|
On October 07 2010 23:30 udgnim wrote:
See now a replay or the games played are in the grey area. I can see it going toward Blizzard's favour since the simple cost of game does not meet the criteria for using the product directly to make money.
At the end it will be balance of
1. 'What did the buyer paid for?' including the price and intention of the parties.
2. Resonableness, has what the defendant created far off from what the Plaintiff created/intended (i.e. Custom Maps are nothing like Blizzard created/intended, replays can be argued because of the notion that the creation process/phase of the game is what Plaintiff had intended)
Who is directly using the product to make money though considering it's free to go and watch to the games and they are broadcast for free on television? If they were charging people to watch games like GomTV then it would probably be clear cut in court, but they aren't. The profit to them is solely the advertisement for the sponsors.
If KeSPA shows in court that the money goes solely towards the continued running of tournaments and upkeep of teams i feel the court will probably rule in their favour. Blizzard's demands were far beyond simply a license fee and seemed pretty unreasonable to me.
|
On October 07 2010 23:42 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 23:33 ZeaL. wrote:
So an anonymous blogger posts a ridiculous "eyewitness" account, deletes said account, and then curious TL'er finds snippets and translates it for the BW section of TL. 90% of BW section goes into kneejerk reaction and blasts Blizzard for being stupid and not knowing its place, just like every other article posted about KeSPA vs Gretech. Why don't we make a thread in BW where people can just rant and rave about how people want Blizzard to die and KeSPA to win and close it on October 16th when we'll ACTUALLY have a legit idea of whats going to happen. Threads like this are just flamebait to get people angry at Blizzard without any substantial reasoning for it. This type of stuff is just blatant "leaking" information to get people's attention, just like what Apple does every year before their stupid apple conference or whatever. K, to clarify 1) Not an anonymous blogger -- the guy's a pretty famous blogger, and gets interviews with producers/operators of games quite often (he seems to be a game industry insider) 2) He deleted said account after people started linking to it and posting it everywhere 3) Not really snippets, but this is pretty much the entire post Just saying, don't just say "oh this is just a blog post so it isn't credible". I personally find it more credible than a lot of the stuff that gets posted on Fomos  Also, to people who says "It doesnt sound like MM", 1) it could easily be a paraphrase, 2) It's a English -> Korean -> Guy overhearing/remembering it -> Korean -> English translation so of course it wont be perfect. Few notes 1) Didn't know Blizzard had the kind of pull to even consider moving GSL from overseas (doesn't that tell you anything) 2) The Korean Minister was rather rude -- cultural context aside, that's not what you expect from a government official especially in Korea (even though MM "could have had it coming")
Okay, that makes it a little more believable, but still, why pull it? If true, what would he have to lose from leaving it online? Also, since you know Korean pretty well, how accurately does the Korean->English translation look in the OP? I just find the whole thing to be too ridiculous to be true, it just sounds like something fabricated to rile people up.
|
On October 07 2010 22:27 Red_beard wrote:
IP rights have so many grey areas, where corporations can go bandit on people. Film/game/music corporations basically have monopolies on their products, and the resulting situation is always monopoly vs. customer.
I think that a company claiming that recordings of people playing their game belong to it is wrong. Just like Adidas trying to destroy UEFA and take over the Championships because players are using Adidas footballs/shoes. Or the architect who planned the stadium demanding money for showing the stadium on TV. It's just not right, the game is just a tool - everyone who plays it has bought it legally, that's that. What we want to watch on TV is the players and their skill foremost.
In short, it should not be possible or permissible under law for companies to claim ownerships of recordings of people using their product. If this can happen, then why can't Bosch suddenly demand that everyone pay them extra $$ for living in a house built with Bosch tools.
I think this is really wrong, it destroys creativity and freedom and should simply not be possible in any legal system. Otherwise we are creating a world where more and more companies are simply weaseling money from people using obscure and annoying technological / legal solutions instead of just selling their products on clear terms.
It's all well and good that you think that all people want to watch is the game being played not the game itself, but the fact of the matter is, Blizzard is not agreeing to let you broadcast their game when they sell you the game, in fact, they are explicitly forbidding that you do so without permission. Be it fair or not, that's just how it is. To demand it to be otherwise is the equivalent of buying something at a terrible price and then stealing something else from that vendor to get what you believe is a reasonable amount of goods for your money. As much as this may sounds unreasonable, you don't have to buy/consume SC:BW or SC2, its your choice, and if the price is too high compared to the utility you receive, then don't do it.
If the community is really just looking for the skill of the players when they watch, then its not beyond the scope of imagination to think that they should just develop their own free game, after all, they have the backing of an entire government behind them. And then they wouldn't have any trouble with Blizzard or any of this.
To reiterate what I'm saying here, I'm not expressing whether or not this is "fair", but simply saying that to demand something that both parties did not agree to sets a terrible precedent. The $60 you spent on SC2 is obviously giving you more value as a gamer than $60 you might have spent on some run of the mill Xbox 360 game, despite the fact that SC2 doesn't come with the right to broadcast games of it. Moreover, there is clearly additional value in the broadcast rights to games, and if you didn't get the company to agree to give you those when you bought the game (which we didn't, unless you called up Blizz to negotiate the EULA), then they don't have to give them to you. If the price they are setting on the good is too high, don't buy it. That's just how free markets work, if you have a high quality good, you sell it for more than a low quality good, and if you've got a problem with the fact that Blizzard is doing that, then I feel like you should be advocating world wide communism, not that Blizzard is a terrible greedy company.
|
China is the next gaming mecca... end of story
|
Regarding the above post by TestSubject - that is exactly what I meant when I said IP creates quasi-monopolies. Those monopolies can be exploited by companies using terms of use contracts, wherein they stipulate that anything you build with the hammer purchased from them is their property.
I believe that, upon selling you a product, the seller is not entitled to complete control over what you do with this product. You may call this socialist, but I do not wish to live in a world where - for example - whenever I take a photograph I have to pay someone a fee for the object or objects being photographed. I do not believe that it is legal or moral to try to stretch property rights at any cost and in any absurd way (you looked at the paining in my hallway through the window, by terms of contract you now owe the author 20 bucks for you 2 minutes of looking). At some point you will get a price tag on the air you breathe.
|
Proleague will START very soon and Blizzard is still being a dickhead refusing to cooperate, even with the government.
Of course the government has little right to start the new Proleague without Blizzard's permission, but it has more than enough power to kill off the SC2 scene (Ex : A simple 18+ or 21+ rating will end its life as an e-sport).
If things continue like that, there will be no BW and SC2, what the fuck ?
Blizzard are supposed to concede in this situation, because government never concede, especially against insignificant foreign company like Blizzard. Even if Blizzard concede they still gain a whole lot of profit each year from both Sc1 and Sc2 scenes, I don't get why they are still being headstrong right now.
|
On October 08 2010 00:42 mimikami wrote:
Proleague will START very soon and Blizzard is still being a dickhead refusing to cooperate, even with the government.
Of course the government has little right to start the new Proleague without Blizzard's permission, but it has more than enough power to kill off the SC2 scene (Ex : A simple 18+ or 21+ rating will end its life as an e-sport).
If things continue like that, there will be no BW and SC2, what the fuck ?
Blizzard are supposed to concede in this situation, because government never concede, especially against insignificant foreign company like Blizzard. Even if Blizzard concede they still gain a whole lot of profit each year from both Sc1 and Sc2 scenes, I don't get why they are still being headstrong right now.
What do you mean by the government has little right to start the new Proleague? If you are in korean soil, you are under korean law, so that means that they can rule out whatever terms of service blizzard has if they want to.
And I think the people saying that this is a cultural difference is blowing things out of proportion. If he was talking to a US government official in a manner like that, he'd probably get the same reaction seeing as he's the one who wants them to do something.
|
Games are inherently in a different area than things like a camera or a shoe or whatever. The engine itself on which the game runs is usually trademarked, being a work of craftmanship taking many, many man-hours to complete. Should the engine just belong to whoever buys it, then? Should people be allowed to take that engine and use it to create their own games and sell them, without the company's permission?
In addition, in games like Starcraft, almost all the in-game content, from the art, the unit names, the critters, etc, are all intellectual property, in the same way the character of Han Solo is intellectual property; should anyone be able to write a novel about Han Solo, and then sell it for big bucks?
The analogy of a hammer is useless here. The hammer is one tool of many that is used to perform a few simple tasks in conjunction with a vast amount of raw material. The hammer is not a creative work, nor is it a work that is as much the grounds of your creations as a game and a game engine are.
A better one would be a book; just because someone sells you a book, that doesn't give you any right to rearrange the pages in it (which is essentially what most map-making consists of; merely re-arranging assets and art that Blizzard has provided for you) and sell it as your own product; nor does it give you a right to take the characters from that book, put them in an adventure of your own, and then sell it (which is what perhaps more creative map-makers do, the ones who still use Blizzard art and assets); and nor does it give you a right to take the book, write over it with your own plot and characters, and sell it (which is what map-makes who only use the engine are essentially doing).
It's fine if you think you should be able to do all these things; but these are essentially the relevant questions here, and following them is not some kind of ridiculous tyranny, as you're making it out to be.
|
What do you mean by the government has little right to start the new Proleague? If you are in korean soil, you are under korean law, so that means that they can rule out whatever terms of service blizzard has if they want to.
And I think the people saying that this is a cultural difference is blowing things out of proportion. If he was talking to a US government official in a manner like that, he'd probably get the same reaction seeing as he's the one who wants them to do something.
Korea is party to international laws on IP rights. They can't simply change things around without getting into deep, deep waters legally...
|
On October 08 2010 00:56 Captain Peabody wrote:Show nested quote +What do you mean by the government has little right to start the new Proleague? If you are in korean soil, you are under korean law, so that means that they can rule out whatever terms of service blizzard has if they want to.
And I think the people saying that this is a cultural difference is blowing things out of proportion. If he was talking to a US government official in a manner like that, he'd probably get the same reaction seeing as he's the one who wants them to do something. Korea is party to international laws on IP rights. They can't simply change things around without getting into deep, deep waters legally...
It's not as clearcut as you think. As been said by other people, Blizzard is claiming IP rights to things without precedent like replays and everything that is used within their game.
|
On October 08 2010 00:29 Red_beard wrote:
Regarding the above post by TestSubject - that is exactly what I meant when I said IP creates quasi-monopolies. Those monopolies can be exploited by companies using terms of use contracts, wherein they stipulate that anything you build with the hammer purchased from them is their property.
I believe that, upon selling you a product, the seller is not entitled to complete control over what you do with this product. You may call this socialist, but I do not wish to live in a world where - for example - whenever I take a photograph I have to pay someone a fee for the object or objects being photographed. I do not believe that it is legal or moral to try to stretch property rights at any cost and in any absurd way (you looked at the paining in my hallway through the window, by terms of contract you now owe the author 20 bucks for you 2 minutes of looking). At some point you will get a price tag on the air you breathe.
With a hammer though, you simply wouldn't buy the hammer that had the ridiculous contract, you would buy the one offer by a different company without it. This would cause the contracted hammer company to either lower their prices, drop the contract, or go out of business, all of which are working toward a better hammer for your money.
But really, I'm not as much saying that this system is ideal for video games, but the fact of the matter is, its the system we have in place, and I think its more "unfair" to try and force a company into something that we decide is best for consumers in a way that is inconsistent with our economic laws rules than it is "unfair" to let Blizzard name their price on their product. The fact that so many people find it so incredibly undesirable to just not consume their product, to me, seems to show its value even more, and suggest that is worth more money than it being sold for now.
The key in all of this is that both parties understand and consent beforehand, and that's why in practice things get so messy. If you knew that your hammer came with a shitty contract, you'd buy a different tool or even consider making our own. It seems that with Blizzard's games, people kind of just took the EULA as some legal garbage that didn't mean anything, and as such, everyone has agreed to something they didn't really intend to agree to. To me, there enlies the real problem. If people took EULAs more seriously, then companies would have to stop putting so much ridiculous stuff in them or people wouldn't buy the games, and ultimately we wouldn't end up where we are now, if the game companies going "But, you agreed to this!!!" and the consumers saying "That doesn't really count, everyone just presses agree anyway...". When it comes down to it, the product we buy comes with the condition of the EULA, whether or not we take them seriously.
|
Well I really hope Blizzard backs down, and going through this entire thread, I found the best post was this:
On October 07 2010 15:23 snowdrift wrote:
Fuck yeah
For the sake of BW and the principle of not having a single entity establish a monopoly over esports, KeSPA and Korea need to win.
By any means necessary. I want bribes, I want collusion between giant conglomerates and government agencies, I want stone-faced -- CJ-faced, Jaedong-staring -- Korean officials to investigate, to stall, to delay; I want judges to bring down the hammer and tear apart this extremely restrictive conception of IP rights. SC2 will exist freely, or will not exist at all.
I mostly just agree because I hate the IP rights Blizzard is trying to enforce.
|
Well, as a person who has being in some important political meetings in my country, I can say that things can go in the way that the blogger stated, I have heard very important people swearing, being rude with others and getting the same as back, nothing strange in that point. What really matters here is that if Activision - Blizzard is challenging a government they are going to lose and not for the IP rights stuff (I let that to the experts in that matter), remember the governments have teeth very sharp teeth, they only need to put some strange regulation and you will be just out of the scene.
|
I'm not so sure I trust this article too much if the rough translation holds the same amount of bias in it.
No one should be surprised that members of the USA government were there. This is an issue regarding international laws, and more importantly, laws that affect trade, something the US is very keen about.
Regardless, now that it's reached this point we're headed down the Cuban Missile Crisis Route, in the sense that it is no longer about Cuba vs. the US, and now more along the lines of the Soviet Union vs. the US.
And much like in that case, the two major parties will come to a settlement and everyone else will have to deal with it. Blizzard won't get quite what they demand and KeSPA will probably just end up paying a small amount of money to host BW.
|
go kespa! <3 i just want bw to carry on ^^
|
laws that affect trade, something the US is very keen about.
Yeah, especially when it comes to ignoring World Trade Organization rulling about online gambling.
US government as every government is keen about enforcing rules to ensure its profit (not that there is anything wrong with it, that's what governments are for).
|
Not a good idea to be rude to someone in a position of power in Korea when negotiating IMO. 'Face' is very important.
|
On October 07 2010 15:07 seRapH wrote:gogo korea! stuff gsl overseas please! and broodwar will liiiiive! + Show Spoiler +ok fine gsl will die miserably if it goes overseas. but AT LEAST BW WILL LIIIVE
I wasnt about to word it myself, but these were my exact thoughts upon reading that part 
|
On October 08 2010 01:06 TestSubject893 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 08 2010 00:29 Red_beard wrote:
Regarding the above post by TestSubject - that is exactly what I meant when I said IP creates quasi-monopolies. Those monopolies can be exploited by companies using terms of use contracts, wherein they stipulate that anything you build with the hammer purchased from them is their property.
I believe that, upon selling you a product, the seller is not entitled to complete control over what you do with this product. You may call this socialist, but I do not wish to live in a world where - for example - whenever I take a photograph I have to pay someone a fee for the object or objects being photographed. I do not believe that it is legal or moral to try to stretch property rights at any cost and in any absurd way (you looked at the paining in my hallway through the window, by terms of contract you now owe the author 20 bucks for you 2 minutes of looking). At some point you will get a price tag on the air you breathe. With a hammer though, you simply wouldn't buy the hammer that had the ridiculous contract, you would buy the one offer by a different company without it. This would cause the contracted hammer company to either lower their prices, drop the contract, or go out of business, all of which are working toward a better hammer for your money. But really, I'm not as much saying that this system is ideal for video games, but the fact of the matter is, its the system we have in place, and I think its more "unfair" to try and force a company into something that we decide is best for consumers in a way that is inconsistent with our economic laws rules than it is "unfair" to let Blizzard name their price on their product. The fact that so many people find it so incredibly undesirable to just not consume their product, to me, seems to show its value even more, and suggest that is worth more money than it being sold for now. The key in all of this is that both parties understand and consent beforehand, and that's why in practice things get so messy. If you knew that your hammer came with a shitty contract, you'd buy a different tool or even consider making our own. It seems that with Blizzard's games, people kind of just took the EULA as some legal garbage that didn't mean anything, and as such, everyone has agreed to something they didn't really intend to agree to. To me, there enlies the real problem. If people took EULAs more seriously, then companies would have to stop putting so much ridiculous stuff in them or people wouldn't buy the games, and ultimately we wouldn't end up where we are now, if the game companies going "But, you agreed to this!!!" and the consumers saying "That doesn't really count, everyone just presses agree anyway...". When it comes down to it, the product we buy comes with the condition of the EULA, whether or not we take them seriously.
If a EULA said "By purchasing this product, you sign away your life to us in eternal servitude", even if you purchased that product, courts would laugh at anyone that tries to enforce it. Just because a EULA says something doesn't make it automagically legal.
|
On October 08 2010 01:08 Armathai wrote:Well I really hope Blizzard backs down, and going through this entire thread, I found the best post was this: Show nested quote +On October 07 2010 15:23 snowdrift wrote:
Fuck yeah
For the sake of BW and the principle of not having a single entity establish a monopoly over esports, KeSPA and Korea need to win.
By any means necessary. I want bribes, I want collusion between giant conglomerates and government agencies, I want stone-faced -- CJ-faced, Jaedong-staring -- Korean officials to investigate, to stall, to delay; I want judges to bring down the hammer and tear apart this extremely restrictive conception of IP rights. SC2 will exist freely, or will not exist at all. I mostly just agree because I hate the IP rights Blizzard is trying to enforce.
As much as I agree that Blizzard should back down you do realize KeSPA has a monopoly over the Korean Brood War scene in itself. Just playing devil's advocate. :/
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
