|
Russian Federation905 Posts
everyone is waiting... 
|
It makes sense from a business standpoint (although honestly, there's pretty much no business to be had in foreign BW anyway, but at least theoretically) what Fomos is doing, but TL's position was also perfectly reasonable - our translators do what they do because they want to bring greater enjoyment of Korean StarCraft to the foreigner community, and as we're all volunteers, it's simply wrong for TL to enforce some sort of quota.
Still, I really wish SDM had a better grasp of what the foreign BW fanbase looks like right now - we're all here on TL for many reasons - its history, ease of accessibility, minimal ads, fast loading times, the friends we've made... none of this is currently available on their Fomos global site, and poor translations aside, it would be hard to attract much positive attention to the global part of the Fomos site anyway, and as such I wish he would have just left us alone. I was personally fine with him copy-pasting our interviews on Fomos, as I believed they were the best quality English interviews done. Of course, professional courtesy mandates credit, but that's a relatively minor issue in the grand scheme of things. Hopefully we can work something out, but if not, I can foresee myself posting summaries of interviews; basically not in interview format, but with all the crucial information.
|
On May 30 2011 19:36 GG.NoRe wrote:Let me do a pharaphrase of the Fomos statement based on the original here for the benefit of clarity and discussion: (LOL at that translation, Fomos could very well afford any college student with decent English yet it settles for this one). Anyway, here it is.FOMOS on TLFOMOS official statement on TL May 30, 2011 - April 2010, FOMOS contacted TL on a possible partnership. FOMOS initially thought TL is a non-profit organization so it felt no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that TL has been using its contents without permission. It turns our that TL is for profit. Still, FOMOS is open to it if TL were willing to sign a contract regarding the use of FOMOS contents.
- FOMOS requested a formal contract (as stated above) granting FOMOS a minimun of 10 articles per month.
- TL initially agreed to this, but it later declined respectfully saying that their (TL) writers are volunteers and they have no control over what they write or post on the site. They however state that they have influence over their writers.
- FOMOS is an incorporated company, and it is imperative to have all its deals be written on paper, in a proper contract. FOMOS does not understand how it can deal with anyone without knowing how much of its contents (pages) is used and translated. FOMOS is baffled by this initial decline by TL, but would still want a formal contract. Nearly a year has passed and TL still uses FOMOS contents without a contract. FOMOS is not happy about this.
- 2011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
This arrangement makes no sense to FOMOS since it already has translators and plans to expand on it in the future. FOMOS does not need the English translation of its articles from TL since FOMOS has the staff to do it (translate its articles to English). FOMOS reiterates its request to share its articles in exchange for the original English ones from TL.
TL refuses the deal. FOMOS notifies TL to stop using its contents.
If FOMOS gets only translations of its own works, then it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to have a partnership with TL. In fact, when TL translates what FOMOS plans to translate for its own site, it is a detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS simply wants TL to stop using FOMOS contents, as it has the right to do so.
FOMOS is an incorporated company with 10 staff member who work hard around the clock. FOMOS writers and photographers strongly express their wishes to others to stop using their original contents.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr twitter:superdanielman
did you just translate an article from fomos about how they do now want TL to translate their articles anymore? :p
I can understand fomos' stance tbh. its their property and you need permission to use it. but we have only heard the story from fomos' side. lets wait for waxangel to respond!
|
On May 30 2011 23:42 Zafrumi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 19:36 GG.NoRe wrote:Let me do a pharaphrase of the Fomos statement based on the original here for the benefit of clarity and discussion: (LOL at that translation, Fomos could very well afford any college student with decent English yet it settles for this one). Anyway, here it is.FOMOS on TLFOMOS official statement on TL May 30, 2011 - April 2010, FOMOS contacted TL on a possible partnership. FOMOS initially thought TL is a non-profit organization so it felt no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that TL has been using its contents without permission. It turns our that TL is for profit. Still, FOMOS is open to it if TL were willing to sign a contract regarding the use of FOMOS contents.
- FOMOS requested a formal contract (as stated above) granting FOMOS a minimun of 10 articles per month.
- TL initially agreed to this, but it later declined respectfully saying that their (TL) writers are volunteers and they have no control over what they write or post on the site. They however state that they have influence over their writers.
- FOMOS is an incorporated company, and it is imperative to have all its deals be written on paper, in a proper contract. FOMOS does not understand how it can deal with anyone without knowing how much of its contents (pages) is used and translated. FOMOS is baffled by this initial decline by TL, but would still want a formal contract. Nearly a year has passed and TL still uses FOMOS contents without a contract. FOMOS is not happy about this.
- 2011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
This arrangement makes no sense to FOMOS since it already has translators and plans to expand on it in the future. FOMOS does not need the English translation of its articles from TL since FOMOS has the staff to do it (translate its articles to English). FOMOS reiterates its request to share its articles in exchange for the original English ones from TL.
TL refuses the deal. FOMOS notifies TL to stop using its contents.
If FOMOS gets only translations of its own works, then it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to have a partnership with TL. In fact, when TL translates what FOMOS plans to translate for its own site, it is a detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS simply wants TL to stop using FOMOS contents, as it has the right to do so.
FOMOS is an incorporated company with 10 staff member who work hard around the clock. FOMOS writers and photographers strongly express their wishes to others to stop using their original contents.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr twitter:superdanielman did you just translate an article from fomos about how they do now want TL to translate their articles anymore? :p I can understand fomos' stance tbh. its their property and you need permission to use it. but we have only heard the story from fomos' side. lets wait for waxangel to respond!
Ironic aint it? :p
Yeah, lets wait what TL has to say about this
|
Just to let you know: Fomos's position on TL was not a translation of a Korean article. No such news is available in Korean at the moment.
|
On May 31 2011 00:50 supernovamaniac wrote:
Just to let you know: Fomos's position on TL was not a translation of a Korean article. No such news is available in Korean at the moment.
So it's more like "SDM's Fomos's position on TL" ?
And I thought why the article does not look like an official statement.
|
Meh, the only thing that kept me up to date with the BW scene now that i more or less switched over to SC2, was in fact the translations that TL provided. I guess this was the last nail in the coffin, time to let go i suppose..
|
On May 31 2011 00:59 Sd13 wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 00:50 supernovamaniac wrote:
Just to let you know: Fomos's position on TL was not a translation of a Korean article. No such news is available in Korean at the moment. So it's more like "SDM's Fomos's position on TL" ? And I thought why the article does not look like an official statement.
It doesn't look like an official statement because SDM sucks at writing stuff. But it probably is Fomos's official position.
|
On May 30 2011 23:42 Zafrumi wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 19:36 GG.NoRe wrote:Let me do a pharaphrase of the Fomos statement based on the original here for the benefit of clarity and discussion: (LOL at that translation, Fomos could very well afford any college student with decent English yet it settles for this one). Anyway, here it is.FOMOS on TLFOMOS official statement on TL May 30, 2011 - April 2010, FOMOS contacted TL on a possible partnership. FOMOS initially thought TL is a non-profit organization so it felt no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that TL has been using its contents without permission. It turns our that TL is for profit. Still, FOMOS is open to it if TL were willing to sign a contract regarding the use of FOMOS contents.
- FOMOS requested a formal contract (as stated above) granting FOMOS a minimun of 10 articles per month.
- TL initially agreed to this, but it later declined respectfully saying that their (TL) writers are volunteers and they have no control over what they write or post on the site. They however state that they have influence over their writers.
- FOMOS is an incorporated company, and it is imperative to have all its deals be written on paper, in a proper contract. FOMOS does not understand how it can deal with anyone without knowing how much of its contents (pages) is used and translated. FOMOS is baffled by this initial decline by TL, but would still want a formal contract. Nearly a year has passed and TL still uses FOMOS contents without a contract. FOMOS is not happy about this.
- 2011, FOMOS hires staff to run its GLOBAL page. Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
This arrangement makes no sense to FOMOS since it already has translators and plans to expand on it in the future. FOMOS does not need the English translation of its articles from TL since FOMOS has the staff to do it (translate its articles to English). FOMOS reiterates its request to share its articles in exchange for the original English ones from TL.
TL refuses the deal. FOMOS notifies TL to stop using its contents.
If FOMOS gets only translations of its own works, then it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to have a partnership with TL. In fact, when TL translates what FOMOS plans to translate for its own site, it is a detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS simply wants TL to stop using FOMOS contents, as it has the right to do so.
FOMOS is an incorporated company with 10 staff member who work hard around the clock. FOMOS writers and photographers strongly express their wishes to others to stop using their original contents.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr twitter:superdanielman did you just translate an article from fomos about how they do now want TL to translate their articles anymore? :p I can understand fomos' stance tbh. its their property and you need permission to use it. but we have only heard the story from fomos' side. lets wait for waxangel to respond!
Thats the second version of that article. The first one was from google translate. And fomos even put that version on their site.
|
On May 30 2011 20:16 konadora wrote:
when we translators were first contacted, we decided not to go with it since meeting a quota set by a company did not fit in our image of "voluntary community work". it would become a "we have to do this" instead of "we want to do this."
this is MY view from here, not TeamLiquid's staffs' or other translators' views
anyway, this is fomos' loss, their translators suck and we don't need their recycled interviews that much anyway. there are other sources for that.
Instead of having a "minimal" amount of articles, would the exchange of all TL translations and BW original articles be worth it?
If TL translators are volunteers, are the translations owned by the individual translators or TL?
Fomos make TL sound like some slave driver by painting it with an image of making money off volunteer work =S.
|
Kennigit
Canada19447 Posts
On May 30 2011 19:17 Vipsanius wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 18:53 sovetskysoyuz wrote:+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS position on TL+ Show Spoiler +FOMOS' position with teamliquid
2011년 05월 30일 15시 56분
[FOMOS]
1. Fomos first contacted teamliquid on a possible partnership last year in April, Fomos initially thought, since teamliquid was a non-profit organization, there is no need to stir up emotions by pointing out the fact that they have been using the Fomos’ content without permission. It turns out that they do make profit. But that was still okay if they were willing to sign a legitimate contract with FOMOS.
2. FOMOS requests:
A.10 articles per MONTH, and a formal contract.
3. Teamliquid’s initial reaction was ok, later respectfully denies.
A. on the grounds that writers are volunteers, and that they don’t control them. However do suggest that they do have influence over the writers.
Fomos is an incorporated company, it is imperative that all deals must be concrete on a piece of paper, a contract. Can’t fathom the idea of not knowing how many pages could be provided as translation work.
Fomos is very baffled by the stance of teamliquid, but is persistent on forming a partnership with teamliquid. Nearly a year passes by, in this time FOMOS articles are still posted on Teamliquid. Fomos is not appreciative of this.
2011
FOMOS hires a staff to run the GLOBAL page.
Still wants a contract with teamliquid, FOMOS wants to negotiate the grounds of using some of their original English articles as well.
Teamliquid feels that taking the English articles is not a good deal for them. However the FOMOS translated articles can be taken by FOMOS.
Aforementioned offer is nonsensical to FOMOS since, it already has a translator, more will be hired in the near future.
FOMOS doesn’t need the translated articles, since they have a staff member to do it, but still wants to make a deal as long as some original English written articles can be used.
The deal is refused, FOMOS notifies teamliquid to stop using our content.
If FOMOS doesn’t get more than just a translated work of FOMOS’ content, it is not in the best interest of FOMOS to form a partnership with teamliquid, in fact when teamliquid translates what’s already been translated or what is about to be translated by FOMOS, it creates a huge detriment to FOMOS.
FOMOS just simply wants them to stop using FOMOS content, since it is FOMOS’
FOMOS is an incorporated company, has 10 staff members, whom works the arduous hours of working around the clock, photographers and writers also wishes strongly for them to stop taking their articles.
superdaniel@fomos.co.kr
twitter:superdanielman The above is the verbatim from Fomos. Now it gets interesting. So let me get this straight. 1. Fomos tolerated TL from using/translating its contents because it thought TL was non-profit 2. Fomos found out TL is a business, but still oks the use of its contents but wants an agreement and a contract 3. April 2010, Fomos talks to TL, states its requests: "10 articles per month, and a formal contract" (later on this) 4. TL does agree fully, saying it has no control over the contributors 5. Fomos demands its right to its contents, and have the agreement in black ad white, but TL seems vague on it(?) This initial discussion end in the meantime, while TL still uses Fomos contents. 6. 2011, Fomos starts global page. Renegotiates with TL, asking for rights to its original English articles as well. TL rejects this, but would be ok for Fomos to use the translated articles that came from Fomos in the first place. 7. Fomos does not understand this, citing that it has little use for the translation if ITS own contents given it already has translators and there are more to be hired 8. Fomos demands TL to stop infringing its contents. So here we are now. So based on this, TL is the one who actually stone-walled? Is this correct? I wonder how the negotiations went, and why, if Fomos version is correct, TL refused use of its original content when Fomos is opening its contents to TL. Btw, does the "10-article" thing mean that Fomos wants TL to publish ONLY 10 of its articles in a month? I can see this as difficult for TL, since on a good month, as many as 30 interviews are made. Still, it is Fomos contents. All throughout their statement, Fomos seems to emphasize that they are they once actually reaching out and negotiating, which imo should be the other way around. If everyhthing Fomos said in there is true and is the whole picture of this story, I think TL was a little to hard and could have negotiated a mutually beneficial middle ground. Can TL please enlighten us on this one. I believe Fomos wanted to get 10 articles a month from TL. TL can't agree to that, because: 1. The people who do it are volunteers. They can make a billion articles this month, and then none after that. TL would be violating the contract. As there is no saying to how many articles will be made in a month, it's not possible to put that black on white (unless you like gambling and losing). 2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not. EDIT: [\spoiler] instead of [\s]
Boom. You're a smart boy. Will wait for wax for the rest.
|
12519 Posts
I'm guessing *all* they need is a click to their own website, from each TL user who wishes to see a translation, or a picture - so! - why not implement a TL posting feature that gives them exactly that?? Say, [Fomos]-tag, which means you have to click and have the source from their website load in a popup window, while this activates the resource in TL for you to see or read. I think implementing such feature and contracting it with them for fair use should make everybody in this conflict happy.
Mind you, often enough TL readers are going to actually look at the popup window and even click on stuff there too, so it would truly increase their website's ad-value.
|
On May 30 2011 20:42 StarStruck wrote:
What he said makes sense. We all know TL isn't non-profit anymore; however, R1CH and Hot_Bid are the only full-time employees on staff. All the writers and translators volunteer their time to giving us content on their own accord.
A non-profit organization is able to pay salaries to its employees. What it can't do, is distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders.
On May 30 2011 19:17 Vipsanius wrote:
2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not.
This isn't really a new issue though. Currently writers/translators (and other contributers) volunteer their time (if they wish to) and TL benefits from the contents (in traffic/ads). A direct payment from fomos for their work does make that line more black and white, but as far as I can see as long as the revenue is treated as non-profit (i.e. going towards helping TL in the form of new servers, more paid staff, etc) it doesn't really change the status quo.
|
Calgary26003 Posts
On May 31 2011 06:05 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 20:42 StarStruck wrote:
What he said makes sense. We all know TL isn't non-profit anymore; however, R1CH and Hot_Bid are the only full-time employees on staff. All the writers and translators volunteer their time to giving us content on their own accord. A non-profit organization is able to pay salaries to its employees. What it can't do, is distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders. Show nested quote +On May 30 2011 19:17 Vipsanius wrote:
2. The people who write articles aren't payed. If TL has a contract with Fomos, and there is money going around, the people that write articles get screwed over. Wether they like it or not. This isn't really a new issue though. Currently writers/translators (and other contributers) volunteer their time (if they wish to) and TL benefits from the contents (in traffic/ads). A direct payment from fomos for their work does make that line more black and white, but as far as I can see as long as the revenue is treated as non-profit (i.e. going towards helping TL in the form of new servers, more paid staff, etc) it doesn't really change the status quo.
It's asking voluenteers to commit to a minimum amount of work - something TL has never does. That's it.
|
How is TL for-profit? TL has shareholders? Can I invest? What is the rate of dividend?
|
On May 31 2011 06:11 Gummy wrote:
How is TL for-profit? TL has shareholders? Can I invest? What is the rate of dividend?
The mid-Banner.
|
hummm ... you would think they would like to get their articles to a new audience.
|
On May 31 2011 06:17 antilyon wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 06:11 Gummy wrote:
How is TL for-profit? TL has shareholders? Can I invest? What is the rate of dividend? The mid-Banner.
That only makes it for-revenue. That doesn't mean it pays out to shareholders. I just thought the fulltime employees just got paid based on ad revenues, etc... I didn't realize that TL actually had a stock structure!
|
Calgary26003 Posts
On May 31 2011 06:50 Gummy wrote:Show nested quote +On May 31 2011 06:17 antilyon wrote:On May 31 2011 06:11 Gummy wrote:
How is TL for-profit? TL has shareholders? Can I invest? What is the rate of dividend? The mid-Banner. That only makes it for-revenue. That doesn't mean it pays out to shareholders. I just thought the fulltime employees just got paid based on ad revenues, etc... I didn't realize that TL actually had a stock structure!
Were owned and operated by The Board of ESPORTS.
|
Still wanting to have a partnership with TL, it renegotiates once again, requesting that in exchange for its interviews for TL to translate, TL should also share some of its original English contents. TL feels that sharing its English articles is not a good deal for them. TL however states that FOMOS can use the English translation of the articles it got from FOMOS.
So at this point were they still requesting a contract with a minimum amount of articles or did this actually fall through because Fomos wanted to put up translations of Final Edits or whatever.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
