Interview with Paul Sams on SC1 and negotiations - Page 2

On October 24 2010 13:01 Selith wrote:
We will continue to support StarCraft 1 no matter what, and will continue to open new tournaments. The chance for that will continue to be provided. We don't want to see progamer teams or big progamer-based groups to be disbanded due to this.

- StarCraft 1 tournaments? What is this about?

A. We are working with many different partner companies worldwide. Through the partners, we will continue to open tournaments and will support them. Our business is varied -- WoW, WarCraft 3, StarCraft and such. Due to the limitation of time and resources, right now, we have to choose and focus. But support for StarCraft 1 will not be reduced now or later.

On October 24 2010 14:24 Simplistik wrote:
What I still don't understand is what "protecting our IP rights" actually means to Blizzard. Does it mean they just want acknowledgement? Does it mean that they don't want anybody else to make money off SC1? Or do they want to get a part of the profits?

We still want to see StarCraft 1 and StarCraft 2 leagues to happen, and to be shown on the TV.

On October 24 2010 14:55 AlBundy wrote:
THanks for translating, OP.

The guy said right there


But more importantly I like how people say "words are sweet", "action are worth more than words".
So because this is blizzard speaking, you don't even give a fuck about what they have to say, and blindly reject their view on the matter? How can you be so biased? I think that people are pissed off because blizzard doesn"t appear as "evil" as some people like to believe. Quite uncomfortable, huh?

Way to go, TL. Way to go.

On October 24 2010 14:55 AlBundy wrote:
THanks for translating, OP.

The guy said right there


But more importantly I like how people say "words are sweet", "action are worth more than words".
So because this is blizzard speaking, you don't even give a fuck about what they have to say, and blindly reject their view on the matter? How can you be so biased? I think that people are pissed off because blizzard doesn"t appear as "evil" as some people like to believe. Quite uncomfortable, huh?

Way to go, TL. Way to go.

On October 24 2010 13:01 Selith wrote:
Source:
http://www.fomos.kr/board/board.php?mode=read&keyno=111542&db=interview

Paul Sams had a special interview session to have more in-depth information on Blizzard's stance in the whole SC 1 IP rights fiasco.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


- StarCraft 1 tournaments? What is this about?

A. We are working with many different partner companies worldwide. Through the partners, we will continue to open tournaments and will support them. Our business is varied -- WoW, WarCraft 3, StarCraft and such. Due to the limitation of time and resources, right now, we have to choose and focus. But support for StarCraft 1 will not be reduced now or later.

On October 24 2010 15:02 zenMaster wrote:

Yes, we blindly reject Blizzard the way you blindly accept SC2.
We're just idiots born yesterday, we can't tell Blizzard's true intentions from their actions these couple months.

On October 24 2010 15:04 Simplistik wrote:

It's not really bias here.

It's hard to swallow him saying: "We want to see SC1 on TV."
AT THE SAME TIME he's hosting a QA session on going to court to get an injuntion to stop SC1 being shown on TV.

His actions and words aren't exactly consistent.

On October 24 2010 14:55 AlBundy wrote:
THanks for translating, OP.

The guy said right there


But more importantly I like how people say "words are sweet", "action are worth more than words".
So because this is blizzard speaking, you don't even give a fuck about what they have to say, and blindly reject their view on the matter? How can you be so biased? I think that people are pissed off because blizzard doesn"t appear as "evil" as some people like to believe. Quite uncomfortable, huh?

Way to go, TL. Way to go.

On October 24 2010 15:12 MayorITC wrote:


If you're not knowledgeable on a subject, it's best to stay silent than promote your ignorance. People aren't scoffing at Blizzard's words merely because of pre-disposed views. That's your own assumption. However, what is intangible is the past history of tournaments and Starcraft on TV. Where was Blizzard during the past 10 years? Aside from the invitationals and Blizzcon, how often did Blizzard hold Starcraft tournaments let alone attempt to broadcast them? If the US isn't as receptive to gaming on TV as Korea, then why not try to make a mark in the nation that bought half of all Starcraft 1 copies? Where was Blizzard 9 years ago when Korea was promoting e-sports using a product made by Blizzard? Why wait until 2007, after e-sports had flourished and become an established enterprise in Korea, to protect your IP rights?

On October 24 2010 15:15 mprs wrote:

Would you watch a tournament if it was only amateurs that played in it? Whats the point of having a tournament when you can't even get the top players to play... This is the problem that Blizzard faced. You can't run a tournament when Kespa says hey well these are our players and we won't let him participate.

On October 24 2010 15:12 MayorITC wrote:
(...)

Let's be honest here. What Blizzard wants from KeSPA is money. They want KeSPA to continue doing the things they are (ie: no additional work for Blizzard). If KeSPA doesn't comply and does die out, do you really think Blizzard can replicate what KeSPA has done?

After all, Blizzard can't even run Blizzcon correctly so how are they supposed to run/manage/overlook OSL/MSL, progaming teams, and progamers in a country halfway across the world?

We want to say again, that what we really want is for broadcasting stations to continue broadcasting the games after getting the StarCraft 1 license. In additional, when this is resolved, there will probably be more ways where we can work together with. But first of all, we must resolve the broadcasting rights issue that started years ago, before we continue talking about other things. It is important to get trust by resolving the age-old problem. It is too hasty to expect a partnership when there is no trust built yet.

On October 24 2010 15:41 jalstar wrote:
Blizzard "support" for SC2 meant $20 a month, no option for Korean commentary, and broken streams.

Let's hope they stay far, far away from SC1.

On October 24 2010 15:51 toadstool wrote:


And KESPA international E-sport support means no English commentating AT ALL, and will let SC die everywhere except for in Korea (and on Teamliquid).



I like what Blizzard is trying to do for Starcraft 2. The first few seasons will be rough, but it will no doubt get better.

On October 24 2010 15:58 Ryo wrote:


Because it's only good if it's in English right.