|
On October 05 2010 09:58 urashimakt wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 09:44 aimaimaim wrote:On October 05 2010 09:15 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 09:11 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 08:59 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 08:42 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 08:23 Vedic wrote:On October 05 2010 07:55 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 07:53 Selith wrote: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. 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. 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.
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. 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?? does SC fall under cinematography?? cinematographic works may be reproduced and played for the public 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.
im not saying they are immune, im just saying that they might have leverage when it goes down to courts. thats why im asking if they were actually charging for pay per view and/or staged events.
|
SC2 fanboys keep your tight panties out of our BW thread thx. Just giving you this advice so your butt won't hurt as much when Gretech lose in court.
How do you suppose a Korean court will rule a Blizzard sock puppet over their home grown organization that has evolved into a part of Korean culture.
|
United States238 Posts
If Korean court rules in favor of KeSPA and states that StarCraft 1's IP does not apply and is okay as a public use (solely because it is being used for E-Sports purposes), that's going to open a nasty can of worms. StarCraft 1 is not the only game that is being used as an E-Sports in Korea.
Also, expect Blizzard to take it to international court system if it happens.
|
10387 Posts
On October 05 2010 10:02 aimaimaim wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 09:58 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 09:44 aimaimaim wrote:On October 05 2010 09:15 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 09:11 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 08:59 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 08:42 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 08:23 Vedic wrote:On October 05 2010 07:55 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 07:53 Selith wrote:
[quote]
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. 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. 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.
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. 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?? does SC fall under cinematography?? cinematographic works may be reproduced and played for the public 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. im not saying they are immune, im just saying that they might have leverage when it goes down to courts. thats why im asking if they were actually charging for pay per view and/or staged events.
After the very first Starleague, there has never been a mandatory fee charged to attend a live Starcraft game in Korea
|
Look at it this way. In a few years or so, SC2 will be crushing BW if not totally extinguishing it in popularity. If Gretech is nonchalant about their IP rights with what exists now, what stops Kespa in a few years time of saying: "Well, SC2 is popular, we want to control it illegally just like BW."
It's bad business all around if they let MBC slide. Kind of like letting someone trespass on your property continually and not calling the cops. If years later you want to get them out because they started building stuff and taking your land, it's very hard to do because over the years your non-action was considered consent.
|
On October 05 2010 11:27 cerebralz wrote:
Look at it this way. In a few years or so, SC2 will be crushing BW if not totally extinguishing it in popularity. If Gretech is nonchalant about their IP rights with what exists now, what stops Kespa in a few years time of saying: "Well, SC2 is popular, we want to control it illegally just like BW."
It's bad business all around if they let MBC slide. Kind of like letting someone trespass on your property continually and not calling the cops. If years later you want to get them out because they started building stuff and taking your land, it's very hard to do because over the years your non-action was considered consent.
Control it illegally? It wasn't a problem until Blizzard stepped in few years late and yelled out 'I want money"
|
On October 05 2010 11:27 cerebralz wrote:
Look at it this way. In a few years or so, SC2 will be crushing BW if not totally extinguishing it in popularity. If Gretech is nonchalant about their IP rights with what exists now, what stops Kespa in a few years time of saying: "Well, SC2 is popular, we want to control it illegally just like BW."
Ironically that sounds a lot like what Blizzard is doing. Cashing in on the E-Sports scene Kespa created.
|
This makes me sad that people won't just leave the pro scene alone. Just cave, and let BW live on with SC2, and everyone is happy. Jeez.
|
On October 05 2010 09:11 moopie wrote:Show nested quote +On October 05 2010 08:59 urashimakt wrote:On October 05 2010 08:42 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 08:23 Vedic wrote:On October 05 2010 07:55 moopie wrote:On October 05 2010 07:53 Selith wrote: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. 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. 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.
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: Show nested quote +
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.
This section doesnt apply. "provided that the performers concerned are not paid any remuneration for such performances". The only way it would be permissible is if there was no prize money given out.
One could argue that the show//broadcast itself is comprised of not only the players but also the commentators and booth girls. If any of them are paid in any way then it would no longer be permissible.
Neither is the work made public for non-profit purposes. I wasn't aware the blizz was giving out sc / BW for free.
|
How does Gretech have intellectual property rights of Broodwar, when Blizzard made the game? Am I not understanding something here? Please fill me in.
|
On October 05 2010 12:01 Raz0r wrote:
How does Gretech have intellectual property rights of Broodwar, when Blizzard made the game? Am I not understanding something here? Please fill me in.
Blizz holds the IP rights. Licensed said rights to Gretech
|
YAY! 
|
I might actually get my life back now
|
I don't have a lot of faith in Gretech where as I still have a little for Blizzard. Gretech has ran the GSL pretty standard for the players, but did an extremely bad job at broadcasting it to the people. The pricing was initially ridiculous and got forced to revise it through massive complaints from everyone (and no one was really buying the original ticket prices). Even after the change, the quality of service is laughable. The VOD Player has the worst deblocker known to man kind when you maximize the player and the low quality stream was often blocked for me due to "too many connections". I've heard they're going to release a higher quality VOD standard soon, but as long as those blocks are there when I maximize, it's just not worth it in my eyes. There are a lot of complaints about this on their own forum system and I'm not sure if they're paying attention to them at all. When I e-mailed Blizzard about the KeSPA vs Gretech situation, they actually gave a response in that they will forward it to the right department inside Blizzard to at least get looked at (if it ever got read or not I don't know, but at least Blizzard acknowledged my complaint).
They also had some problems over control of the Live Chat system and didn't know how to properly moderate it and wound up closing it instead. It should not be hard to station a few mods in the Live Chat to clean out the bad people.
I don't know their full business negotiation strategies are, but if they're this bad interacting with their audience, I really don't have much hope with it interacting with other businesses.
|
On October 05 2010 11:27 cerebralz wrote:
Look at it this way. In a few years or so, SC2 will be crushing BW if not totally extinguishing it in popularity. If Gretech is nonchalant about their IP rights with what exists now, what stops Kespa in a few years time of saying: "Well, SC2 is popular, we want to control it illegally just like BW."
It's bad business all around if they let MBC slide. Kind of like letting someone trespass on your property continually and not calling the cops. If years later you want to get them out because they started building stuff and taking your land, it's very hard to do because over the years your non-action was considered consent.
It's not a fact yet that sc2 is CRUSHING BW it is merely what you imagine it would be are you nostradamus ? I believe not lets see how things fair in the next coming years until than please keep your prediction to yourself.
|
So many threads have already popped up regarding this legal battle, and yet so many people still can't figure out why IP rights does not belong to Blizzard.
|
Sigh there is NO OTHER game whereby you need to pay the developing company to hold a tournament. Brood War is being treated like this only because OTHER people helped Blizzard made it popular to this extent (wtf free-riding on 10 years worth of free advertisement on PRIME TIME slot on multiple TV channels? did i mention that their advertisements last for HOURS instead of a minute like other people?). I have no idea why people are saying "Blizzard is only doing what is right because its their IP rights, they can do whatever they want". What happened to the HUGE benefit that they reap, and that are built off the blood n sweat of organizers and players and fans over YEARS?
Lets just forget about the as-yet-unclear borders of IP rights for a moment. Even assuming Blizz is 100% right legally.
If i saw you dying in your house, and decided to climb in to save your life. Are you "only doing what is right" by sueing me for trespassing, after getting ur ass saved?
|
hahahahahaha i cant believe whats happening here
you guys should know the ugly korean underground system.
its just another dirty turf war that came-outta-nowhere organization is trying to claim what's never been theirs in the first place
|
On October 05 2010 14:16 suchanx7 wrote:
hahahahahaha i cant believe whats happening here
you guys should know the ugly korean underground system.
its just another dirty turf war that came-outta-nowhere organization is trying to claim what's never been theirs in the first place
Your atrociously doltish diction confuses me. I'm assuming "came-outta-nowhere organization" refers to "KeSPA". That organization is pretty much single-handedly going down in history as the founders of E-Sports with Starcraft: BW as the first medium to do so. Its not an ugly korean underground system, its just a bunch of corrupt businessmen on their periods trying to fight over some numbers. Ultimately, it doesn't matter who wins. We, the players suffer.
|
This just further cements my opinion that KeSPA is in the right here and Gretech is only concerned about profits (not to say that KeSPA doesn't care about profits, just that they have other aims too).
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
