|
On October 17 2010 22:43 Coldazer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2010 22:15 maybenexttime wrote:
Sustaining a team like CJ Entus (now Hite Entus) costs CJ $40 mil a year. For years there used to be 11 progaming teams. Then take into consideration maintaining the leagues and broadcasting them on the TV - that includes plenty of other titles, not just BW.
You do the math... The sponsorships keep the teams running. Like the "CJ Corp" in CJ Entus. Not KeSPA. The leagues themselves for the most part are independent of KeSPA, all KeSPA does is leech money off of the people who run the leagues and broadcasters. All these are illegal activities since they have no rights to do such in the first place.
Seriously, how many times do people have to explain that? KeSPA = team sponsors + officials + broadcasters + ...
If you don't know what the heck you're talking about, do not post...
|
On October 17 2010 22:40 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2010 22:31 Frankon wrote:On October 16 2010 16:16 QuothTheRaven wrote:On October 16 2010 16:15 Nemesis wrote:On October 16 2010 15:46 Emon_ wrote:
About the 100million won fee for tournaments - didn't KeSPA say that the max they would go to was 55-60million? I think it was in one of the news posts about the negotiations.
Also, why is this post released now? If they really cared about the scene this could've come two weeks ago. There is nothing earth shattering in the document. Only when KeSPA went ahead with the SPL despite there being no contract and possibly facing a lawsuit do they decide to speak up. GomTV/Gretech are handling this like amateurs. Shows how much Blizzard really cares about BW. Kespa offered 300 million won I think Yeah, that was reported in one of the other threads. And it was stated that Gretech rejected the 300 million won. What gives? Well Gom wants their logo on Proleague If this was about a simple logo, this wouldnt've dragged on for three years... T____T As a matter of fact, last OSL had a blizzard logo during the finals.
Well there is a difrence between a Blizzard logo and big GOMTV logo (that has nth to do with sc1 and proleagu)
Also about IP right.
Blizzard holds IP right to Starcraft 1..
Kespa holds IP rights to ProLeague...
And it was said before that Blizzard want all rights to it. So be enforcing their own rights they are restricting other company IP rights...
Doesnt sound to good
|
Quite splendid news really for all the devoted fans here  may starcraft live long and prosper
|
On October 17 2010 22:54 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2010 22:40 maybenexttime wrote:On October 17 2010 22:31 Frankon wrote:On October 16 2010 16:16 QuothTheRaven wrote:On October 16 2010 16:15 Nemesis wrote:On October 16 2010 15:46 Emon_ wrote:
About the 100million won fee for tournaments - didn't KeSPA say that the max they would go to was 55-60million? I think it was in one of the news posts about the negotiations.
Also, why is this post released now? If they really cared about the scene this could've come two weeks ago. There is nothing earth shattering in the document. Only when KeSPA went ahead with the SPL despite there being no contract and possibly facing a lawsuit do they decide to speak up. GomTV/Gretech are handling this like amateurs. Shows how much Blizzard really cares about BW. Kespa offered 300 million won I think Yeah, that was reported in one of the other threads. And it was stated that Gretech rejected the 300 million won. What gives? Well Gom wants their logo on Proleague If this was about a simple logo, this wouldnt've dragged on for three years... T____T As a matter of fact, last OSL had a blizzard logo during the finals. Well there is a difrence between a Blizzard logo and big GOMTV logo (that has nth to do with sc1 and proleagu) Also about IP right. Blizzard holds IP right to Starcraft 1..
Kespa holds IP rights to ProLeague...And it was said before that Blizzard want all rights to it. So be enforcing their own rights they are restricting other company IP rights... Doesnt sound to good
These two statements should not be said as if they were fact.
If this issue does eventually end up in court i believe the battle will mostly be over what is "IP" and how far does Blizzard's "IP" over the Starcraft franchise stretch (players/leagues).
|
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it.
|
On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it.
This is one of the original reasons why KeSPA declined blizzard's offer - they too wanted KeSPA to sign a 1 year deal. Gretech, on the other hand, got a 3 year contract.
|
On October 17 2010 12:59 bluetrolls wrote:
Is anyone as disturbed by the whole "IP rights" stance as I am? Should a movie that takes a shot of a Toyota(TM) car have to pay "IP rights" to Toyota? If I make a picture of my kids playing with Lego(TM) blocks, do I have to pay a fee to the Lego company if I want to post them online? Where is the line drawn?
actually its normally Toyota who pay the film company or atleast give them the car for free, its how corporate sponsorship works in movies. Every time you see a named brand in a film, they have either paid for it to be there or gifted it to the studio to get them brand recognition. Its totally different to IP rights.
IP rights are what the studio has over the film, what a car manufacturer has over the technology in their cars, what game companies have over the content of their game.
As for your lego argument, you aren't making any money, therefore you aren't violating any IP rights. If you were uploading videos of lego and charging to watch them lego would sue your ass in a heart beat as you are making money off their product without their consent.
Blizzard only started trying to enforce their IP right in the last few years because until then there wasn't such things as IP rights, atleast not in the sense we have now, by law. Before then, there were copyright laws that stated you needed permission to sell or copy games, but it did not protect the broadcast of those games in the way that it did films.
When laws were made for IP, games companies got the right to control the images within the game, they got the right to stop epople broadcasting their games and making money off them.
|
On October 18 2010 03:15 emythrel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2010 12:59 bluetrolls wrote:
Is anyone as disturbed by the whole "IP rights" stance as I am? Should a movie that takes a shot of a Toyota(TM) car have to pay "IP rights" to Toyota? If I make a picture of my kids playing with Lego(TM) blocks, do I have to pay a fee to the Lego company if I want to post them online? Where is the line drawn? actually its normally Toyota who pay the film company or atleast give them the car for free, its how corporate sponsorship works in movies. Every time you see a named brand in a film, they have either paid for it to be there or gifted it to the studio to get them brand recognition. Its totally different to IP rights. IP rights are what the studio has over the film, what a car manufacturer has over the technology in their cars, what game companies have over the content of their game. As for your lego argument, you aren't making any money, therefore you aren't violating any IP rights. If you were uploading videos of lego and charging to watch them lego would sue your ass in a heart beat as you are making money off their product without their consent. Blizzard only started trying to enforce their IP right in the last few years because until then there wasn't such things as IP rights, atleast not in the sense we have now, by law. Before then, there were copyright laws that stated you needed permission to sell or copy games, but it did not protect the broadcast of those games in the way that it did films. When laws were made for IP, games companies got the right to control the images within the game, they got the right to stop epople broadcasting their games and making money off them.
Afaik there were already appropriate laws way before blizzard went into "negotiations" with KeSPA.
|
On October 17 2010 22:43 Coldazer wrote:Show nested quote +On October 17 2010 22:15 maybenexttime wrote:
Sustaining a team like CJ Entus (now Hite Entus) costs CJ $40 mil a year. For years there used to be 11 progaming teams. Then take into consideration maintaining the leagues and broadcasting them on the TV - that includes plenty of other titles, not just BW.
You do the math... The sponsorships keep the teams running. Like the "CJ Corp" in CJ Entus. Not KeSPA. The leagues themselves for the most part are independent of KeSPA, all KeSPA does is leech money off of the people who run the leagues and broadcasters. All these are illegal activities since they have no rights to do such in the first place.
Kespa = team sponsors and pro league. Leech money? they are a not for profit organisation that charged OGN and MBC some money to broadcast the pro league organised by kespa to recoup some of the huge costs it requires to run 12 pro gaming teams on a salary.
Too many blizzard fanboys posting before they do at least some small background research.
They get it in their head that theres some massive profit scheme going on wen they see the flashy pro leagues running.
Money to license the game was never an issue, blizzard wanted control over everything.
|
We need more sc2 broadcasting.
|
On October 18 2010 05:46 Danneth wrote:
We need more sc2 broadcasting.
Who is that "we" you're speaking of?
|
On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it.
Well, actually a annual contract and a 1 year contract are different. annual contracts have the expectation of being resigned after a MUTUAL agreement on terms (they tend to be identical to the previous year adjusted for inflation unless somethin drastic happens) 1 year contracts leaves both out in the cold after one year and they need to try to get a contract again. annuals are just renewable.
as for Kespa = the sponsers and stuff. thats part of the problem. They pay for the teams, and thenmake more money than they spend by chargign for rights and stuff. and so they are pretty much making money to advertise. this would be similar to a football stadium paying a company to put the companies name on their stadium. thats just stupid and wrong. they should be sponsering the team for revenue from the advertising and not to make a quick flip with the investment for money. thats not caring for the team/how they are doing at all.
|
On October 18 2010 06:14 maybenexttime wrote:Who is that "we" you're speaking of?
"We" is anyone who enjoys watching SC2. A condescending attitude isn't really necessary here. I've been playing broodwar and practically every blizzard game starting with diablo and wc2, including SC,2 and I enjoy all of them. You have to realize that if e-sports is going to continue to grow and expand, SC2 is going to be a pivotal part of that expansion and growth. Especially in the US.
I am really tired of seeing nothing but blind hatred towards blizzard/Gretech and even Kespa. Is either side 100% in the right? No, but neither side is completely in the wrong. You can argue that Blizzard/Gretech are taking something the Kespa put effort into creating. On the other side of the same coin, Kespa created something from what Blizzard created. No BW, no Kespa, no BW scene. Both have viable claims and if this was so clear cut, we wouldn't have this ongoing issue.
I won't hide my bias, I originally got into BW watching savior duke it out with Nal Ra at blizzcon and I was enthralled. After that I discovered TL and began following the entire scene. When GOM came around I was ecstatic to have one of my favorite casters casting a tournament partially aimed at a foreign audience. When the GOM classic died because of lack of participation, I was very angry, especially with Kespa. Yes people can say the players were overworked/uninterested, but I heartily doubt that was the entire case, especially with what Super Daniel Man posted. After Blizzard put the funding into GOM, being muscled out probably left a sour taste in their mouth as well as mine. I realize two wrongs don't make a right, but it does feel like some comeuppance if a Kespa sponsored/run tournament gets shut down similarly.
There is also no reason for people to be doom saying that Blizzard/Gretech winning this law suit will mean the end of BW. If you want to talk from a pure monetary standpoint, Blizzard would profit from keeping the BW scene going concurrent with SC2. The only way it would die is if Kespa chooses to LET the BW scene die if Blizzard/Gretech win. There hasn't been talk of dissolving Kespa at all as far as I have seen. If they are truly non-profit (which I whole-heartedly doubt), I am sure that Kespa can be worked into whatever changing system that Blizzard/Gretech implements and if they choose not to, it really is theirs, and the fans loss. Either way, the BW scene is going to change, and acting like a child and screaming whenever something changes, isn't going to help. If Kespa dissolves, I am sure someone will pick up the pieces. As long as there are players wanting to play, companies willing to sponsor tournaments, and fans willing to watch, the BW scene will continue, in one form or another.
I also can't believe how much the Korean fans input is being marginalized. As if we truly know better when it comes to the complicated mess of BW politics. From what I have seen, I would compare Kespa to a labor union that has outlived its usefulness. Their only purpose is to control the BW scene, and to perpetuate their own existence. They don't exist to help the players, as was seen in their mockery of free agency. Just because they are the current ruling body, doesn't mean they need to stay that way and it seems a large portion of Korean fans feel the same.
I wouldn't be surprised to see this case go on for a quite a while and even get appealed to an international court regardless of the outcome in Korea. Either way, people need to get used to change, because E-Sports, including BW, is changing.
|
I was incredibly neutrel to this entire thing, all i did before was watch the broadcasts, but after joining this site and seeing all the arguements in this and the other thread, quite frankly the people arguing for kespa are terrible, 99% of you completly fail in the logic department, and just try to appeal to other fans like yourselves, and dont offer true arguments.
Perfect example is around 8 posts above me, how blizz owns IP rights, and kespa holds IP rights to proleague. PROLEAGUE CAN NOT EXIST WITHOUT STARCRAFT. Starcraft can exist without proleague, the fact is that sc1 proleague requires....... sc1. Wow how crazy, how on earth did i know this..... Because I used logic, and didn't just go OMG SOMETHING MAY THREATEN sc1 pro scene BAD BAD BAD BAD. Well guess what, the entire kespa sc1 thing IS ILLEGAL, period end of story, and you guys havn't even been able to prove that kespa is willing to negotiate in good faith.
I had zero dog in this fight, I don't work for blizzard (and dislike ativision greatly...) or gretech, and really all I did before was enjoy the games. Well done, I wasn't even convinced much by the pro gretech arguements, as I was by the pure uneducated, not well thought out, just plain elementary grade school arguments from pro kespa people on these forums, which really is quite sad because for the most part this site is superior. My view? Purely based upon the arguments from the users on this forum, is that kespa is totally in the wrong over 90% fault on their side, with gretech in the right with 10% fault.
|
On October 18 2010 06:43 PrinceXizor wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it. Well, actually a annual contract and a 1 year contract are different. annual contracts have the expectation of being resigned after a MUTUAL agreement on terms (they tend to be identical to the previous year adjusted for inflation unless somethin drastic happens) 1 year contracts leaves both out in the cold after one year and they need to try to get a contract again. annuals are just renewable. as for Kespa = the sponsers and stuff. thats part of the problem. They pay for the teams, and thenmake more money than they spend by chargign for rights and stuff. and so they are pretty much making money to advertise. this would be similar to a football stadium paying a company to put the companies name on their stadium. thats just stupid and wrong. they should be sponsering the team for revenue from the advertising and not to make a quick flip with the investment for money. thats not caring for the team/how they are doing at all.
Seriously, what are you talking about? How are they making more money than they spend?! T_____T They are spending more money on the teams than they are going to earn in a hundred years (talking about the money coming from charging the broadcasters for ProLeague). On top of that, they are reinvesting all of it in esports...
Do you actually know how much money they are spending on the teams and how much they're charging for PL? Because you've just pulled an idiotic statement out of your ass, no offence. ;/
|
On October 18 2010 07:59 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2010 06:43 PrinceXizor wrote:On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it. Well, actually a annual contract and a 1 year contract are different. annual contracts have the expectation of being resigned after a MUTUAL agreement on terms (they tend to be identical to the previous year adjusted for inflation unless somethin drastic happens) 1 year contracts leaves both out in the cold after one year and they need to try to get a contract again. annuals are just renewable. as for Kespa = the sponsers and stuff. thats part of the problem. They pay for the teams, and thenmake more money than they spend by chargign for rights and stuff. and so they are pretty much making money to advertise. this would be similar to a football stadium paying a company to put the companies name on their stadium. thats just stupid and wrong. they should be sponsering the team for revenue from the advertising and not to make a quick flip with the investment for money. thats not caring for the team/how they are doing at all. Seriously, what are you talking about? How are they making more money than they spend?! T_____T They are spending more money on the teams than they are going to earn in a hundred years (talking about the money coming from charging the broadcasters for ProLeague). On top of that, they are reinvesting all of it in esports... Do you actually know how much money they are spending on the teams and how much they're charging for PL? Because you've just pulled an idiotic statement out of your ass, no offence. ;/
Man really, come on. Its not like some dude and his grandma started kespa in order to feed the progamers and they are givin money out of the poor lady's pension. The teams have sponsors, from huge companies. It's like, omg Shinhan or Nate or Korean Air are all such good samaritans, giving money to esports without taking anything back. It's sponsorship man, they get their brand out there to geeks wherever, so now you go buy Sony Ericson and eat pringles chips and feel like a dt pimp, fly with Korean Air and make a debit card at Shinhan Bank. Whatever, their marketing dudes know why they sponsor esports. Probably its profitable, and it gives their brand a good image.
The fact that these major players made this Kespa "non profit" organisation that gives food for the progamers to put in their mouth and chew and all they ask in return is only a broadcasting fees, its like Jesus reborn in Korea right ? Wrong, they have them wearing their shirts, and doing their events so its as much sponsorship as anything else. So i dont see why you think there should be this zero sum ecuation, as in Kespa gives all this money to the teams and it should get the same back. No, wrong. The companies within Kespa should sponsor those teams period, if they so wish. If its not in their best interest anymore, or the team is not delivering, or no profit, then by all means, go estro. It's how it happens everywhere else in the world.
|
On October 18 2010 08:38 ptz wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2010 07:59 maybenexttime wrote:On October 18 2010 06:43 PrinceXizor wrote:On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it. Well, actually a annual contract and a 1 year contract are different. annual contracts have the expectation of being resigned after a MUTUAL agreement on terms (they tend to be identical to the previous year adjusted for inflation unless somethin drastic happens) 1 year contracts leaves both out in the cold after one year and they need to try to get a contract again. annuals are just renewable. as for Kespa = the sponsers and stuff. thats part of the problem. They pay for the teams, and thenmake more money than they spend by chargign for rights and stuff. and so they are pretty much making money to advertise. this would be similar to a football stadium paying a company to put the companies name on their stadium. thats just stupid and wrong. they should be sponsering the team for revenue from the advertising and not to make a quick flip with the investment for money. thats not caring for the team/how they are doing at all. Seriously, what are you talking about? How are they making more money than they spend?! T_____T They are spending more money on the teams than they are going to earn in a hundred years (talking about the money coming from charging the broadcasters for ProLeague). On top of that, they are reinvesting all of it in esports... Do you actually know how much money they are spending on the teams and how much they're charging for PL? Because you've just pulled an idiotic statement out of your ass, no offence. ;/ Man really, come on. Its not like some dude and his grandma started kespa in order to feed the progamers and they are givin money out of the poor lady's pension. The teams have sponsors, from huge companies. It's like, omg Shinhan or Nate or Korean Air are all such good samaritans, giving money to esports without taking anything back. It's sponsorship man, they get their brand out there to geeks wherever, so now you go buy Sony Ericson and eat pringles chips and feel like a dt pimp, fly with Korean Air and make a debit card at Shinhan Bank. Whatever, their marketing dudes know why they sponsor esports. Probably its profitable, and it gives their brand a good image. The fact that these major players made this Kespa "non profit" organisation that gives food for the progamers to put in their mouth and chew and all they ask in return is only a broadcasting fees, its like Jesus reborn in Korea right ? Wrong, they have them wearing their shirts, and doing their events so its as much sponsorship as anything else. So i dont see why you think there should be this zero sum ecuation, as in Kespa gives all this money to the teams and it should get the same back. No, wrong. The companies within Kespa should sponsor those teams period, if they so wish. If its not in their best interest anymore, or the team is not delivering, or no profit, then by all means, go estro. It's how it happens everywhere else in the world.
You're stating the obvious. Progaming is a marketing venture for KeSPA companies.
Doesn't change the fact that what he said was utter nonesense.
|
On October 18 2010 07:57 Varth wrote:
I was incredibly neutrel to this entire thing, all i did before was watch the broadcasts, but after joining this site and seeing all the arguements in this and the other thread, quite frankly the people arguing for kespa are terrible, 99% of you completly fail in the logic department, and just try to appeal to other fans like yourselves, and dont offer true arguments.
Perfect example is around 8 posts above me, how blizz owns IP rights, and kespa holds IP rights to proleague. PROLEAGUE CAN NOT EXIST WITHOUT STARCRAFT. Starcraft can exist without proleague, the fact is that sc1 proleague requires....... sc1. Wow how crazy, how on earth did i know this..... Because I used logic, and didn't just go OMG SOMETHING MAY THREATEN sc1 pro scene BAD BAD BAD BAD. Well guess what, the entire kespa sc1 thing IS ILLEGAL, period end of story, and you guys havn't even been able to prove that kespa is willing to negotiate in good faith.
I had zero dog in this fight, I don't work for blizzard (and dislike ativision greatly...) or gretech, and really all I did before was enjoy the games. Well done, I wasn't even convinced much by the pro gretech arguements, as I was by the pure uneducated, not well thought out, just plain elementary grade school arguments from pro kespa people on these forums, which really is quite sad because for the most part this site is superior. My view? Purely based upon the arguments from the users on this forum, is that kespa is totally in the wrong over 90% fault on their side, with gretech in the right with 10% fault.
Yup, obviously everything is already laid out black and white and you're the only person that can see it. You're smarter and have more logic than Blizzard, Gretech, Kespa, and all of Korea.
|
On October 16 2010 15:59 Scarecrow wrote:Show nested quote +On October 16 2010 15:15 Selith wrote:
GomTV said, "The goal is to further increase the size of e-sports, as well as to make it more active through our involvement. I hate PR -.-
This line is what annoys me most considering its a blatant lie. When did they assert themselves in the position needed to make eSports more active? And how is taking action that threatens the entire existence of the longest running/most successful eSports scenes going to do that either? I really hate them.
|
On October 18 2010 07:59 maybenexttime wrote:Show nested quote +On October 18 2010 06:43 PrinceXizor wrote:On October 18 2010 00:54 StorkHwaiting wrote:
Didn't read through the thread responses but does anyone else think this is really fishy? 1 year term before renegotiation?
This sounds like Blizzard/Gretech giving up first year profits in exchange for guaranteeing their right to the IP, then year 2 onwards they can jack up the rate however they like, and Kespa at that point has no legal path other than to accept it. Well, actually a annual contract and a 1 year contract are different. annual contracts have the expectation of being resigned after a MUTUAL agreement on terms (they tend to be identical to the previous year adjusted for inflation unless somethin drastic happens) 1 year contracts leaves both out in the cold after one year and they need to try to get a contract again. annuals are just renewable. as for Kespa = the sponsers and stuff. thats part of the problem. They pay for the teams, and thenmake more money than they spend by chargign for rights and stuff. and so they are pretty much making money to advertise. this would be similar to a football stadium paying a company to put the companies name on their stadium. thats just stupid and wrong. they should be sponsering the team for revenue from the advertising and not to make a quick flip with the investment for money. thats not caring for the team/how they are doing at all. Seriously, what are you talking about? How are they making more money than they spend?! T_____T They are spending more money on the teams than they are going to earn in a hundred years (talking about the money coming from charging the broadcasters for ProLeague). On top of that, they are reinvesting all of it in esports... Do you actually know how much money they are spending on the teams and how much they're charging for PL? Because you've just pulled an idiotic statement out of your ass, no offence. ;/
they charge 1.5 billion from both MBC and OGN. so 3 billion won is incredibly less than the cost of food+internet+salary for every team? 2.7 million. about 1.8 million of that is salary. and you think that the 50 players eat and use enough electricity annually for over 900000 dollars???
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
