few people who know what they're talking about. Hope that helps explain the confusion.
|
The logic capability on this forum is astonishing, seeing the level of blind (Mostly American) fanboyism towards a company like Blizzard which is owned by Activision, which is owned by Vivendi Universal which in turn is owned by General Electric, which is basically the BIGGEST conglomerate in the WORLD, owned by very powerful oligarchs like Rockefeller. I would suggest strongly to READ the article to the fans of Blizzard.
Firstly, Kespa agreed to pay ROYALTIES to Blizzard for e-sports broadcasts and competitions. Outside of future IP right, That is where IP rights binding to a software developer like BLizzard end.
But, Blizzard then demands stifling stipulations to the negotiations(logical):
1. All KESPA-Blizzard legal contracts can be modified after one fiscal year. Any changes regarding increased royalties or any change can be implemented immediately thereafter. KESPA has NO say to future league changes unless agreed upon by Blizzard(General Electric).
2. BLIZZARD can audit KESPA at any point to see how much MONEY KESPA garnered during a fiscal year. IF Blizzard sees to it that KESPA MADE A CRAP load of money in one year, then the AUDIT will reveal the financials of Kespas Boon. Then, BLizzard will INCREASE royalty rates as a result of revealing audits of Kespa.
3. Ownership to the rights of Broadcast. Blizzard will own the pie on the backs all Korean engineered Broadcasts of future starcraft competitions. Plus a Licence fee, could be yearly bi-annaul, anything. Pure $$$$$$$$$
4. Any Player can be signed to an additional contract with COntract with Blizzard, with complete over-ride of Other stipulated contracts from Professional Starcraft teams.
5. All league transactions must be VERIFIED and authorized by Blizzard.
(Some people say that this is for the corporate image of Blizzard that they must protect. Remember they sell software. How can being a game developer suddenly transform their responsibilities as being content creators to game companies dicatating Corporate Public relations managers of Official League governments ? riddle me that Batman.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Further more, Do you think that Blizzard exists as a game developer not to make a ridiculous amount of money even possibly directing enhanced machiavellian techniques to accomplish massive Profit taking? Of course silly, Blizzard is a part of the Big Boys now. That is how the Boys roll. Take the money and control everything.
There are no needed moralistic debates, who is right or wrong at this juncture, Blizzard and Kespa. The outcome is what is pertinent to pay attention to regarding KESPA Vs. Blizzard's game outside of their game, Starcraft BroodWar. So it is neccessary to ignore who is right or wrong(Ad Hominem, appealing to emotion), which is blatantly clear (That legally Blizzard crossed the line) and gander at the real issue relevant to E-Sports. That issue is what is going to happen to the future of gaming into the 21st century? Well here is what I think:
~Gaming, massive immerse virtual competitions will be the growth engine in Sporting competition in the future. Growth in e-sports is so obvious now if you see the trends in society as a whole. ~
Unfortunately, the problem with the growth of E-sports currently has been the lack of a participating audience, this problem contributed by the popularity of athletic competitions like baseball etc. (Since audience volume or the Sports $Pie$ is mostly consumed by athletic sports entertainment). But time will march on through this century. And heavy sponsorships from the Biggies in the United States and Europe WILL make e-sports a reality. Big plans are being made to transform not only military protocol like Revolutions in military affairs (Unoccupied aerical Drones, or even digitally connected soldiers {see Metal Gear 2 and 4] connected to a central Network) but also the entertainment complex as well.
The question is why will big corporations sponsor E-sports competitions? Simply, easier managed audience (agenda to integrate digital entertainment with behavior), a chance to shape society into a new paradigm of digital convergence. We are being hooked up into the matrix surreptitously quicker than the public is aware of. The digital age is morphing itself to becoming full bore presense in 21st century. And most importantly Digital entertainment is A BIG plan of the politicians of present date, you know our rulers.
====================================================================
So my hypothesis, which is educated is that, E-sports will grow with or without KESPA and Korea. And, E-sports will grow with or without Blizzard. It is a must be( that is E-sports entertainment dynamics), a big dream to create massive e-sports complex for the ENTIRE Planet.
What do I think will happen to Blizzard? To be honest with you. I think blizzard will be successful in North America and in Europe. They will take control with the help of major sponsorship money, media cooperation like NBC( which is owned by GE by the way), and infrastructure building to create new leagues in North America and Europe. Kespa, will probably be successful in Korea, in spite of Starcraft 2 launching in North america and Europe. Newer Players in South Korea and children will grow up, they might defect to North American or European leagues to compete for the Starcraft 2 tournaments and team battles. Many South Koreans will stay faithful to Kespa, but Broodwar will become antiquated, in light of newer iterations and evolutions of Starcraft Blizzard updates North America and Europe with.
IF Blizzard fails to revolutionize E-sports( due to their destructive bold escoriating anti-social policies some other corporation like EA (Look who is behind EA, that's why they are that huge) or Take-Two will fill the void. Blizzard happens to be in an expedient postition to fully steer the course of E-sports to its proper direction at this moment( since Korea fostered and enabled Blizzard's Growth in E-sports domain). Since Koreans helped grow Starcraft and e-sports, Blizzard can realize its dream to become the anchor of the e-sports growing Oak tree. BLizzard's Starcraft 2 is coming out, The plan is to spread the e-sports business, bandwagoning the popularity of Starcraft 1, to Europe and North America. With or without Korea, which some of you have pointed out, eventually E-sports will become a major force in our society( remember we are wired now in 2010. Most developed countries have broad band access. Developed countries even the US did NOT Have reliabe Broadband access in 2000).
Benjamin Williams.
|
it's easy to see both points of view, but in my opinion blizzard is asking for a couple of very unreasonable things including the auditing (which is an absurd and even offensive way to look at 'friendly' negotiations) and rights of ownership on all the material kespa produces.
The way to look at this is simple, as explained by KESPA e-Sports are borderline becoming almost a 'sport' in a way. that's the way KESPA looks at it, while the way Blizzard looks at it is, we need you to pay $ if you want to run our copyright material, and they are in the right to. HOWEVER, they shouldn't be. The Constitutional Provision of Copyright and the Copyright Act that all countrys abide by (the united states was one of the last countrys to sign it) is OBVIOUSLY not designed for eSports...
if this was an actual sport NATURALLY blizzard couldn't have a right to claim right of ownership over any footage and wouldn't be allowed to interfere in any way with the sponsorship, marketing etc. KESPA is like "NHL or NBA" here, so imagine if "John Basketball" the creator of Basketball appeared out of nowhere and said "I invented, copyrighted and pattented basketball, so anything you, the NBA broadcasts any material or new 'play' your players and coaches may come up with; I OWN, and you have to pay me a % (that we'll agree on) for every league that you host in the future. Of course, this doesnt affect ONLY "Nicholas NBA, owner of the NBA" it affects all of its players as well, as they have to pay a high percentage to "John Basketball" the prizes for the leagues and interests of sponsors drop, suddenly Lebron James can't live off of Basketball and has to find a job at McDonald's because 'John Basketball' is too damn selfish.
However this can't possibly happen because Basketball involves action and things such as walking, you can't really copyright ideas, only solid products, you can copyright a video of lebron james walking (with his authorization) make copies and sell it. But you can't say that you own Lebron James' right to walk.
Sadly, as KESPA states, this is NOT a sport, its right in between, and while KESPA's Stand is : THIS IS A SPORT TOO, LET US GROW AS SUCH FOR THE SAKE THE FUTURE OF E-SPORTS (and of course the sake of their pockets)
BLIZZARD says: NO, we're looking at this as if it was a new album by the Jonas Brothers, you have no right of reproduction and if you want to continue to play your cd in public places, or throw it on TV, it is considered a 'performance' and you don't own the rights to this, so we need to come to an unresonable agreement where I just get more $ than I am already making, so thanks a lot for the free publicity and what you've done to help our game become as big as a Sport, but from now on, you're gonna have to pay us if you want to continue to do this. (looking after their pockets as well)
SOLUTION: Fix the Copyright Act! how? go to the UN and teach them about E-Sports. so yeah... there is really no way to go (at least not for a few years until world leaders decide esports need different rules, in between) at it other than hope blizzard eases down for the sake of not only starcraft, but E-Sports in General.
|
I am also of the belief that Blizzard should not own every little thing related to Starcraft.
In an earlier post, I drew the analogy of map-making to that of creating content with other tools such as Photoshop or Word. Let's take it a step further.
Let's assume, just for a moment, that a single large contractor creates a very complex piece of equipment. Let's pretend that I am Lockheed Martin and I am the sole provider of a new space vehicle capable of exiting and re-entering the atmosphere (perhaps there are many, many contractors involved); but nothing prevents Blizzard from outsourcing some parts of its development or QA testing either. No one will doubt that the new space vehicle is far more complex than both Photoshop and any game that Blizzard will ever create. Thus complexity, in and of itself, can not be a determining factor in the rights of how the "tool" is used.
If Lockheed sells this space vehicle ("tool") to anyone, it is a given that they can use it how they see fit, and that Lockheed will have no say in the use or the promotion of it. There are countless examples of this over the last two centuries.
The difference with SC2 is that Blizzard isn't really selling you a "tool" or even a "game". According to the ToS, it's more like a license to temporarily play SC2 as long as you do not violate any of the Draconian rules set forth by Blizzard. (Yes, I do realize that SC2 costs a lot less than a space vehicle. But in the long run, they might make more money nonetheless.)
It's a license in the sense that Blizzard can revoke your right to play at anytime since it controls Battle.net which is the only to play (even for single-player <sigh>). You make them angry, you forfeit your right to play even though you purchased a "license".
This is a radical departure from traditional gaming dating back to Pong 38 years ago. Until very, very recently, when you bought a game (or application), you could use it in whatever ways you wanted for as long as you wanted without any fear that the manufacturer could immediately, and without warning, take away your rights.
If you look at software in general, licenses have been around for a while, much longer than the "stealth license" of some new games such as SC2. But in all of those cases, none of the licenses dictate in any way how you can use the software for which you purchased a license. There are often disclaimers such as "if you use it in unintended ways and you break shit, it's not our fault". But that's a far cry from dictating how the software can be used.
Legally, Blizzard is in uncharted waters. All of the precedent seems to go against them, but you never know how these things will turn out (especially given the current SCOTUS justices). I am certain that within the next 10 years there will be a major legal battle surrounding this issue. Since KeSPA is Korean, they won't be the ones bringing it on in the US Legal System. But it will happen. Sooner or later. And hopefully the Justices will realize that giving the creator of a tool unlimited power with regards to its use is a really, really bad idea.
|
I won't delve into other demands made by Blizzard other than the audit one as they have been covered countless times over and over in this thread. Obviously some of the demands were taken out of context by Kespa to sway the court of the public opinion to make Blizzard look unreasonable.
However, the demand for the 'right for Blizzard to audit Kespa' is not fully comprehensible to me. This would only make sense if Kespa has agreed to contractual terms to pay % of the revenue they generate from the E-sports scene, which then limited financial audit is understandable. If anything beyond, then it is unreasonable.
Obviously I will need to look into the scope of the audit before I can draw more intellectual conclusion on the situation.
IBM for example, has many resellers and wholesalers, who basically purchases IBM products from IBM in mass and sells them to end users. Not exactly a perfectly parallel example as there is no IP ownership issues in this case, but they are still leveraging entirely off IBM products to generate revenue.
Does that give IBM the right to audit a entirely different organization with different stakeholders, infrastructure, vision and strategies? Hell no. That would reveal some of the companies most intimate confidential details which is really none of IBM's business.
|
On May 15 2010 17:34 Lonegunman2000 wrote:
The logic capability on this forum is astonishing, seeing the level of blind (Mostly American) fanboyism towards a company like Blizzard which is owned by Activision, which is owned by Vivendi Universal which in turn is owned by General Electric, which is basically the BIGGEST conglomerate in the WORLD, owned by very powerful oligarchs like Rockefeller.
Vivendi Entertainment =/= Vivendi =/= Activision Blizzard.
GE electrics owns 80% of Vivendi Entertainment, not Vivendi or Activision Blizzard.
|
There is no reason to hedge an argument based on, "They are a corporation, therefore they are greedy, etc etc." All businesses are in the business of making money. If they aren't in the business of making money, they aren't in business.
If you want to learn something about law, rather than making completely baseless assumptions about society or whatever, look at this post:
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=5227155
We really don't know whats in the contract. We do know that KeSPA has given Blizzard the shaft with BW and burned that bridge with 6 years unethical behavior. Blizzard just may be slapping them back. I for one think the KeSPA deserves it, especially with the recent news of game fixing. Please.
Just to give a basis on how things work in real life:
If you work for any company doing research and you design something new, get a patent on it, the company owns it. Same thing with anything else. If you create something using someone else's tool, unless that tool is sold as a product to create things, and they release rights to ownership of what is created, the owners of the tool have partial ownership rights on what is created.
No tool, no creation.
I also wanted to comment on a previous post that stated that making video games is more complicated than doing aerospace engineering and rocket science. Give me a break. Go to school for Aerospace Engineering and go to school for software design, and tell me which is harder, I've done both, and Engineering makes software design look like kindergarten math. Engineers have to write software applications all the time to solve math problems that can't be solved analytically. There is a GLOBAL shortage of Engineers, and way too many software designers out of work.
And for those of you who want to say that game design is hard, doing the engine can be time consuming, but its not that hard. Funny thing is, all the best engines use physics mathematics (Havok, etc.), which is what Engineers have been doing in their application design for decades.
|
morally:
I feel that Blizzard is entitled some money if S2 is used in broadcast, at least if it is done commercially. I do not feel that they should be entitled derived rights on replays and or vods etc because they own the copyright on S2.
legally:
Muaziz +1
Some big media companies are used being able to extend "IP" to suite their purposes. Sooner or later there will be a resistance to this push. If not from within USA then from EU or China.
IP - imaginary property(or so I often think) ie mostly software patents + copyright +trademarks are lumped together and called intellectual property.
Software patents - lol, lets patent sorting backwards etc ...
Copyright - Micky mouse act .... seriously lifetime + 95 years?
Trademarks - Seems mostly reasonable from what little i know about them.
Copyright should be limited to commercial uses mainly and only give limited ability to control derived products. The sad part is that the only party willing to even discuss these issues are the pirateparty.
|
On May 17 2010 01:16 Razor[cF] wrote:
I also wanted to comment on a previous post that stated that making video games is more complicated than doing aerospace engineering and rocket science. Give me a break. Go to school for Aerospace Engineering and go to school for software design, and tell me which is harder, I've done both, and Engineering makes software design look like kindergarten math. Engineers have to write software applications all the time to solve math problems that can't be solved analytically. There is a GLOBAL shortage of Engineers, and way too many software designers out of work.
And for those of you who want to say that game design is hard, doing the engine can be time consuming, but its not that hard. Funny thing is, all the best engines use physics mathematics (Havok, etc.), which is what Engineers have been doing in their application design for decades.
Yeah, I thought that was a pretty arrogant quip by Carmack myself. Writing a screwy ingenious routine to calculate an inverse square root is great and all, but to stand in front of an audience of Aerospace Engineers and call their work child's play by comparison to writing the Quake engine is pretty damned egotistical. And, yeah, I'm also an engineer, physicist, and a programmer. I'd like to see Carmack shipped off to ITER to see if he can't just whip up something to get fusion working.
|
LOL @ jgad
I'm a nuclear engineer, so I love your comment on the ITER. I actually am getting into plasma and fusion research. Magnetic confinement for the win!
|
On May 18 2010 03:11 Razor[cF] wrote:
LOL @ jgad
I'm a nuclear engineer, so I love your comment on the ITER. I actually am getting into plasma and fusion research. Magnetic confinement for the win!
The funny thing is I actually dug up that press conference and watched it to see wtf he was on about. First he says that aerospace engineering is easy and that him and his buddies could basically do up the design phase on a napkin. The hard part, he said, was getting it to actually work - and work reliably, LOL! Well, no shit Sherlock... engineering is more than a handful of equations, eh.
|
On May 04 2010 07:45 rotinegg wrote:Show nested quote +On May 04 2010 07:42 Railz wrote:
How long before it will be before some moron says, "but Kespa created esports, Blizzard needs them" Kespa didn't create esports, the players did. Playing under harsh conditions with no pay, yet having the Charisma to get the government to back them is what made Kespa.
Blizzard could have ended this a long time ago and never did, all they did prior to SC2 was try and limit how much KeSPA claimed rights over it. Now blizzard is cutting them from the get go. difference is the stakes weren't that high back then, but now, esports is huge, and it's not very reasonable for blizzard to step in now and demand compensation for esports' success in SK
Nothing could be more reasonable. Kespa can make thier own game, if they don't want to pay blizzard for theirs. Its pretty simple. It's also reasonable to know who is going to advertise and be associated with your game, since a bad decision by kespa could make blizzard look bad. ESports do not exist without the game, they can exist without kespa.
|
what i don't like is the 1 year contract, basically blizz can just make them pay more every year? that seems like greedy bullshit, just fucking settle on a yearly fee for a long term period, say 5 years and done! always trying to be greedy bastards. I'm not taking any sides cuz they're both equally wrong and greedy, doesnt blizzard make enough money from WoW without having to lay down some gimmick to increase fees for KeSPA as SC2 progaming's popularity increases?
|
the unseen reality though is that without Kespa, E-sports would be quite a wreck. Even though im a huge blizzard fan and a huge anti-fan of Kespa, what they are requesting is hey lets look over the conditions vs Blizzard which is basically saying do as we say bitch. However... if we got someone else representing Kespa.... maybe that'll changes things....
+1 if you want Boxer in charge of Kespa
|
On May 04 2010 07:46 redtooth wrote:
i'm actually surprised at the number of people taking kespa's side. just try to remember a time you've heard kespa's name associated with a positive act? they are just a bunch of greedy bureaucratic idiots who are trying their best to stay alive with SC2 looming around the corner.
dude calm down... kespa cant just be taken as self-evident
i dont know another country where the government accepted e-sports as a real sport and pushed it as much as kespa did. i know they are far away from being perfect, but i have to take their side in this case. Blizzard doesnt want money from kespa, they want to take control over everything kespa does, probably to kill professional broodwar and open a path for starcraft2.
oh and starcraft 2 will get a 18+ ranking in korea, so kespa wont be able to broadcast anything related to it
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
