EPTNote that I am literally a communist so make of that what you will.
Gretech-Kespa Negotiation Update - Page 5
| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
Redmark
Canada2129 Posts
Note that I am literally a communist so make of that what you will. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
| ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:40 PrinceXizor wrote: which is good considering gretech will ultimately win any dispute in court if it comes to it Citation needed. | ||
|
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
Proves they actually serve a legitimate purpose. | ||
Selith
United States238 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:47 moopie wrote: Citation needed. The matter that's going to go to court is about whether Blizzard owns IP to StarCraft 1 or if it is, as KeSPA said few months earlier, no one owns IP to StarCraft 1 and is for public use. I don't think any court would agree with what KeSPA said here. Blizzard clearly created StarCraft 1 as a private corporation using private money, so the game's IP belongs to Blizzard no matter what you do with StarCraft 1. | ||
|
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:40 PrinceXizor wrote: OGN is the big winner here, they are going to get broadcasting rights alot cheaper than through kespa and they will be on gretechs good side (which is good considering gretech will ultimately win any dispute in court if it comes to it) Sorry but no. Without KeSPA there is no one to protect the sponsors and a lot of them will leave instead of taking a risk of getting screwed over. | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:53 Selith wrote: The matter that's going to go to court is about whether Blizzard owns IP to StarCraft 1 or if it is, as KeSPA said few months earlier, no one owns IP to StarCraft 1 and is for public use. I don't think any court would agree with what KeSPA said here. Blizzard clearly created StarCraft 1 as a private corporation using private money, so the game's IP belongs to Blizzard no matter what you do with StarCraft 1. Again, you are assuming how the Korean courts would handle this, assuming that the matter goes to court. These assumptions are all well and good, but they are far from factual. | ||
|
PrinceXizor
United States17713 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:48 Lightwip wrote: You know, sticking up for MBC really shows that KeSPA does what it has to do and protect the companies involved in the scene. Proves they actually serve a legitimate purpose. Or just proves that the Corporations involved in kespa have invested in MBC and do not want to lose money. | ||
|
Shikyo
Finland33997 Posts
On October 05 2010 04:39 So no fek wrote: That's pretty lame by Gretech. I think it was a bit of a sneaky move by MBC to move up their entire schedule, while not trying to negotiate, but I don't see anything wrong with it. If Gretech really cared so much about it, they should have made the deadline a date closer to when negotiations were going on. If MBC continued past that, I could see some justification in their decision. But nope, MBC just altered their schedule to close before the date that they were told they had to stop broadcasting by. It's Gretech's fault for not seeing that as a likely outcome. I'm curious as to what "small" fee they want OGN to pay. If it's significantly less than the 250k, then I see no reason for them not to take it and let MBC/OGN broadcast. Gretech, out of good will, let MBC operate to the end of August without needing to pay, even though they had every right to make them pay. What MBC did was extremely rude and disrespectful, I'm not sure why people think Gretech isn't being rationale here. | ||
|
Lightwip
United States5497 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:56 PrinceXizor wrote: Or just proves that the Corporations involved in kespa have invested in MBC and do not want to lose money. You're talking as if that's some sort of problem when it's really not. Without corporations we wouldn't have progaming. | ||
|
supernovamaniac
United States3047 Posts
On October 05 2010 08:06 Shikyo wrote: Gretech, out of good will, let MBC operate to the end of August without needing to pay, even though they had every right to make them pay. What MBC did was extremely rude and disrespectful, I'm not sure why people think Gretech isn't being rationale here. Gretech is doing the right move. But not because MBC did not negotiate for Bigfile and STX (Proleague finished without negotiations). MBC already has MSL planned out without Gretech's go. | ||
|
Vedic
United States582 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:55 moopie wrote: Again, you are assuming how the Korean courts would handle this, assuming that the matter goes to court. These assumptions are all well and good, but they are far from factual. Err, what? South Korea is more nazi about copyright laws than the US, and Activision has more than enough money to bury anyone they want. South Korea is big on supporting IP rights, and there are only a few "fair use" exceptions - none of which KeSPA qualify for. Your post represents the denial of most Brood War fanboys, where you don't actually contribute to the conversation, and instead just try to make it seem like "NOBODY KNOWS". You seem to assume that South Korea is in some kind of judicial stone age, even though they're just as advanced as most nations. | ||
|
Legace
Sweden342 Posts
On October 05 2010 07:35 robertdinh wrote: Just because your goal is to make money for your shareholders doesn't mean that that is valid justification for terrible business ethics. Some corporations hold themselves to a higher standard, it's about making money, but doing it the right way. Your definition of terrible business ethics are intriguing. Pretty much everything you own is manufactured in some chinese sweatshop by underpaid and overworked illiterate children working 14 hours a day, why? - they pretty much have no choice, it's modern day slavery. Almost all companies in the world have productions facilities in countries such as China, Taiwan, Bangladesh etc. People could argue this is terrible business ethics. FTC and EU slapped Intel with enormous fines because Intel were being anti-competitive and paying computer manufacturers money for not using AMD processors. People could argue this is terrible business ethics. Gretech as licensed by Blizzard, owning the broadcast rights for Starcraft in Korea not wanting to negotiate with certain partys and/or having certain demands for letting other companies broadcast Starcraft in Korea. How is this possibly terrible business ethics? | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On October 05 2010 08:23 Vedic wrote: Err, what? South Korea is more nazi about copyright laws than the US, and Activision has more than enough money to bury anyone they want. South Korea is big on supporting IP rights, and there are only a few "fair use" exceptions - none of which KeSPA qualify for. Your post represents the denial of most Brood War fanboys, where you don't actually contribute to the conversation, and instead just try to make it seem like "NOBODY KNOWS". You seem to assume that South Korea is in some kind of judicial stone age, even though they're just as advanced as most nations. Putting the dismissive attitude of your post aside, no I don't think its as clear cut as you do clearly. I didn't claim that nobody knows, but you or I certainly don't, since we don't even have all the facts on hand, let alone full knowledge of past agreements and interactions between KeSPA and Blizzard (besides what was reported regarding the 2007 reselling of rights and the articles of the power struggle this past year). Since I'm not looking to get in a long repetitive argument discussing what has already been discussed on this forum many times before and you are clearly an experienced Korean copyright attorney with full facts on the case I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. | ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
On October 05 2010 08:23 Vedic wrote: Err, what? South Korea is more nazi about copyright laws than the US, and Activision has more than enough money to bury anyone they want. South Korea is big on supporting IP rights, and there are only a few "fair use" exceptions - none of which KeSPA qualify for. Your post represents the denial of most Brood War fanboys, where you don't actually contribute to the conversation, and instead just try to make it seem like "NOBODY KNOWS". You seem to assume that South Korea is in some kind of judicial stone age, even though they're just as advanced as most nations. ehh?? proof? because seems to me your just speculating. and if you talk about money. kotick has been been battling lawsuit left and right, they cant even bury EA or Infinity Ward Employees. also you think they are gonna waste all of their money on something that only deals with one country? also SK being Nazi about IP rights .. source?? proof? all of what you said are just speculations. they dont have agencies listing the websites you visit, they dont have a very active organization like the M.P.A.A., they dont have a president who sides with big companies when comes to destroying/blocking file-sharing and file-sharing websites. Also you flaming BW fans with your 2nd paragraph. NOBODY REALLY KNOWS whats going to happen. nobody knows how the korean courts feel about this issue, how the judge, whos going to take this case, feels about the issue. nobody knows how GOOD or CONVINCING or BAD the attorneys are on Kespa and Gretech. Courts can be reason with. for example: America's and Canada's view on file sharing. Two VERY SIMILAR countries yet when it comes to file sharing, they have very different laws. | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On October 05 2010 08:42 moopie wrote: Putting the dismissive attitude of your post aside, no I don't think its as clear cut as you do clearly. I didn't claim that nobody knows, but you or I certainly don't, since we don't even have all the facts on hand, let alone full knowledge of past agreements and interactions between KeSPA and Blizzard (besides what was reported regarding the 2007 reselling of rights and the articles of the power struggle this past year). Since I'm not looking to get in a long repetitive argument discussing what has already been discussed on this forum many times before and you are clearly an experienced Korean copyright attorney with full facts on the case I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Actually, it is possible for anyone who cares to know to...know. Only laziness separates a person from knowledge. Here's the Republic of Korea's copyright laws, under which you can find law on an author's right to a computer program: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_South_Korea#CHAPTER_2._RIGHTS_OF_AUTHORS + Show Spoiler + SECTION 1. WORKS Article 4(Examples of Works, etc.) ... 9. Computer program works. (2) Matters necessary for the protection of computer program works in accordance with Subparagraph 9 of Paragraph (1) shall be provided for in a separate Act. + Show Spoiler + SECTION 4. AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS SUBSECTION 1. TYPES OF AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS ... Article 18(Right of Communication to the public) The author shall have the right to communicate his work to the public. There's a lot more there if you care to read up on it. On October 05 2010 08:44 aimaimaim wrote: also SK being Nazi about IP rights .. source?? proof? all of what you said are just speculations. they dont have agencies listing the websites you visit, they dont have a very active organization like the M.P.A.A., they dont have a president who sides with big companies when comes to destroying/blocking file-sharing and file-sharing websites. While I wouldn't use the term Nazis to describe them, South Korea has been coerced multiple times by the World Trade Organization to both shape up their IP laws and to enforce their IP laws. You can read about that history in this article: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/article-1G1-55721901/korea-road-toward-respecting.html | ||
|
moopie
12605 Posts
On October 05 2010 08:59 urashimakt wrote: Actually, it is possible for anyone who cares to know to...know. Only laziness separates a person from knowledge. Here's the Republic of Korea's copyright laws, under which you can find law on an author's right to a computer program: http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Copyright_Act_of_South_Korea#CHAPTER_2._RIGHTS_OF_AUTHORS + Show Spoiler + SECTION 1. WORKS Article 4(Examples of Works, etc.) ... 9. Computer program works. (2) Matters necessary for the protection of computer program works in accordance with Subparagraph 9 of Paragraph (1) shall be provided for in a separate Act. + Show Spoiler + SECTION 4. AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS SUBSECTION 1. TYPES OF AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS ... Article 18(Right of Communication to the public) The author shall have the right to communicate his work to the public. There's a lot more there if you care to read up on it. Yes, like this: Article 29(Public Performance and Broadcasting for Non-profit Purposes) (1) It shall be permissible to perform publicly or broadcast a work already being made public for non-profit purposes and without charging any fees to audience, spectators or third persons provided that the performers concerned are not paid any remuneration for such performances. (2) Commercial phonograms or cinematographic works may be reproduced and played for the public, if no admission fee is charged to audience or spectators, except the cases as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. And since KeSPA is a non-profit organization ("an organization that does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals"), and no fees are charged from the audience for any events, this isn't such a simple cut and dry case. As for reselling rights, it also isn't such an easy ruling since the rights are sold to broadcast events in which players using a tool they have purchased and whether or not what they do with it is copyrighted. Does adobe own my art? this discussion can go on and on (and already has in the past), I think I'm done here. | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On October 05 2010 09:11 moopie wrote: Yes, like this: And since KeSPA is a non-profit organization ("an organization that does not distribute its surplus funds to owners or shareholders, but instead uses them to help pursue its goals"), and no fees are charged from the audience for any events, this isn't such a simple cut and dry case. As for reselling rights, it also isn't such an easy ruling since the rights are sold to broadcast events in which players using a tool they have purchased and whether or not what they do with it is copyrighted. Does adobe own my art? this discussion can go on and on (and already has in the past), I think I'm done here. Make sure you read that very carefully. I don't believe Blizzard ever went non-profit with Starcraft 1, so that work is not available for others. | ||
|
aimaimaim
Philippines2167 Posts
On October 05 2010 09:15 urashimakt wrote: Make sure you read that very carefully. I don't believe Blizzard ever went non-profit with Starcraft 1, so that work is not available for others. "LIMITATIONS TO AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS" Blizzard/Gretech, from what i've understand, cant sue kespa because what kespa falls under the limitation. or does kespa charge people for the show??? are they pay-per-view?? Edit: bah .. saw it .. still if kespa doesn't charge people to watch the games then there is no problem .. if kespa acquires the rights because they paid for it, then i can only imagine that kespa will be charging fees for public events and fees for pay-per-view (GOD I HOPE NOT) im like 50/50 sure that this is the case  | ||
|
urashimakt
United States1591 Posts
On October 05 2010 09:44 aimaimaim wrote: "LIMITATIONS TO AUTHOR'S PROPERTY RIGHTS" Blizzard/Gretech, from what i've understand, cant sue kespa because what kespa falls under the limitation. or does kespa charge people for the show??? are they pay-per-view?? does SC fall under cinematography?? bah .. this is the problem .. there isn't any clear law that actually states that its prohibits the use a program/software and the product of that program/software be broadcasted. this can only be sorted out if there is going to be a new law specifically for this or use any existing laws about broadcasting sports and recreational activities. None of the limitations listed apply to Starcraft 1 as an intellectual property. KeSPA isn't immune to lawsuits solely due to its status as a non-profit organization. These laws are actually fairly straightforward, though anyone would admit the language used is tedious. That's just how those lawyer jerks do things. | ||
| ||
