|
Estonia4505 Posts
On October 23 2010 20:46 bRuTaL!! wrote:
xarthaz, that is exactly why IP is so important. Why do gamedevelopers have if they dont have IPs. Who is going to make expensive games if they cant get their development costs back.
Sorry, what are you arguing? Noone will buy the game if it is being shown on TV? Should you ask permission from Blizzard every single time you stream some of their games? It's not like there's a lot of money to be made from the scene and in addition, whoever wants to play the game WILL STILL HAVE TO BUY IT FIRST. Basically you are complaining about a gamecompany getting free advertising without specific consent.
|
People people, remember. It is Blizzard vs esports players. Who ownes the IP right over esport games. The players or the devs. They both spend a lot of effort in what they do. But if the court decides the rights belong to Blizzard the court says that esport players have no special talents of creativity that deserve protection. It basically denies the added value the esport player's intellect adds to the product. Esports can't work if there are Blizzard AI's fighting each other. So it is both technically wrong and morally wrong.
It is terrible for the players, who already are the weakest link in the whole esports industry. People seem to forget it's about this. Kespa sells MBC/OGN player rights.
|
Fuck off blizzard! trying to kill esports for cash >.<
|
On October 23 2010 21:13 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 20:46 bRuTaL!! wrote:
xarthaz, that is exactly why IP is so important. Why do gamedevelopers have if they dont have IPs. Who is going to make expensive games if they cant get their development costs back. Sorry, what are you arguing? Noone will buy the game if it is being shown on TV? Should you ask permission from Blizzard every single time you stream some of their games? It's not like there's a lot of money to be made from the scene and in addition, whoever wants to play the game WILL STILL HAVE TO BUY IT FIRST. Basically you are complaining about a gamecompany getting free advertising without specific consent.
No. Lol.
My point is, anytime a game is used in some kind of way for COMMERCIAL purposes, it should be discussed with the IP rights holder. Buying a game, doesnt give you a ownership over the game. You buy a license to privately play/use that game.
BW proscene has indeed boosted sales by alot. But in the end, Blizzard doesnt owe KeSPA etc anything. Koreans didnt "promote" BW for the sake of Blizzard, they did it because they got something out of for themselves. As a side effect, BW sales increased. Just because someone decided to do something for themselves and at the same time it resulted in me being better off, doesnt mean I owe them something.
Its a symbiosis. Blizzard developed a game for the Korean proscene that they could use as platform for a proscene and in exhange Blizzard got more sales. It worked as long as both got something out of it. Business works in a way that if you own something then you own everything it produces. Who is going to judge how much someone deserves profits for certain ideas or products? What Im trying to say is. Just because someone made a big profit out of something, it doesnt mean they dont deserve futher profits. People have become billionaires because theyve come up with rather simple ideas, while other work their whole life for pennies. So saying that 1. Blizzard owes Koreans something or 2. Blizzard shouldnt make anymore money because they already made alot, is FALSE.
Now SC2 has come out, and the relatively small sales of BW now a days is dwarfed by what SC2 could be. Thus the symbiosis has been broken. No longer is the current state beneficial for both parties.
|
No one read ELUA's. Not even lawyers. And normal people couldn't understand one if they did actually read it. It cannot be legally binding. You cannot have agreed to something you didn't read or couldn't understand. Especially not if you only read it after buying the game.
I bought a disc from a shop. I made the buying contract there and then. I get a box with a disc from the shop and he gets no money. Blizzard isn't even a party. On it was SC BW. That's it. The license thing is irrelevant even if you accept it. It's not about licensing. It is about recognizing the IP rights of the players, who Kespa owns and sold to MBC.
No one that bought the game went into contract with Blizzard. Those ELUA's are written to undo the actual laws because they contradict each other. They are designed to strip customers of their law-given rights. They are meaningless. Especially outside the US. It should actually be illegal even to represent a customer with such an agreement.
And Blizzard doesn't even need ELUA's to get their royalties. The artists of the music they use in MSL/OSL/Proleague get their royalties. Blizzard should get the same ones. But they were offered a lot more. Plus the advertising that doubled their SC BW sales and made possible and hyped SC2.
|
Blizzard fucking suck they get free advertisement for like 10 years and now they bitch and whine about it. Sc2 really wouldn't have been as successful if korea hadn't kept sc1 alive for so long so imo there's no reason for mbc to pay blizz ..they've made money while promoting blizzards product. blizz doesn't lose money just gain money.. so yeah fucking retarded.
|
On October 23 2010 22:05 simme123 wrote:
Blizzard fucking suck they get free advertisement for like 10 years and now they bitch and whine about it. Sc2 really wouldn't have been as successful if korea hadn't kept sc1 alive for so long so imo there's no reason for mbc to pay blizz ..they've made money while promoting blizzards product. blizz doesn't lose money just gain money.. so yeah fucking retarded.
i dont even know why the fuck i said something before. nvm ~
|
I really think this has alot more to do with setting up some kind of agreement or getting a legal decision to protect SC2 than blizzard trying to take over BW. Do you really think if SC2 began to overtake BW popularity in Korea that Kespa wouldn't just swap straight into SC2 leagues? Ofcourse they would if thats where the money is. In order for Blizzard to protect what it is doing/has planned for SC2 they would need to pursue any actions across all thier products equally or complications would be likely. Like everyone else in this thread though I am no law expert and probably haven't heard even 1% of the true events that have happened behind closed doors.
|
On October 23 2010 20:46 bRuTaL!! wrote:
xarthaz, that is exactly why IP is so important. Why do gamedevelopers have if they dont have IPs. Who is going to make expensive games if they cant get their development costs back. Taking abolishment of IP enforcement as a premise, industry would indeed have to adjust. But that would be for the better for consumers! That very service-style offering i was talking about, a business model would have to be designed to appeal to consumer preferring the service over increasing alternative opportunities.
It is exactly the same argument as allowing consumer preference to be the ultimate arbiter in the debate of protectionism vs free markets, whereas the protectionists are fear mongering, appealing to emotions of fright of the audience, trying to scare them away from their liberties.
|
God why didnt ogn/mbc agree to broadcasting some GSL games and just make pro-league 1 game/week for the teams? This is going to get so ugly T_T
|
Estonia4505 Posts
On October 23 2010 21:47 bRuTaL!! wrote:Show nested quote +On October 23 2010 21:13 mustaju wrote:On October 23 2010 20:46 bRuTaL!! wrote:
xarthaz, that is exactly why IP is so important. Why do gamedevelopers have if they dont have IPs. Who is going to make expensive games if they cant get their development costs back. Sorry, what are you arguing? Noone will buy the game if it is being shown on TV? Should you ask permission from Blizzard every single time you stream some of their games? It's not like there's a lot of money to be made from the scene and in addition, whoever wants to play the game WILL STILL HAVE TO BUY IT FIRST. Basically you are complaining about a gamecompany getting free advertising without specific consent. No. Lol. My point is, anytime a game is used in some kind of way for COMMERCIAL purposes, it should be discussed with the IP rights holder. Buying a game, doesnt give you a ownership over the game. You buy a license to privately play/use that game. BW proscene has indeed boosted sales by alot. But in the end, Blizzard doesnt owe KeSPA etc anything. Koreans didnt "promote" BW for the sake of Blizzard, they did it because they got something out of for themselves. As a side effect, BW sales increased. Just because someone decided to do something for themselves and at the same time it resulted in me being better off, doesnt mean I owe them something. Its a symbiosis. Blizzard developed a game for the Korean proscene that they could use as platform for a proscene and in exhange Blizzard got more sales. It worked as long as both got something out of it. Business works in a way that if you own something then you own everything it produces. Who is going to judge how much someone deserves profits for certain ideas or products? What Im trying to say is. Just because someone made a big profit out of something, it doesnt mean they dont deserve futher profits. People have become billionaires because theyve come up with rather simple ideas, while other work their whole life for pennies. So saying that 1. Blizzard owes Koreans something or 2. Blizzard shouldnt make anymore money because they already made alot, is FALSE. Now SC2 has come out, and the relatively small sales of BW now a days is dwarfed by what SC2 could be. Thus the symbiosis has been broken. No longer is the current state beneficial for both parties.
Tell me something I don't know. For example, what that had to do with what you wrote before about there being no incentive for game developers if the IP rights aren't oppressive.
I haven't said the 2 points you attempt to disprove. You do state their motives, which to me seem petty compared to what we might be about to lose. There most likely are some things you can do to a product that are non-beneficial to it, but hiring a hundred people to play it for at least a million people to spectate is not one of them.
|
On October 23 2010 21:58 Meriones wrote:+ Show Spoiler +No one read ELUA's. Not even lawyers. And normal people couldn't understand one if they did actually read it. It cannot be legally binding. You cannot have agreed to something you didn't read or couldn't understand. Especially not if you only read it after buying the game.
I bought a disc from a shop. I made the buying contract there and then. I get a box with a disc from the shop and he gets no money. Blizzard isn't even a party. On it was SC BW. That's it. The license thing is irrelevant even if you accept it. It's not about licensing. It is about recognizing the IP rights of the players, who Kespa owns and sold to MBC.
No one that bought the game went into contract with Blizzard. Those ELUA's are written to undo the actual laws because they contradict each other. They are designed to strip customers of their law-given rights. They are meaningless. Especially outside the US. It should actually be illegal even to represent a customer with such an agreement.
And Blizzard doesn't even need ELUA's to get their royalties. The artists of the music they use in MSL/OSL/Proleague get their royalties. Blizzard should get the same ones. But they were offered a lot more. Plus the advertising that doubled their SC BW sales and made possible and hyped SC2.
Not knowing isnt an excuse in court. Quoting from WikipediaIgnorantia juris non excusat or Ignorantia legis neminem excusat is a legal principle holding that a person who is unaware of a law may not escape liability for violating that law merely because he or she was unaware of its content.
And in this case isnt about normal people but big corporations so saying "we didnt read it" isnt going to hold much water. Now this not automatically mean that EULA is binding. It has to be reasonable and I bet in Blizzard case it probably is pretty much a copy of an industry standard EULA for games that has held in court previously. If this was a western country, Blizzard would have this 100%. But this isnt. Its a different culture. Still, being a civilized and a developed country, this case will most likely be won by Blizzard.
I dont quite understand what you mean or refer to with "Those ELUA's are written to undo the actual laws because they contradict each other. They are designed to strip customers of their law-given rights. They are meaningless." Sometimes EULAs cannot be enforced because they are unreasonable. But a clause saying that "you dont own this game" isnt unreasonable after all the value of that game is 100 million+ and you just bought it for $50.
|
Oh Blizzard , killing all E-sports so Sc2 can flourish.
Scallywags ^^
|
On October 23 2010 22:30 Ftrunkz wrote:
God why didnt ogn/mbc agree to broadcasting some GSL games and just make pro-league 1 game/week for the teams? This is going to get so ugly T_T
Look at the terms Blizzard offered KeSPA. Do you think they really would have made it more reasonable for the broadcasting companies(which includes KeSPA)?
|
On October 23 2010 22:30 Ftrunkz wrote:
God why didnt ogn/mbc agree to broadcasting some GSL games and just make pro-league 1 game/week for the teams? This is going to get so ugly T_T
Probably because ShinHan wouldn't agree to that, I assume.
|
It's not an issue of not knowing. It is an issue of not having an agreement. And yes, those ELUA's are written to strip customer rights. The most absurd stuff in in there.
You tell me how you can have agreed with something you didn't read? That's no an issue of not knowing the law you violated not being an excuse. Blizzard will claim they had an ELUA but the customer didn't even know what this agreement proposed by Blizzard was. Yet alone agree to it.
As for IP rights. They already don't exist anymore. If they aren't enforced then you don't have them. IP rights are constantly being violated without punishment. The PC gaming industry doesn't need to adjust at all to what it would mean if they didn't have an IP right at all. They already have.
Now IP rights were silly idea to being with. But corporations took it way way too far. They even claimed IP ownership over human genes. No one respects them. Even the people here that argue they are in favour of them don't always respect IP rights.
If it happens to be the case that without IP rights no one will develop any medicine or games or music anymore then that is a problem for which is needed a new solution. IP rights as a whole cannot survive as long as they cannot be enforced. And when people that grew up with twitter and torrent from age 7 take up all the big positions in society then IP rights will be no longer. Not just because they aren't just or fair or productive but because they cannot be enforced and have become meaningless rights.
And this is about the IP rights of the esports player. They went into contract with Kespa and that is what Kespa sold to MBC/OGN. If Blizzard owns the rights to the IP created by esports players, then esports is gone. Why invest money in a player whose product is automatically property to a third party?
|
On October 23 2010 22:30 Ftrunkz wrote:
God why didnt ogn/mbc agree to broadcasting some GSL games and just make pro-league 1 game/week for the teams? This is going to get so ugly T_T
You're talking about cutting airtime for some major sponsors/team owners. The main benefit of companies like SKT/Samsung running teams is that their companies get advertising when proleague is on air. Totally defeats the purpose of owning a proteam if it's only one game a week. And I can tell you that many BW fans would be very annoyed with only 1 game a week as well.
Broadcasting GSL also means entering into a contract with Gretech/Blizzard. No way that was ever going to happen.
|
On October 23 2010 09:36 Shiragaku wrote:
...For some reason, I am supporting MBC over Blizzard. Is that normal?
It's not only normal, its the only responsible decision. Nothing can ever replace Broodwar, and I oppose anything and anyone trying to end it.
|
On October 23 2010 21:58 Meriones wrote:
No one read ELUA's. Not even lawyers.
Heh, funny one.
Companies have lawyers that read them.
As for the rest of your post, you make it sound like the only reson you bought Starcraft 1 and 2 was because of the korean scene which I highly doubt.
|
On October 23 2010 22:26 xarthaz wrote:
Taking abolishment of IP enforcement as a premise, industry would indeed have to adjust. But that would be for the better for consumers! That very service-style offering i was talking about, a business model would have to be designed to appeal to consumer preferring the service over increasing alternative opportunities.
It is exactly the same argument as allowing consumer preference to be the ultimate arbiter in the debate of protectionism vs free markets, whereas the protectionists are fear mongering, appealing to emotions of fright of the audience, trying to scare them away from their liberties.
IP enforcement can be achieved by either law or by changing the product. So if the company cant enforce their IP through courts they ill either not make it available at all or change the product. For example, SC2 cant be played in LAN. I wonder why, might have something to do with piracy or the whole ordeal in Korea... Same goes for copyprotection for music or DVD areas. Im struggling to see how making IP rights enforcement harder will benefit consumers. Either the product will be inferior or it wont be released at all (simplified scenario). Maybe you mean something like Steam?
On October 23 2010 22:34 mustaju wrote:
Tell me something I don't know. For example, what that had to do with what you wrote before about there being no incentive for game developers if the IP rights aren't oppressive.
I haven't said the 2 points you attempt to disprove. You do state their motives, which to me seem petty compared to what we might be about to lose. There most likely are some things you can do to a product that are non-beneficial to it, but hiring a hundred people to play it for at least a million people to spectate is not one of them.
Mustaju, my first paragraph was directed at you. Rest was towards the thread in general. Id argue thought that competition for your own product is harmful (BW vs SC2 tournaments). Blizzard didnt really do anything before now simply becuase of the reasons I already stated, they got sales of their game. Now BW scene is conflicting with their own projects and Blizzard simply wants either money to offset the damages BW does to SC2 or the end of BW tournaments. Whether this is right or wrong, is NOT my point. Simply telling both sides of the story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
