|
United States33121 Posts
In the aftermath of reports of failed negotiations with Blizzard and an impending lawsuit against MBCGame, KeSPA released an official statement regarding the current situation.
KeSPA announced that they are still committed to reaching an agreement, but stated that the fees being requested by Gretech were unreasonable. In a rare official release about the finances of Korean e-Sports entities, KeSPA claimed that additional fees would be a significant burden on the unprofitable Korean e-Sports industry.
Edit: An alternate translation and discussion can be found here.
Source: KeSPA
Official Statement from KeSPA and the Ten Pro-gaming Teams.
“KeSPA is not a profit seeking entity, and did its best at the negotiations.”
KeSPA is reinvesting all revenue made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues.
While KeSPA is a non-profit entity for the growth and support of e-Sports, we are allowed to participate in some revenue generating activities for the sake of making a secure e-Sports environment and promoting e-Sports in Korea and internationally.
Our main sources of income are the membership fees from the managerial board, Proleague sponsorships, and the sale Proleague broadcasting rights. The entirety of this income is spent on operating the proleague, and other re-investments to create a solid foundation for e-Sports.
Of these, the sale of Proleague broadcasting rights began in 2007 in order to form an industry structure where a larger audience could access e-Sports and Proleague, by setting up a solid foundation for e-Sports and creating opportunities to broadcast through multiple media platforms.
After we began this business in 2007, all of the revenue from broadcasting rights sales and Proleague sponsorships have been spent on the operation of Proleague. The sale of broadcasting rights to IEG in 2007 brought in 1.7 billion won over a three year contract. The broadcasting stations OnGameNet and MBCGame each paid IEG 600 million won to be able to broadcast for that duration, a total of 1.2 billion won. KeSPA then reinvested 250 million won and 500 million won respectively in OnGameNet and MBCGame in annual production costs, a total of 1.5 billion won.
The current operational structure of Proleague makes it difficult to acquire multiple sources of income for stable operation unlike other professional sports, and it is a similar story for most Korean e-Sports competitions.
The new media environment and change in the policy of various portal websites since 2008 have actually reduced income from broadcasting rights. Operating a league on the level of Proleague with multiple teams and players competing is a money losing business, and we are forced to use part of the board membership fees in order to fill these losses. We are reducing our losses with constant attempts to improve our operations.
In this situation, the tournament fees and other costs being brought up during negotiations with Gretech would have a large impact on the operation of Proleague. KeSPA respects the IP rights regarding SC1, and are working to reach a reasonable agreement with Gretech for the sake of the continuation of Starcraft 1 leagues.
It is unfortunate that legal action has been announced amidst the negotiations.
KeSPA and the Pro-game teams have continued to negotiate with Gretech, who are acting as Blizzard’s legal representative.
We reached partial agreement regarding the approval of platforms and the principle agents in contracts during our 8th meeting on the 20th of October, and agreed to re-discuss the issues of broadcasted material copyrights, game categories, and licensing fees at our 9th meeting on the 25th. However, Blizzard’s COO Paul Sams made the unfortunate announcement at Blizzcon the 22nd that “Protecting IP rights are very important. We have tried for years to resolve the issue through fair means, but we now feel that legal action is best recourse.”
KeSPA has continued to try and moderate opinions with Gretech on the copyright of broadcast programs, league licensing fees, and game categories and league negotiations during our meetings on the 25th and 27th, and have agreed to meet again for our 11th meeting next week.
However, after our session on the 27th, the media reported false stories of “Negotiations have broken down for good, legal dispute inevitable.” This was disconcerting news to us, as we were engaging in negotiations with a positive attitude. We think it is unfortunate that our desire to negotiate in earnest has been brought into question.
KeSPA and the Pro-gaming teams are doing their best in negotiations.
We have been earnest in our negotiations with Gretech, suggesting many revised offers and making many concessions so that the leagues can continue stably. Even though intellectual property experts have advised us that it is excessive to request joint ownership of broadcast materials created through the expertise of TV stations and the performance of players in addition to charging a licensing fee for a tournament, we have accepted a limited form of joint ownership for the sake of promoting e-Sports and to improve negotiations.
However, we cannot approve of the licensing fees as they are being suggested now, as they do not at all take into consideration the income structure and operational situation of current Starcraft 1 leagues. As Gretech revealed on the 16th, their conditions are 100 million won per tournament. Considering there is one season of Proleague, and six individual leagues a year, the total fee comes out to 700 million won.
Considering that the present Korean Starcraft 1 e-Sports market has not reached the stage of creating profits, it needs continued investment for further growth.
The net losses for three seasons of Proleague are approximately 670 million won, and we are filling the gap with the income from broadcasting rights and board membership fees. The individual leagues are being run at the level where they are barely avoiding a loss. Even in this situation, we have said many times we are willing to pay licensing fees as long as it is a reasonable amount.
As of now, the Korean Starcraft 1 market still needs reinvestment of income from sponsorships and other sources in order to create a more stable environment.
KeSPA and the Pro-gaming teams hope to clarify the ownership situation in e-Sports and create clear standards through these negotiations, so game creators and tournament operators can form effective partnerships in the future. We will continue to participate in negotiations and try to bring about a positive result.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49608 Posts
This is a much better translation than the one from the other thread.
Thanks for the translation Waxangel.
|
Thanks for the more detailed translation. It makes it sound a whole lot better.
|
kespa posts their financial losses, the thread feels the empty void created by hordes of blizzard fanboys suddenly being informed.
edit: great translation thanks for posting this up 
|
Great translation, thanks!
This definitely makes me feel more sympathetic towards Kespa, but then again, it was a report released by them. Both Blizzard and Kespa are releasing news that put them in the good light, so I'm not sure who to believe.
|
Its great to get some actual facts from one of the companies involved in the dispute, and you can be pretty sure that the financial figures are accurate, and the rest is positively spun truth, you can probably expect a similar release from gretech/blizz soon
|
If a company as insignificant (on the big scale) as MLG can manage to make a profit what's holding KeSPA back?
I have a feeling their financial situation is extremely exagerated in this article. Basing your opinion on PR buzz is never a good idea. Both kespa and gretech seem to have very shady motives throughout this whole thing.
|
51368 Posts
MLG thrives on advertising from big companies such as Dr. Pepper, Doritos etc. KeSPA doesn't have that.
|
On October 28 2010 22:36 Hakker wrote:
If a company as insignificant (on the big scale) as MLG can manage to make a profit what's holding KeSPA back?
I have a feeling their financial situation is extremely exagerated in this article. Basing your opinion on PR buzz is never a good idea. Both kespa and gretech seem to have very shady motives throughout this whole thing.
They said they re-invest all profits in e-sports. That doesn't mean their business in unprofitable imo.
If proleague was not-profitable there would be no proleague. Clearly they are exaggerating.
|
France2061 Posts
On October 28 2010 22:36 Hakker wrote:
If a company as insignificant (on the big scale) as MLG can manage to make a profit what's holding KeSPA back?
I have a feeling their financial situation is extremely exagerated in this article. Basing your opinion on PR buzz is never a good idea. Both kespa and gretech seem to have very shady motives throughout this whole thing.
MLG charges entry fees. More importantly, does MLG sponsor teams and pay for team houses, etc.? (legit question, I don't know much about them)
|
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/
|
United States33121 Posts
On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/
Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries.
|
On October 28 2010 22:05 Waxangel wrote:
The net losses for three seasons of Proleague are approximately 670 million won, and we are filling the gap with the income from broadcasting rights and board membership fees.
This part sounds a bit strange. 670m won over 3 years is about $200k USD per year. Surely the broadcasting fees and membership fees for an entire year is many times more than this. So does that mean they have a huge surplus to reinvest or was it just worded poorly?
|
Thank you, Waxangel, for translating! More financial transparency is a good thing.
|
Russian Federation4405 Posts
Thank for translation very much!
And thank to this site for supporting BroodWar so confidently, I hope it never dies as a true eSport game.
|
On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/
Profit is revenue MINUS expenses.
What this article is saying is that the expenses of maintaining a Proleague already exceed the revenue.
|
On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries.
Exactly my problem. =/ They could be paying executives dozens of times what the entry fee and likely tons of times the average salary of the players. So when they tell me that they can't afford the fees or worst... That they would need to take the money out of the teams or the players. =/
Once AGAIN personal opinion.
|
On October 28 2010 22:57 Mortality wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit is revenue MINUS expenses. What this article is saying is that the expenses of maintaining a Proleague already exceed the revenue.
But then they mention broadcasting fees and board membership fees as if they were not included.
|
I'm guessing blizzard/gretech also didn't know about the insolvency of the korean e-sports league =/.
|
On October 28 2010 23:01 Furycrab wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries. Exactly my problem. =/ They could be paying executives dozens of times what the entry fee and likely tons of times the average salary of the players. So when they tell me that they can't afford the fees or worst... That they would need to take the money out of the teams or the players. =/ Once AGAIN personal opinion.
Not much can be said if you insist that outside of listed facts, everything other particles of their body is working to deceive you/fans.. Suffice to me that i am getting quality entertainment for free (instead of getting charged for VoD/stream), so i dont dwell on and speculate the little details that i wont know 
Anyhow if Blizz win this i ll just go back to JRPG and give RTS/e-Sport a rest.. Since (imo) if that happens, e-Sport is lost 
|
I know a lot of people are following this. But it's getting kind of silly. "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" "Kespa's response." "Blizzard's response to Kespa's response." "Gretech's response" "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" etc. etc. etc.
|
On October 28 2010 23:10 Jeez wrote:
I know a lot of people are following this. But it's getting kind of silly. "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" "Kespa's response." "Blizzard's response to Kespa's response." "Gretech's response" "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" etc. etc. etc.
Yea definitely not something that could happen in real life. I mean normally all negotiations succeed immediately.
|
On October 28 2010 23:10 Jeez wrote:
I know a lot of people are following this. But it's getting kind of silly. "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" "Kespa's response." "Blizzard's response to Kespa's response." "Gretech's response" "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" etc. etc. etc.
Yeah when will all these be over???
Also this is probably the most desperately-sounded announcement from KeSPA that I ever read in the last 4 years. They suddenly sounded like the shorter-end-of-the-stick side in this battle (if you remember their first reactions before Blizzard gave the rights to Gretech).
Hope that KeSPA is being honest, and thus Blizzard realizes their honesty and shows some sympathy/understanding.
|
On October 28 2010 23:01 OTIX wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:57 Mortality wrote:On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit is revenue MINUS expenses. What this article is saying is that the expenses of maintaining a Proleague already exceed the revenue. But then they mention broadcasting fees and board membership fees as if they were not included.
I wouldn't read too deeply into the specific wordings of this article, since this is after all an unofficial translation.
The other translation says, "While the proleague has accumulated a deficit of 670 million won over the 3 seasons, it is operated by broadcasting license fees and the organization fee."
|
Sorry but i dont trust you Kespa.
I also do not trust blizzard anymore.
two childs fighting for the swing on the playground.
|
On October 28 2010 23:10 Jeez wrote:
I know a lot of people are following this. But it's getting kind of silly. "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" "Kespa's response." "Blizzard's response to Kespa's response." "Gretech's response" "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" etc. etc. etc.
so true, reminds me of Politics in my country.
|
Didn't Kespa reject the option of being audited as part of the negotiation? I will take anything they claim financially with a grain of salt.
|
konadora
Singapore66110 Posts
waxangel delivers, as always.
god, with this announcement, i really hope gretech can be less anal about this entire issue.
|
thanks for bringing some light with your translation...as a lot of people i'm surprised KeSPA is claiming that their bizness is broken and they are the good guy throwing out a lot of money from their pocket.
This situation is so blur, just with official stances from both part we have no idea who's the bad guy !
|
On October 28 2010 23:32 battarro wrote:
Didn't Kespa reject the option of being audited as part of the negotiation? I will take anything they claim financially with a grain of salt.
One of the supposed terms was to be audited, yes, but you shouldn't really separate them from the rest of the terms. Maybe they were willing to be audited but disagreed with the other terms.
|
On October 28 2010 23:31 Nizaris wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 23:10 Jeez wrote:
I know a lot of people are following this. But it's getting kind of silly. "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" "Kespa's response." "Blizzard's response to Kespa's response." "Gretech's response" "Negotiations resumed." "Negotiations failed, Lawsuits!" etc. etc. etc. so true, reminds me of Politics in my country.
Naww, even this doesn't compare to the mess that is Belgium :p
Honestly, I just hope they get over with it, so at least the fans/players know what the future will hold.
|
One of the supposed terms was to be audited, yes, but you shouldn't really separate them from the rest of the terms. Maybe they were willing to be audited but disagreed with the other terms.
I doubt it.
When you claim to be poor, but refuse to show your bank accounts, or other financial statements. It does not looks good.
They could agreed to the audit, have them audited while negotiating the other terms.
If they were as poor as they claim to be, the action of being audited and found to be poor/insolvent, would have given them a lot of leverage in terms of public opinion.
But they didn't went that route, and now they claim insolvency. As a blizzard fan, as much as i respect their IP rights, i don't want them to bankrupt an already bankrupt business. I would side with Kespa in an instant if they can show with auditing that the salaries they pay management/sponsors/players and operational amounts are reasonable.
But they have kept so much secrecy that I suspect someone is getting filthy rich while treating B players like crap and not paying Blizzard anything.
|
It seems that many people are taking condition of Blizz "Rights to audit Kespa" lightly..
No matter what kind of organisation you are, even the Government needs a DAMN good reason to audit ur finances at any time.. So giving another firm the rights to audit your finances anytime is as ridiculous a condition as it gets.. I do not know, but i firmly believe that never before has such a condition been agreed upon outside of parent-child companies.
That said, other conditions of Blizz were about as ridiculous too, so there =/
|
Things will be bad for blizzard/greetech if what KeSPA say is true. IP rights should be paid but they are paid buying the game copy... If KeSPA doesn't make profits or they just reinvest them for the cause, and they prove it in the court this mean that IP right pretender is wrong. Yes blizzard has IP rights over the game, if kespa redistribute the game or something else I will understand Blizz/gre. If they win against KeSPA guess what will be the next big hit ? They will go after streamers casters, they will go after ESL/Zotac/CraftCup and every other mini tournament, that provide replays streams and so on.
I want to give all those people that are against kespa 1 thing to think about:
Let's compare it with the music industry.
Group make a song. It is IP and is protected as it is.
People buy it like it and so on.
If someone else sing this song is it breaking the IP rights ?
I don't say publish it release it sell it or something. Just singing it.
|
If you are a musical group and you make covers of the Beatles, and you play in local clubs. Nobody will come after you.
But if you become successful that you play to sold out arenas every other week, you can guarantee the owner of the Beatles music rights ( Michael Jackson' Family oddly enough ) will come after you asking for money.
Post edit
On October 28 2010 23:50 ffreakk wrote:
It seems that many people are taking condition of Blizz "Rights to audit Kespa" lightly..
No matter what kind of organisation you are, even the Government needs a DAMN good reason to audit ur finances at any time.. So giving another firm the rights to audit your finances anytime is as ridiculous a condition as it gets.. I do not know, but i firmly believe that never before has such a condition been agreed upon outside of parent-child companies.
That said, other conditions of Blizz were about as ridiculous too, so there =/
Auditing a company is common in negotiations when companies wanting to become partners in a specif business venture. Specially if there is a lack of trust among the players.
Kespa had every right to say no to the audit. But it does not looks good, when they say "No, you can not look at our books", but then come around ans say. "we are broke and we are operating at a loss every year"
The phrase, "we reinvest all profits into the operating costs" is what brings a red flag. Like someone already pointed out, salaries are operating costs. Someone could have bought a very nice house under their name, then rent it to the team as a team practice/ storage room and then it would be covered under operating costs.
|
On October 28 2010 23:50 ffreakk wrote:
It seems that many people are taking condition of Blizz "Rights to audit Kespa" lightly..
No matter what kind of organisation you are, even the Government needs a DAMN good reason to audit ur finances at any time.. So giving another firm the rights to audit your finances anytime is as ridiculous a condition as it gets.. I do not know, but i firmly believe that never before has such a condition been agreed upon outside of parent-child companies.
That said, other conditions of Blizz were about as ridiculous too, so there =/
They want the right to audit, so that when they claim the fees are too high, it's not a huge puff of wind, and some control over the growth to keep the fees appropriate since Esports and starcraft is still very much the wild west.
Claiming insolvability though... They are going to pay lawyers over the next couple of months more than the fees per tournament that was suggested. The money if they are willing to fight is there... Just like anything else in this world, no one wants somebody elses hand in their cookie jar.
Feel like I need to repeat, personal opinion only.
|
On October 28 2010 23:51 AcOrP wrote:
Things will be bad for blizzard/greetech if what KeSPA say is true. IP rights should be paid but they are paid buying the game copy... If KeSPA doesn't make profits or they just reinvest them for the cause, and they prove it in the court this mean that IP right pretender is wrong. Yes blizzard has IP rights over the game, if kespa redistribute the game or something else I will understand Blizz/gre. If they win against KeSPA guess what will be the next big hit ? They will go after streamers casters, they will go after ESL/Zotac/CraftCup and every other mini tournament, that provide replays streams and so on.
They wont go after the ESL at least since they r supporting the ESL.
About Zotac/CraftCup .. no idea.
But i doubt it, since they r advertising their currently hyped game, not a game that blizz wants to vanish from sight so be replaced by their new game.
|
The music industry isn't quite the way I would think about it because you are not just copying something they did but instead just using a product they sold to you.
More like if I designed a new product like a new type of yo yo which allows people to do cool tricks. Then some people started running successful tournaments with my yo yos. At first I think its great since its free advertising for me and heaps more people are buying my yo yos because of it.
A few years later I release version 2 of my yo yo and want to start being involved in running leagues with it. The old yo yo tournaments are competition for my new yo yo so I demand money from them since they are making money out of showing my yo yos being used on TV.
|
Thanks a lot for the translation I was waiting for the next piece of drama in this little saga to pop up.
|
On October 28 2010 23:35 Marou wrote:
thanks for bringing some light with your translation...as a lot of people i'm surprised KeSPA is claiming that their bizness is broken and they are the good guy throwing out a lot of money from their pocket.
This situation is so blur, just with official stances from both part we have no idea who's the bad guy !
If they are not the good guy throwing money from their pocket then where is the money that they are taking in? There's a lot of suspicious people around assuming some kind of KeSPA secret income we are not aware of as if eSports is actually financially profitable in the first place.
|
On October 28 2010 23:57 battarro wrote:If you are a musical group and you make covers of the Beatles, and you play in local clubs. Nobody will come after you. But if you become successful that you play to sold out arenas every other week, you can guarantee the owner of the Beatles music rights ( Michael Jackson' Family oddly enough ) will come after you asking for money. Post edit Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 23:50 ffreakk wrote:
It seems that many people are taking condition of Blizz "Rights to audit Kespa" lightly..
No matter what kind of organisation you are, even the Government needs a DAMN good reason to audit ur finances at any time.. So giving another firm the rights to audit your finances anytime is as ridiculous a condition as it gets.. I do not know, but i firmly believe that never before has such a condition been agreed upon outside of parent-child companies.
That said, other conditions of Blizz were about as ridiculous too, so there =/ Auditing a company is common in negotiations when companies wanting to become partners in a specif business venture. Specially if there is a lack of trust among the players. Kespa had every right to say no to the audit. But it does not looks good, when they say "No, you can not look at our books", but then come around ans say. "we are broke and we are operating at a loss every year" The phrase, "we reinvest all profits into the operating costs" is what brings a red flag. Like someone already pointed out, salaries are operating costs. Someone could have bought a very nice house under their name, then rent it to the team as a team practice/ storage room and then it would be covered under operating costs.
about the audit subject you are given yourself the answer, they are not becoming real partners and this is not a joint venture so there is not normal to be audited, I own a company that is a wholesaler of some producers here, when i go to the negotation table, I present my finances in order to get some trust but in not way I am going to let that my suppliers of a product or service audit my finances, that would be out outrageous, when you audit a firm you get all the information that makes that firm valuable in the market. Secondly they are not saying they are broke (where did you read that?), they are telling you that they have operational losses that are being settle from another kind of income, after all of this I think the goverment is pushing Kespa to get the negotations go in the right way, but I believe there is a point where Kespa can just not admit Blizzards demands.
|
"KeSPA is reinvesting all profits made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues."
Notice, they don't specify that the leagues are only BW. Again, the reason Bliz have been after them for a while is because said profits have been redirected to fund development of competitive titles (for use in leagues). KeSPA isn't lying, they are just careful with their words. People want to think KeSPA is doing everything for BW when KeSPA would usurp BW and replace it with one of their own funded projects in a heartbeat; however, so far, they've only funded utter shit.
"The individual leagues are being run at the level where they are barely avoiding a loss."
Such a fantastic example of careful wording... "barely avoiding a loss" doesn't sound like a profit, but actually it is if you apply logic. Makes you wonder why they are so against audits.
|
the difference between Kespa and things like ICCup is that kespa is a huge organisation, responsible for all BW in Korea, they broadcast on TV and have massive companies sponsoring them, they do not have any rights from blizz to run said tourneys/leagues or the rights to broadcast them on TV.
ICCUP etc have all had to apply for licences to run tourneys, none of them broadcast on TV, only the internet, and ESL probably DO have to pay blizzard a fee. follow this link to visit the sc2 esports page at blizz http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/community/esports/
and this is their post about why you need a licence to run tourneys:http://us.battle.net/sc2/en/forum/topic/374722123
ICCup etc have all had to have their operations reviewed by blizz and keep to specific rules etc, some of them probably have to pay for the right to broadcast if they charge for a "premium" service.
have a read, then you will see the difference between what ICCUP do and what Kespa does.
|
On October 29 2010 01:12 sk` wrote:
"KeSPA is reinvesting all profits made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues."
Notice, they don't specify that the leagues are only BW. Again, the reason Bliz have been after them for a while is because said profits have been redirected to fund development of competitive titles (for use in leagues). KeSPA isn't lying, they are just careful with their words. People want to think KeSPA is doing everything for BW when KeSPA would usurp BW and replace it with one of their own funded projects in a heartbeat; however, so far, they've only funded utter shit.
Well KeSPA is supposed to be for all eSports right? So i don't see whats wrong with this? They are not going to drop BW unless it completely fails. Even if something else popular managed to overtake it they would just run it and change timeslots i'm guessing. By the time it's not worth running i can't imagine any of us will still care if it does.
|
On October 29 2010 01:12 sk` wrote:
"KeSPA is reinvesting all profits made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues."
Notice, they don't specify that the leagues are only BW. Again, the reason Bliz have been after them for a while is because said profits have been redirected to fund development of competitive titles (for use in leagues). KeSPA isn't lying, they are just careful with their words. People want to think KeSPA is doing everything for BW when KeSPA would usurp BW and replace it with one of their own funded projects in a heartbeat; however, so far, they've only funded utter shit.
What? BW is right now the star of Kespa, but you cant just broadcast one game 7/24 or make teams exclusively for that, that would be the ruin of e-sports, Kespa must have part of the income and costs for other games aside of BW.
|
What what? Iccup asks for permission for their SC2 tournaments and Blizzard also gives it?
You get banned for even mentioning iccup on the b.net forums for "promoting piracy".
|
On October 29 2010 01:12 sk` wrote:
People want to think KeSPA is doing everything for BW when KeSPA would usurp BW and replace it with one of their own funded projects in a heartbeat; however, so far, they've only funded utter shit.
huh?
|
KeSPA should pay Blizzard for the IP rights to use Starcraft: Broodwar.
It is no different than being paid for designing a web page or other piece of intellectual property such as a photograph or even professional sports footage.
|
Trying to make sense of the finances here...
IEG pays KeSPA for Proleague rights. OGN/MBC then pay IEG. KeSPA invests on OGN/MBC productions (for smaller games?) Not sure about the word invests here, as it would indicate they expect to get that money back while MBC is saying they don't even make a profit. Team sponsors pay KeSPA ("board membership fee") and pay the players' salaries and other expenses of the team. League sponsors pay... OGN/MBC for OSL/MSL and KeSPA for PL I guess? Anyway, KeSPA saying that the proleague makes a loss just means that the money from IEG and Shinhan Bank doesn't cover it fully. They still make money from the board membership fees that keep their finances running.
Overview of the organizations of the "unprofitable" industry:
OGN: profiting? High profile sponsors, quick deal with Gretech, no bad news from them
MBC: breaking even as said in their report, troubles finding sponsors sometimes
KeSPA: non-profit
IEG: I don't even know what this company does but they seem to buy 1.7 billion worth of stuff and then sell it for 1.2 billion
Team/league sponsors: ask their marketing department, nobody knows
As for the rest of the statement, it's about as "unfortunate" that they're getting sued than it was "unfortunate" for Gretech that PL got started without a license. It's quite stupid that Gretech's asking the same amount of money for a 3 month MSL than for a 10 month PL season. They probably just decided an amount of money they want for keeping the BW scene running as it is and divided it by the number of tournaments per year and won't negotiate for smaller deals. Good position for Gretech anyway - owning the rights to your competitors' main business.
PS. Funny old poll: http://www.teamliquid.net/poll/index.php?poll_id=169
|
On October 28 2010 23:26 w1kk wrote:
Sorry but i dont trust you Kespa.
I also do not trust blizzard anymore.
two childs fighting for the swing on the playground.
Exactly, I feel like both companies are just in a giant spin cycle and it's spinning nothing but BS for us. I personally don't trust either right now...
Here's a chopped up quote from a earlier translated news piece from TL:
Here's a big catch: Kespa offered Gretech 300,000,000 won (267332.10 dollars) for Proleague+OSL+MSL for a year... Now some of you may say that 300,000,000 won is a lot of money. In this case, this is relatively low money:
300 mil would be relatively low but would 700 million won a year be considered a lot of money for the boardcasting/licensing fee? (it's about $625,000 according to google).
Personally I find it a little BS when kespa claims that it's barely keeping everything afloat. That's a publicity/number twisting move, like the NBA claiming that over half of it's teams are not profitable.
|
United States238 Posts
Then again, what kind of press release will a company reveal that would put them in a bad light, and put the other guys in a good light?
|
What some of the users don't understand here is the lack of sponsers that are open to MBCGame and OnGameNet for their individual leagues. Remember way back in the early 2000s when the StarLeague had some big name sponsers such as Gillette, Coca-Cola, Snickers (MSL), Pringles (MSL).
These sponers are not much interested in these individual leagues anymore and it's getting harder and harder to find good sponsers for them. OnGameNet has been sponsered by KTF EVER like 5 seasons now? Bacchus to sponser a 3rd season now? It's like OGN is having to go back and hoping for these companies (although big, but not as big as say Coca-Cola, etc) to sponser again. MBCGame is winding up with some more and more obscure businesses and in some cases (Hana Daetoo) having to start without a sponser for a short amount of time.
The smaller the company is, the more lack of funding there is to manage tournaments. It's not really shocking that OGN and MBCGame are reporting just barely treading the water to stay alive here.
It would be nice to see some huge companies invest that can afford it (Microsoft StarLeague, Google MSL, etc). Maybe they can offer some more help to reach out to international audiences more as well.
|
Its blizzards product, and just because your reinvesting the profits doesn't mean you get a pass on paying for rights.
|
On October 28 2010 22:42 GTR wrote:
MLG thrives on advertising from big companies such as Dr. Pepper, Doritos etc. KeSPA doesn't have that.
How exactly does this work? Do all televised advertisement profits go straight to MBC/OGN, no quarter to KeSPA, because it's non-profit? With advertising and sponsorship deals all over the place, you think they'd have something set-up where they weren't in debt.
|
Dang! Don't you hate this? I mean: this double-sided truth... As many have already remarked: hard to see who is right thru all this fog. But yet again, hope they come to an agreement for the benefit of the players and fans.
|
On October 28 2010 22:42 GTR wrote:
MLG thrives on advertising from big companies such as Dr. Pepper, Doritos etc. KeSPA doesn't have that.
Isn't that partly KeSPA's own fault? Genuine question. I was under the assumption that as much as KeSPA wants esports to survive that they want their brand of esports to survive more. They couldn't even handle a blizzard sponsorship or the GOM tourney.
Would KeSPA even accept non-korean sponsorships? I've heard so many examples of how stubborn Koreans are about supporting Korean things the Korean way that I worry KeSPA will die by it.
|
United States33121 Posts
On October 29 2010 03:20 Cedstick wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:42 GTR wrote:
MLG thrives on advertising from big companies such as Dr. Pepper, Doritos etc. KeSPA doesn't have that. How exactly does this work? Do all televised advertisement profits go straight to MBC/OGN, no quarter to KeSPA, because it's non-profit? With advertising and sponsorship deals all over the place, you think they'd have something set-up where they weren't in debt.
They'd snap up a foreign sponsor paying money in an instant.
There's always a bit of nationalism going in any country, and each country has it's own brand. However, it's often very complicated and conditional... I'd just say it's more productive to avoid discussions based on nationalism regarding this issue, unless it's brought up by someone who is proven to be knowledgeable about how it works in business (such as MightyAtom).
|
On October 29 2010 02:55 purecarnagge wrote:
Its blizzards product, and just because your reinvesting the profits doesn't mean you get a pass on paying for rights.
It is this thought process that is killing the scene we have so loved for years. I'm experiencing some seriously illimitable frustration on this whole thing. Once Thanksgiving rolls around and I get some time, I plan on making a ridiculously large post about how these events have more to do with your freedom and their (Activision/Blizzard) greed than any perceived infringement on intellectual property rights.
|
poor kespa, oh woe, oh alas. please understand our plights~
...
no seriously, financial transparency is quite a standard approach in business if you would like to gain the trust of your industry and stakeholders and audience. i do not see a lot of openness from kespa, only a lot of excuses and smoke-and-mirrors.
|
Honestly, if the only snagging point is the money I'm rather confused. Gretech/Blizzard's primary concern should be securing recognition of their IP rights and their role in broadcasting games which use the said rights. Even having a barebones agreement which just acknowledges the IP is worth a ton as a precident between the two companies if it does go to litigation further down the line.
My opinion is that there's probably a snagging point to do with Gretech attepting to dictate timeslots for BW. Prime time viewership is worth more than 700million/year, imo.
|
On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries.
Which means as long as you're investing all extra income in growing your company you're a non-profit organization. Does that not sound like double-speak to everyone else?
If I started a company and paid myself a salary, then invested the rest of the profit back into the company, would my company be considered non-profit? Not a chance, but apparently that is what kespa is claiming?
Interesting subject, just wish the best for all parties involved in the end.
Unfortunately if Kespa is truly as in the red as they wish folks to believe (to no apparently fault of their own) they are a poor business and deserve to go under. Floundering business die, that is how it works.
|
On October 29 2010 01:12 sk` wrote:
"KeSPA is reinvesting all profits made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues."
Notice, they don't specify that the leagues are only BW. Again, the reason Bliz have been after them for a while is because said profits have been redirected to fund development of competitive titles (for use in leagues). KeSPA isn't lying, they are just careful with their words. People want to think KeSPA is doing everything for BW when KeSPA would usurp BW and replace it with one of their own funded projects in a heartbeat; however, so far, they've only funded utter shit.
"The individual leagues are being run at the level where they are barely avoiding a loss."
Such a fantastic example of careful wording... "barely avoiding a loss" doesn't sound like a profit, but actually it is if you apply logic. Makes you wonder why they are so against audits.
Yeah that's pretty much the world of corporate PR. While trying to look like the good guys or the victims in the eyes of the public, all entities are completely selfish and trying to further their own goals.
|
I actually don't see Blizzards case here, at all.
People buy there games and kespa is streamign them playing into the world, why should Blizzard get anything?
|
On October 29 2010 05:39 Klimpen wrote:
Honestly, if the only snagging point is the money I'm rather confused. Gretech/Blizzard's primary concern should be securing recognition of their IP rights and their role in broadcasting games which use the said rights. Even having a barebones agreement which just acknowledges the IP is worth a ton as a precident between the two companies if it does go to litigation further down the line.
My opinion is that there's probably a snagging point to do with Gretech attepting to dictate timeslots for BW. Prime time viewership is worth more than 700million/year, imo.
There's obviously more going on here than KeSPA is letting up, these kind of press releases are nothing new from KeSPA where they spread their plight that they are the victim, in an effort to get the public to take their side. I've stopped taking their word at face value, and will wait till I see what GRETECH/Blizzard has to say in the process. If the courts say it's in the right of Blizz, than that's that, if not, then that's that, there's really nothing left to do here except spread corporate PR and propaganda.
Oh and Hi Klimpy.
|
On October 29 2010 05:57 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote:
I actually don't see Blizzards case here, at all.
People buy there games and kespa is streamign them playing into the world, why should Blizzard get anything?
If it was just "hi, i buy your game blizzard, now look i show it on youtube", it wouldn't be a problem.
The problem is
"Hi blizzard, I buy your game, now, i go and charge other companies LOTS of money to broadcast YOUR game"
|
Are there 10-K forms we could look at? I know that is for American business, but I would guess that there is a similar financial statement form for publicized traded companies. Unless of course KESPA is a privately owned company. Even so, people on Wall Street estimate the earnings/financial statements of privately traded companies all the time.
What KESPA is saying about losing money makes sense. I dont get the sense that E-sports is or has ever been very profitable. Look at GGL and CGS in America. I think KESPA is doing better than that because they are better run, but I still think the market is relatively limited compared to other forms of media, even in Korea.
On the copy-right issue, I dont see how Blizzard can say that they own the broadcast rights to the game. When C++ compliers came out, they owned the right to the code to make the complier, bu t not the right to the results that came from executing the application. That would be ridiculous. Now this case is somewhat different, as the name "Starcraft" is trademarked. However, trademarking a name does not mean that no one can ever say that name; it means that name cannot be used to sell products or in a way that would rival the owner of the trademark. Even though the characters in a book are copy-righted and the story is copy-righted, that does not mean one cannot have a show were you discuss the book and the characters(that sounds fuking boring, but never mind).
|
On October 29 2010 05:59 Kazeyonoma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 05:57 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote:
I actually don't see Blizzards case here, at all.
People buy there games and kespa is streamign them playing into the world, why should Blizzard get anything?
If it was just "hi, i buy your game blizzard, now look i show it on youtube", it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is "Hi blizzard, I buy your game, now, i go and charge other companies LOTS of money to broadcast YOUR game"
kaze, u make it sound like KeSPA actually gets to hold on to that money.
for the last 2 yrs, the fees charged to the networks are less than the cost of running the tournaments and paying the players salaries.
|
On October 29 2010 05:59 Kazeyonoma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 05:57 Innsmouth-Zerg wrote:
I actually don't see Blizzards case here, at all.
People buy there games and kespa is streamign them playing into the world, why should Blizzard get anything?
If it was just "hi, i buy your game blizzard, now look i show it on youtube", it wouldn't be a problem. The problem is "Hi blizzard, I buy your game, now, i go and charge other companies LOTS of money to broadcast YOUR game"
So? Nobody is charging anybody LOTS of money to broadcast just SC:BW, because SC:BW is _nothing_ without the players playing it, without the structure to stream it without commentators without all this organization going into turning a game like SC:BW into a e-Sport game like it is in S-Korea.
BMW is not charging me money because i use that car for driving me into work every day.
|
Well as far as broadcasting rights is concerned.. I guess Blizz is entitled to ALL the broadcasting rights if the game broadcasted is between computer AIs.. But what happen to the effort, creativity and all these stuffs from players.. E-Sport is far from just a game made and broadcasted as is.. It involves a huge myriad of factors that it is crazy to think that developers who already get paid should still get to hold the scene by the throat imo..
There are lots of probes and SCVs and drones here (i realise i am one as well) making claims like "its Blizz's game, they can get whatever they want" but.. is it really JUST the game we are watching? if i want to watch AI fight i can do so anytime i want on my own computer.. Any map, any matchups
|
This is called Hollywood accounting. It will ALWAYS show your company making a lost.
Basically you write fat cheques to yourself(wages etc), sometimes involving another company own by you but register under a different name(bills).
|
United States33121 Posts
On October 29 2010 05:40 VonLego wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries. Which means as long as you're investing all extra income in growing your company you're a non-profit organization. Does that not sound like double-speak to everyone else? If I started a company and paid myself a salary, then invested the rest of the profit back into the company, would my company be considered non-profit? Not a chance, but apparently that is what kespa is claiming? Interesting subject, just wish the best for all parties involved in the end. Unfortunately if Kespa is truly as in the red as they wish folks to believe (to no apparently fault of their own) they are a poor business and deserve to go under. Floundering business die, that is how it works.
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike.
|
Sounds like they miss managed their money, and they are at a deficit /me looks @US government. The amount of money asked doesn't sound to bad, considering a player can make as much as 150k-200k a year the organisation that is paying him can not possibly be making less than him, they should stop paying themselves as much as they do then.
You will be surprised how much a sponsor is willing to pay for a bit of good publicity, so KESPA should stop whining and just a get 1 fucking sponsor and get the money needed.
|
On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike.
Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge?
|
United States238 Posts
Interestingly enough, it is known that broadcasting companies pay Namco to have Tekken tournaments in South Korea.
If this whole court deal rules in favor of KeSPA, I would expect all the foreign game companies (that have their game in e-sports) to pull out and not have their games to be used in e-sports. I also foresee potential cries from existing Korean game developers too.
|
This statement sounds like what kespa probably told blizzard from the first negotiation years back, thus it makes sense that blizzard asked them to have a watch into their finances as part of what blizzard expected to be the agreement, but kespa did not want that, either some pride thing, or they have something to hide.
Can't see why a non profit organization doesnt disclose finances publicly anyway.
|
Ugh more bad news. :/ This is like the never-ending story.
|
United States33121 Posts
On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge?
As has always been the case.
|
On October 29 2010 05:58 Kazeyonoma wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 05:39 Klimpen wrote:
Honestly, if the only snagging point is the money I'm rather confused. Gretech/Blizzard's primary concern should be securing recognition of their IP rights and their role in broadcasting games which use the said rights. Even having a barebones agreement which just acknowledges the IP is worth a ton as a precident between the two companies if it does go to litigation further down the line.
My opinion is that there's probably a snagging point to do with Gretech attepting to dictate timeslots for BW. Prime time viewership is worth more than 700million/year, imo. There's obviously more going on here than KeSPA is letting up, these kind of press releases are nothing new from KeSPA where they spread their plight that they are the victim, in an effort to get the public to take their side. I've stopped taking their word at face value, and will wait till I see what GRETECH/Blizzard has to say in the process. If the courts say it's in the right of Blizz, than that's that, if not, then that's that, there's really nothing left to do here except spread corporate PR and propaganda. Oh and Hi Klimpy.
oHi2u2 Kaze.
I have to agree that there's a lot of spin in this press release. I'm honestly surprised by how many people seem to take these statements at face value and don't try to extrapolate motives. I personally think that the view that Blizzard wants to 'kill' bw is naive at best.
Brood War itself is irrelevant to Blizzard's primary goal, imo, which is to secure exclusive broadcast rights for SC2 and secondary goal of expanding those broadcasts. Blizzard has been attempting to secure their IP rights for quite a while now, since KeSPA sold the rights to Proleague 3 years ago, iirc.
Securing a non-competition clause for prime timeslots is the most likely point of contention, imo. If you look at the announces timeslots for Proleague for OGN and MBC, you'll see that they differ quite a bit. OGN has 2pm onwards from what I seem to remember will be the start of GSL3, while MBC is continuing with their 7pm schedule.
Money is ultimately irrelevant, imo. While it is important, in terms of value to the various players, it takes a backseat to the other two. Also, it should be noted that 1 year of Proleague was sold to a third party for 500mil, while KeSPA is calling foul because Proleague AND the three OSL's and MSL's have a combined sale point of 700mil. Seems a bit strange that the deal is unreasonable to me.
|
The fact they acknowledged the IP rights to SC1 and a willingness to come to an agreement at a better price is promising. If what Kespa are saying is true then I really hope Gretech make this work. It's impossible to know what is fact and what is fiction though. Oh well.
|
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense...
|
On October 29 2010 07:21 LegendaryZ wrote:
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense...
Except, as has been stated a million times, a company is still non-profit if the board members are writing themselves big 6-figure cheques every now and then or giving inflated contracts to companies owned by family members etc.
Of course everything they do could be above the board, which is the point of contention, we simply don't know. Blizzard doesn't even know, although I suspect they suspect the former possibility.
Ultimately we can theorise and legalcraft as much as we want, we aren't going to know anything until this is settled in court.
|
On October 29 2010 07:11 Waxangel wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge? As has always been the case.
I suppose that means that people should stop being spoon fed all this propaganda from these large corporations. But where shall I place all my fanboyism spirit then?
|
Man, each side releases statements putting them as the good guy and blaming the opposition, I don't know who to trust anymore.
Having said that I think Blizzard should reduce the fee, in order for SC1 e-sports to continue.
|
thank you for posting this. I really hope they... find some common ground here. as far as I can tell Gretech is just trying to milk as much as they can from Kespa. Now that is unreasonable.
|
On October 28 2010 22:51 cocoa_sg wrote:
Thank you, Waxangel, for translating! More financial transparency is a good thing.
I agree. The hairy part of this law suit is Blizzard is going to Korea and fighting a law suite were non-GAAP accounting standards are utilized. While GAAP standards are not perfect, they're generally accepted as the most transparent accounting standards in the world. However one thing is sure, Kespa is sitting on the sidelines for not reaching agreement while others are not.
If the Korean courts do reach a ruling where they favor Kespa, they ought to remember who controls the medium for playing SC2...Blizzard! How smart of an idea was Battlenet 2.0? We may not like it but hell, shareholders fkn love it.
|
On October 29 2010 07:21 LegendaryZ wrote:
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense...
No firm is obligated to publicly post profits unless you're publicly traded. In addition, if you're from another country besides the U.S. the financial data is more often than not less transparent.
|
OGN made a contract to have a starleague with Gretech, right? They managed to do that while still having starleague proftable. Why couldn't MBC and KeSPA take a page out of their book?
|
On October 29 2010 07:33 RisingTide wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 07:21 LegendaryZ wrote:
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense... Except, as has been stated a million times, a company is still non-profit if the board members are writing themselves big 6-figure cheques every now and then or giving inflated contracts to companies owned by family members etc. Of course everything they do could be above the board, which is the point of contention, we simply don't know. Blizzard doesn't even know, although I suspect they suspect the former possibility. Ultimately we can theorise and legalcraft as much as we want, we aren't going to know anything until this is settled in court.
That is true for any non-profit entity. Would you accuse the Red Cross of doing this just because they technically could? I really don't get why people seem to think there's a lot of money being made in the Starleagues and Proleague. Where would all of this supposed money to pay for these supposedly ridiculous salaries and contracts come from?
|
On October 29 2010 08:31 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 07:33 RisingTide wrote:On October 29 2010 07:21 LegendaryZ wrote:
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense... Except, as has been stated a million times, a company is still non-profit if the board members are writing themselves big 6-figure cheques every now and then or giving inflated contracts to companies owned by family members etc. Of course everything they do could be above the board, which is the point of contention, we simply don't know. Blizzard doesn't even know, although I suspect they suspect the former possibility. Ultimately we can theorise and legalcraft as much as we want, we aren't going to know anything until this is settled in court. That is true for any non-profit entity. Would you accuse the Red Cross of doing this just because they technically could? I really don't get why people seem to think there's a lot of money being made in the Starleagues and Proleague. Where would all of this supposed money to pay for these supposedly ridiculous salaries and contracts come from?
It's not an accusation, but a possibility, which is what I'm saying, we haven't got a clue and probably never will.
However, while a doubt KESPA is doing anything too underhanded, the fact that their board is made up of representatives of some of the largest Korean companies makes it significantly more likely than the Red Cross.
|
Actually, in the US and most European countries, nonprofits' financial information are public record. I'm not sure if SK has different rules, but for an organization that wields the word "nonprofit" like a big stick to hit everyone over the head with, it's still rather curious they obscure their accounting books so.
Especially considering how the keep emphasizing how they are "reinvesting all their profits back to the community," yet they won't say how much they have "reinvested," which is in sharp contrast to how unshy they are about their losses. And let's not even go into how they have can any profit to invest with to begin with when they are consistently posting losses. That's such a ridiculous oxymoron it has to either be a mistranslation or very lackluster politician-speak.
I really don't want to be so cynical, but for an organization that tries so hard to present itself as charitable and just all around "the good guy" so as to be sympathized by the community, Kespa's whole situation just looks so shady at best.
|
On October 29 2010 08:31 LegendaryZ wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 07:33 RisingTide wrote:On October 29 2010 07:21 LegendaryZ wrote:
Is it really that surprising to people that a non-profit organization doesn't post profits? I would have thought this much would just be common sense... Except, as has been stated a million times, a company is still non-profit if the board members are writing themselves big 6-figure cheques every now and then or giving inflated contracts to companies owned by family members etc. Of course everything they do could be above the board, which is the point of contention, we simply don't know. Blizzard doesn't even know, although I suspect they suspect the former possibility. Ultimately we can theorise and legalcraft as much as we want, we aren't going to know anything until this is settled in court. That is true for any non-profit entity. Would you accuse the Red Cross of doing this just because they technically could? I really don't get why people seem to think there's a lot of money being made in the Starleagues and Proleague. Where would all of this supposed money to pay for these supposedly ridiculous salaries and contracts come from?
This is false. Neither the Red Cross nor most other westerns can hide their earnings because they are public record by law. You can go ahead and look up their finical statements on the web or get it straight from them for a small handling fee.
|
While thats true that is not the default modus operandi for all NFP organisations.. The only times where you have to make transparent your account is when it is demanded by the government, with good reasons.. If they wish to do so outside of that is their own will to provide more transparency but it is not a must.. I am aware that organisations like Red Cross functions a little differently.. But Red Cross is not the only NFP organisation there is, nor is its operational model the one and only.
And those who speculate that Kespa is paying itself fat six-figure income.. You havnt taken the time to read or answer LegendaryZ's question: where do you think those six-figures salary come from? VoDs, streams as well as live seatings are all free.. Organising and operating fee over a year is obviously not cheap.. Where do you think those 6-figure salary come from, i would really like to hear about it as well.
|
Well, being in "public record" means it's available for everyone to see for whatever reason, that's how NPF is supposed to hold itself responsible in the public eye for receiving that tax exempt status. Good reason is needed for the government to audit private businesses, not nonprofits.
But again, I don't know if SK has different laws. I find it interesting Kespa can even be granted a NPF status to begin with for how it operates to be honest.
|
Non-profits typically get tax breaks, which is the reason for why their finances are part of the public record, regardless of whether or not they ask for government handouts. (Let's gloss over the part where a tax break is technically a government handout. I doubt KESPA pays much tax.)
And as I understand it, you can start a non-profit where you re-invest profits into your organisation, while paying yourself a salary. The sticking point is that you don't own the organisation's profits and assets - when you retire, you can't cash out. (There's obviously a lot more regulation governing non-profits, but that's the key clause.)
|
On October 29 2010 08:31 DiamondTear wrote:
OGN made a contract to have a starleague with Gretech, right? They managed to do that while still having starleague proftable. Why couldn't MBC and KeSPA take a page out of their book?
Yes, but CJ has partial ownership of OGN and Gretech so negotiations probably weren't too hard.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49608 Posts
On October 29 2010 07:35 Mintastic wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 07:11 Waxangel wrote:On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge? As has always been the case. I suppose that means that people should stop being spoon fed all this propaganda from these large corporations. But where shall I place all my fanboyism spirit then?
put it in the players...not their sponsors.
|
and yes u can see financial data, but you cant audit the American Red Cross if you wanted to.
Auditing is a very intrusive process for a company, and there's pretty much always going to be some sort of excess spending, whether it's choosing a nicer hotel for that company trip, or choosing to eat at a slightly nicer restaurant for 'promotional' purposes or something. Further, no company wants all their investment strategies and financials to be viewed by a company that very well could be a competitor or a company that you have no idea if your information will be kept confidential. I realise Kespa is meant to be non-profit, but they still have to make money to keep alive.
Secondly, just putting it out there, but everyone getting cranky that Kespa may be paying the board too much money, the top salary for the American Red Cross was over 1 million USD in 2008 (according to Forbes)... I'd be tentative to be argue along the lines of salary paying and Kespa.
Thirdly, Kespa makes profit. Yes they need to. Noone wants to operate at-cost, especially for something as intangible and infant as an electronic gaming industy. If anything goes amiss for the year, and Kespa doesnt have any contingency options Kespa crumbles, and then esports in korea suffers a huge blow. And when Kespa is a operating in the billions of wons, it's a fairly big operation they're running, all the facilities, pro-gaming teams, advertising, they're not small costs, and they're not running costs you can easily cut and remove. Furthermore, any cost-cutting that they would try to do, would have a detrimental impact on the e-sports scene which goes against the purported goal of Kespa.
I think it's more viable as well for kespa to say how much they really need to reinvest and develop the market, because they are in the market, and whilst it is biased, it'd probably be more biased for gretech/blizzard viewing what they think is the amounted needed for reinvestment.
Im also curious what the contractual relationship between blizzard and gretch is. Im assuming gretech paid money to blizzard for the airing rights and stuff, and if gretech cant actually get anything from this arrangement (in regards to bw), then wouldnt blizzard be liable to gretech as well now? since gretech cant actually get their end of the contract?
|
On October 28 2010 23:50 ffreakk wrote:
It seems that many people are taking condition of Blizz "Rights to audit Kespa" lightly..
No matter what kind of organisation you are, even the Government needs a DAMN good reason to audit ur finances at any time.. So giving another firm the rights to audit your finances anytime is as ridiculous a condition as it gets.. I do not know, but i firmly believe that never before has such a condition been agreed upon outside of parent-child companies.
That said, other conditions of Blizz were about as ridiculous too, so there =/
See, mergers / acquisitions. Even companies trying to parter sometimes share the books with each other. This case isn't so different from those.
I'd say being able to legitimately claim that you are insolvent and prove to those that are negotiating with you that you absolutely cannot pay more then XXXXXX would be worth it. Given that corruption is/was rampant in the korean government and higher levels of business it makes sense for blizz to want to be able to audit finances.
|
This whole thing wouldnt even be a matter if the korean government have some balls and use the ministry of culture as a defacto regulator of korea e-sport. But no, they have to let a private organization like kespa abuse their monopoly,
|
On October 29 2010 05:40 VonLego wrote:Show nested quote +On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries. Which means as long as you're investing all extra income in growing your company you're a non-profit organization. Does that not sound like double-speak to everyone else? If I started a company and paid myself a salary, then invested the rest of the profit back into the company, would my company be considered non-profit? Not a chance, but apparently that is what kespa is claiming? Interesting subject, just wish the best for all parties involved in the end. Unfortunately if Kespa is truly as in the red as they wish folks to believe (to no apparently fault of their own) they are a poor business and deserve to go under. Floundering business die, that is how it works.
Seriously... reinvesting their profits into E-Sports, when E-Sports IS your business doesn't make them non-profit whatsoever. Non-profit means you give AWAY your profits to others, who usually have no direct relation to you. E.g. Unicef gives away profits to people in developing countries. So much carefully worded shady language here.
Every company in the world reinvests their profits into their business after paying off salaries, and other expenses.
|
On October 29 2010 12:04 worosei wrote:
and yes u can see financial data, but you cant audit the American Red Cross if you wanted to.
Auditing is a very intrusive process for a company, and there's pretty much always going to be some sort of excess spending, whether it's choosing a nicer hotel for that company trip, or choosing to eat at a slightly nicer restaurant for 'promotional' purposes or something. Further, no company wants all their investment strategies and financials to be viewed by a company that very well could be a competitor or a company that you have no idea if your information will be kept confidential. I realise Kespa is meant to be non-profit, but they still have to make money to keep alive.
Of course you can audit the Red Cross. Well, to put it more accurately, the government performs annual audits of all tax-exempt entities, including NPOs. That's how their financial information enters the public record in the first place.
Auditing is not a punishment for when things go wrong, it gets a bad rep due to annoying IRS tax audits, but the process itself is an extremely ordinary accounting procedure done regularly by all kinds of businesses and organizations. For NPOs, public audits are a necessity no matter if you are entirely made up of nuns.
Secondly, just putting it out there, but everyone getting cranky that Kespa may be paying the board too much money, the top salary for the American Red Cross was over 1 million USD in 2008 (according to Forbes)... I'd be tentative to be argue along the lines of salary paying and Kespa.
Thirdly, Kespa makes profit. Yes they need to. Noone wants to operate at-cost, especially for something as intangible and infant as an electronic gaming industy. If anything goes amiss for the year, and Kespa doesnt have any contingency options Kespa crumbles, and then esports in korea suffers a huge blow. And when Kespa is a operating in the billions of wons, it's a fairly big operation they're running, all the facilities, pro-gaming teams, advertising, they're not small costs, and they're not running costs you can easily cut and remove. Furthermore, any cost-cutting that they would try to do, would have a detrimental impact on the e-sports scene which goes against the purported goal of Kespa.
While this sounds sweet and dandy, realize that it is all your speculation, backed by nothing besides Kespa's own press release, which is itself full of holes. This is why most NPOs are required to release their financial statements to the public, so this kind of shadiness don't happen.
|
On October 29 2010 12:32 teamsolid wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 05:40 VonLego wrote:On October 28 2010 22:48 Waxangel wrote:On October 28 2010 22:46 Furycrab wrote:
Well we might expect a response from Gretech/Blizzard. We're obviously not getting the whole picture.
This is just personal opinion: but Kespa really hits my nerves when they insist on calling themselves a "non-profit" organization. We live in a world where even Charity organizers pay themselves salaries... =/ Profit just means any leftover income after operating costs, which INCLUDE salaries. Which means as long as you're investing all extra income in growing your company you're a non-profit organization. Does that not sound like double-speak to everyone else? If I started a company and paid myself a salary, then invested the rest of the profit back into the company, would my company be considered non-profit? Not a chance, but apparently that is what kespa is claiming? Interesting subject, just wish the best for all parties involved in the end. Unfortunately if Kespa is truly as in the red as they wish folks to believe (to no apparently fault of their own) they are a poor business and deserve to go under. Floundering business die, that is how it works. Seriously... reinvesting their profits into E-Sports, when E-Sports IS your business doesn't make them non-profit whatsoever. Non-profit means you give AWAY your profits to others, who usually have no direct relation to you. E.g. Unicef gives away profits to people in developing countries. So much carefully worded shady language here. Every company in the world reinvests their profits into their business after paying off salaries, and other expenses.
While most charities are NPOs, NPOs aren't necessarily charities, so this dig is a miss.
|
On October 29 2010 11:33 BLinD-RawR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 07:35 Mintastic wrote:On October 29 2010 07:11 Waxangel wrote:On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge? As has always been the case. I suppose that means that people should stop being spoon fed all this propaganda from these large corporations. But where shall I place all my fanboyism spirit then? put it in the players...not their sponsors.
And by saying that, are you implying that you are going to pay the players?
This whole things getting messier and messier, frankly speaking I don't know which side is correct. However I'm biasing toward players, and by this I'm biasing toward KeSPA as a logical consequences.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES49608 Posts
On October 29 2010 13:16 antas wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 11:33 BLinD-RawR wrote:On October 29 2010 07:35 Mintastic wrote:On October 29 2010 07:11 Waxangel wrote:On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge? As has always been the case. I suppose that means that people should stop being spoon fed all this propaganda from these large corporations. But where shall I place all my fanboyism spirit then? put it in the players...not their sponsors. And by saying that, are you implying that you are going to pay the players? This whole things getting messier and messier, frankly speaking I don't know which side is correct. However I'm biasing toward players, and by this I'm biasing toward KeSPA as a logical consequences.
I meant support the decisions of the players...yes KeSPA are their representatives but they do have their own brains and know that they can talk to the media without KeSPA telling them what to say.
They are human beings(and gods lol) they do have every right to speak out to the public with their own opinions.
like JD...except he was being monitored by KeSPA.
Go wherever the players want to go.Accept whatever they accept.
|
On October 29 2010 13:35 BLinD-RawR wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 13:16 antas wrote:On October 29 2010 11:33 BLinD-RawR wrote:On October 29 2010 07:35 Mintastic wrote:On October 29 2010 07:11 Waxangel wrote:On October 29 2010 06:26 Redmark wrote:On October 29 2010 06:22 Waxangel wrote:
Accounting is a complicated and possibly shady business, for corporations and non-profits alike. Does this mean that, as I suspect, there's no point in TL users speculating as to which side is in the right without real knowledge? As has always been the case. I suppose that means that people should stop being spoon fed all this propaganda from these large corporations. But where shall I place all my fanboyism spirit then? put it in the players...not their sponsors. And by saying that, are you implying that you are going to pay the players? This whole things getting messier and messier, frankly speaking I don't know which side is correct. However I'm biasing toward players, and by this I'm biasing toward KeSPA as a logical consequences. I meant support the decisions of the players...yes KeSPA are they representatives but they do have their own brains and know that they can talk to the media without KeSPA telling them what to say. They are human beings(and gods lol) they do have every right to speak out to the public with their own opinions. like JD...except he was being monitored by KeSPA. Go wherever the players want to go.Accept whatever they accept.
You have a good point there. I really would like to know what the players and coaches stance in this situation. However it's not as easy as it is. As a professional player they really have to respect their contract, except if they are deciding to not extend their contract, like what Nada and Boxer did, but that is a huge decision to make obviously. It's like you are a pro footballer, and somehow you're deciding not to renew your contract since you want to play hockey.
The best situation for the players is obviously like what happened with their sibling WC3 players in team like WeMadeFox. As I understand, players like Moon and Lyn is allowed to keep their contract, which means they still being paid, and they are also allowed to try / learn SC2, although obviously their main hours should be dedicated to WC3. I really wish that something like this could happen with SC1 scene. If player decided to try or not stay in SC1, they are still being supported and so on. Would be better if we have big teams like SK T1 have their SC1 and also SC2 roster in their rank Or is this the reason why Boxer still not deciding to join new team, maybe he's hoping that SK T1 will embrace SC2? OK, i'm just dreaming here.
Thus being said, I really hope that Blizzard not really enforcing their demands, and somehow reach mutual agreement with KeSPA. As if it goes on as of now, I'm afraid that it will do more damage to the pro SC1 players than good.
|
just wondering, where is blizzard suing Kespa? In america or in korea?
because if blizzard and the government dont get on, and if the korean government wants to promote their esports industry and if the korean government can (or has any interest in doing so), would they be able to legislate or ammend IP laws to just make kespa all fine and dandy?
Also i am probably just basing my stuff off kespa's report, Bllizzard is probably very well and justified, i just dont want my proleague to suffer much change and restructuring, and i think Kespa knows this fact very well and it would be in their interests to stall the negoatiations as long as possible in order to maximise their own agenda.
But i do think Kespa is perfectly warranted to refuse to be audited. I wouldnt be surprised to see a lot of nasties inside their accounts, but i still dont think they should be audited, especially if it's information to another company for them to purely use as negotiation material against you
|
On October 29 2010 16:13 worosei wrote:
just wondering, where is blizzard suing Kespa? In america or in korea?
because if blizzard and the government dont get on, and if the korean government wants to promote their esports industry and if the korean government can (or has any interest in doing so), would they be able to legislate or ammend IP laws to just make kespa all fine and dandy?
Also i am probably just basing my stuff off kespa's report, Bllizzard is probably very well and justified, i just dont want my proleague to suffer much change and restructuring, and i think Kespa knows this fact very well and it would be in their interests to stall the negoatiations as long as possible in order to maximise their own agenda.
But i do think Kespa is perfectly warranted to refuse to be audited. I wouldnt be surprised to see a lot of nasties inside their accounts, but i still dont think they should be audited, especially if it's information to another company for them to purely use as negotiation material against you
Thats the scary part. What if the Korean government decided to just say "go away" to Blizzard and their IP rights negotiations? What about games like Warcraft 3? Would Blizzard want any of their future products in Korea if the government chooses to ignore IP rights? Would any other videogame company want their product in Korea after they see how Blizzard is being treated?
|
On October 29 2010 16:49 stangstang wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 16:13 worosei wrote:
just wondering, where is blizzard suing Kespa? In america or in korea?
because if blizzard and the government dont get on, and if the korean government wants to promote their esports industry and if the korean government can (or has any interest in doing so), would they be able to legislate or ammend IP laws to just make kespa all fine and dandy?
Also i am probably just basing my stuff off kespa's report, Bllizzard is probably very well and justified, i just dont want my proleague to suffer much change and restructuring, and i think Kespa knows this fact very well and it would be in their interests to stall the negoatiations as long as possible in order to maximise their own agenda.
But i do think Kespa is perfectly warranted to refuse to be audited. I wouldnt be surprised to see a lot of nasties inside their accounts, but i still dont think they should be audited, especially if it's information to another company for them to purely use as negotiation material against you
Thats the scary part. What if the Korean government decided to just say "go away" to Blizzard and their IP rights negotiations? What about games like Warcraft 3? Would Blizzard want any of their future products in Korea if the government chooses to ignore IP rights? Would any other videogame company want their product in Korea after they see how Blizzard is being treated?
I feel that you are assuming the stance that blizzard is the victim here. While Kespa aren't saints by any means, remember how ridiculous blizzard's original demands were (they even demanded control of pro gamer contracts, since when does this automatically fall under ip?).
I would go as far s to say any other game company would be thrilled to have the same crazy publicity that Kespa gave to blizzard. On that token yes Kespa should pay licensing fees but lets not forget money wasn't the main issue in negotiations breaking down, it was control that was the issue. Blizzard wanted the ability to tell kespa wen and wen they can't broadcast pro league, basically saying they can't be in a prime time slot.
Warcraft 3 died because they had no kespa, pretty simple.
Alot of people are taking for granted that it was kespa's ability to keep pro full time salary teams afloat that made BW pro league so special. Other scenes die out because prize hunting tournaments are amateur / not sustainable, and will never be as amazing as a real bona fide pro league.
Say what you will about IP rights and such, but to say that Kespa isn't responsible for making BW so amazing is a lie. BW was one hell of a game, but the pro scene in korea is what really showed the way. - and on that note, kespa didn't make a profit, they dont have shareholders as "kespa". They are an association of sponsors. Its amazing that people are still jumping to the conclusion that they're fudging the books and that starcraft tournaments are churning millions for them.
Have we forgotten that we never paid a single cent for pro league streams/vods ? And yet those teams are full salaried players? Where the hell do you think the money comes from?
|
Rik:
KeSPA has backed many other games unsuccessfully. So, the criteria of "KeSPA" is a miss. War3 never took off because it wasn't as visceral as BW.
|
On October 29 2010 16:55 Rikstah wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 16:49 stangstang wrote:On October 29 2010 16:13 worosei wrote:
just wondering, where is blizzard suing Kespa? In america or in korea?
because if blizzard and the government dont get on, and if the korean government wants to promote their esports industry and if the korean government can (or has any interest in doing so), would they be able to legislate or ammend IP laws to just make kespa all fine and dandy?
Also i am probably just basing my stuff off kespa's report, Bllizzard is probably very well and justified, i just dont want my proleague to suffer much change and restructuring, and i think Kespa knows this fact very well and it would be in their interests to stall the negoatiations as long as possible in order to maximise their own agenda.
But i do think Kespa is perfectly warranted to refuse to be audited. I wouldnt be surprised to see a lot of nasties inside their accounts, but i still dont think they should be audited, especially if it's information to another company for them to purely use as negotiation material against you
Thats the scary part. What if the Korean government decided to just say "go away" to Blizzard and their IP rights negotiations? What about games like Warcraft 3? Would Blizzard want any of their future products in Korea if the government chooses to ignore IP rights? Would any other videogame company want their product in Korea after they see how Blizzard is being treated? I feel that you are assuming the stance that blizzard is the victim here. While Kespa aren't saints by any means, remember how ridiculous blizzard's original demands were (they even demanded control of pro gamer contracts, since when does this automatically fall under ip?). I would go as far s to say any other game company would be thrilled to have the same crazy publicity that Kespa gave to blizzard. On that token yes Kespa should pay licensing fees but lets not forget money wasn't the main issue in negotiations breaking down, it was control that was the issue. Blizzard wanted the ability to tell kespa wen and wen they can't broadcast pro league, basically saying they can't be in a prime time slot. Warcraft 3 died because they had no kespa, pretty simple. Alot of people are taking for granted that it was kespa's ability to keep pro full time salary teams afloat that made BW pro league so special. Other scenes die out because prize hunting tournaments are amateur / not sustainable, and will never be as amazing as a real bona fide pro league. Say what you will about IP rights and such, but to say that Kespa isn't responsible for making BW so amazing is a lie. BW was one hell of a game, but the pro scene in korea is what really showed the way. - and on that note, kespa didn't make a profit, they dont have shareholders as "kespa". They are an association of sponsors. Its amazing that people are still jumping to the conclusion that they're fudging the books and that starcraft tournaments are churning millions for them. Have we forgotten that we never paid a single cent for pro league streams/vods ? And yet those teams are full salaried players? Where the hell do you think the money comes from?
I completely agree with you, but i'm not saying that kespa hasn't helped the growth of broodwar and e-sports. I'm saying if the korean courts decide to side with kespa in the pretense of "this will help e-sports", "helping korean culture grow", the backlash from not just blizzard but other game companies will be huge.
|
This is poor mouthing at it's finest. Sure it costs money to operate a company. I have this much money so I can only hold x amount of tournaments this year until I can secure more revenue/sponsors/investors to hold more. I guess tightening the belt in hard times is a hard concept in korea for some organizations. I guess it's better to rely on the crutch of the "korean culture" bullshit to argue into continuing an already admitted unprofitable business model rather than change things up so the fans can continue following the tournaments and players. They are welcome to start a streaming service in the states so they can do like gomtv does and sell season passes/show commercials during breaks ,unlike in korea where everything is restricted if you aren't korean, and maybe take in a few more dollars to cover any gaps.
|
I don't get why noone pointed this out yet:
Even though intellectual property experts have advised us that it is excessive to request joint ownership of broadcast materials created through the expertise of TV stations and the performance of players in addition to charging a licensing fee for a tournament, we have accepted a limited form of joint ownership for the sake of promoting e-Sports and to improve negotiations.
I imagine that this is why Blizz/Gretech want a decent amount of money. Kespa wants some form of Joint Ownership. Is this common in a contract for IP rights? I would say no, but I'm not certain. Either way, I imagine this is is what's causing the legality issues, not the money at stake. Anyone agree or enlighten me?
|
Please please stop comparing KeSPA with the Red Cross! One is an organisation that promote's and commercializes esports in Korea, the other is a humanitarian movement that tries to prevent and alleviate human suffering.
KeSPA should be compared to organisations as FIFA or NFL, which actually have a similar goal. Ironically these organisations don't have the same IP problems KeSPA has, and FIFA especially is known for abusing the shit out their rights.
Whether Blizzard/Gretech or KeSPA is in the right here I truly can't say, and I would argue non of us can. What I can say is that comparing KeSPA with the Red Cross is just revolting.
|
On October 29 2010 18:59 Smog wrote:I don't get why noone pointed this out yet: Show nested quote +Even though intellectual property experts have advised us that it is excessive to request joint ownership of broadcast materials created through the expertise of TV stations and the performance of players in addition to charging a licensing fee for a tournament, we have accepted a limited form of joint ownership for the sake of promoting e-Sports and to improve negotiations. I imagine that this is why Blizz/Gretech want a decent amount of money. Kespa wants some form of Joint Ownership. Is this common in a contract for IP rights? I would say no, but I'm not certain. Either way, I imagine this is is what's causing the legality issues, not the money at stake. Anyone agree or enlighten me?
I think it's the other way round, Blizzard/Gretech wants joint ownership of the broadcast content on top of charging a licencing fee for the tournament. KeSPA is saying here that, even though IP experts told them that that is excessive, they agreed to it.
|
Just to everyone saying that "this is no different than someone singing someone elses music", or the c++ comment about "well the owners of the compiler don't own what comes from it" or the comments about other people copying things people made and not having to pay... the difference is:
You can copy/use/whatever most things that have IP rights owned by someone else as long as... You don't make a profit for it/don't charge for what your doing with it/aren't making money for yourself off of it.
Because KeSPA is making money off of it (even if non-profit the employees/progamers are getting paid) and because they are charging MBC/OGN for the other leagues, they can't freely use the IP rights without paying for them themselves.
If they make money off of advertising and selling broadcasting rights that means they need to pay for the right to sell those broadcasting rights and advertising, which is what Bliz/Gretech want.
Now if they completely ran off of the membership fees/donations/etc, things that keep other "non-profits" afloat then they would have a case. But they don't.
It all boils down to: you cannot make money off of someone else's intellectual property without paying them to do so.
|
Drathmar,
afaik all the people playing SC:BW on KeSPA own a legal version of the program they are using, so Blizzard got already payed. Also SC:BW is a game, it's purpose is to be played, letting people watch, even charging them to watch, is not letting them use your Legal Copy.
As i see it, Blizzard smells money, smells power, and wants a piece of the cake, i see no real argument for them to charge money just because people start watching awesome players play there game.
|
Everyone who is on Blizzard side is a brainwashed fanboy.
|
What really sucks about this is the fact that SC2 is largely as popular as it is - and was so hotly expected as it was - because Korea kept the Starcraft spirit alive for an entire decade with BW eSports. ESports exists because of KeSPA - for whatever good or bad you want to say about them, on this point there can be no debate. Blizzard now is riding a wave of commercial eSports that KeSPA is responsible for starting. They have new opportunities for income and influence in the gaming sector exactly because someone before them had the vision and the drive to lay down a foundation for them to recognize as potential and build upon. And for this wonderful gift that Blizzard can now profit from, they repay KeSPA by stomping them in the face.
Why?
Because IP rights are so dodgy to begin with and, furthermore, are so poorly defined. If there was any justice in the world, KeSPA should have IP rights over the entire concept of televised professional eSPORTS. Blizzard could just as justifiably be required to pay KeSPA to use THEIR idea of taking what was otherwise a box-on-shelf video game for basement dwellers and turning it into a media and celebrity sensation. Why is it that KeSPA does not have as much right to the genius idea and implementation of broadcasted eSPORTS as Blizzard has to the genius and implementation of Starcraft?
There is no defensible argument here. There are fundamental problems with the letter of the law regarding the entire concept and framework of what intellectual property is and isn't and the mechanisms by which government power can and can not be used to leverage power in cases of dispute. This isn't about true negotiation and cooperation, justice, or fairness - it's about a badly constructed legal system that Blizzard and Gretech have demonstrated the poor judgement to use mercilessly to their own advantage with zero respect or acknowledgement of the fact that they are now stabbing in the back the very organization whose members, teams, and sponsors have sacrificed and worked towards building the professional eSPORTS institution they now profit from and enjoy.
Just think of how much money Blizzard has made from KeSPA's decade of free advertizing for the Starcraft franchise! How many millions of copies of BW have sold in Korea alone SOLELY because KeSPA has been stoking the starcraft fire with their innovative application of an otherwise home-use video game product. How many millions of copies of SC2 will they have helped Blizzard sell also because of this. And to repay this incredibly mutually beneficial symbiosis what does Blizzard do? They treat KeSPA like a parasite rather than a cooperative, free, and highly profitable asset. This is not good business sense and, ethically, is a deplorable way to treat what was otherwise and could have continued to be a helpful friend.
For the service of a decade of keeping SC1 alive - a game that would otherwise have been buried in the closet along with other legacy dinosaurs of its age as a piece of quaint history - and for creating a heavily primed environment for Blizzard to blast onto the scene with SC2, the very least that Blizzard could do to show that they are respectable and honourable human beings is to just let KeSPA keep their BroodWar scene with no strings attached until it finally dies in peace on its own. Anything less is just disrespectful.
|
@jgad: Curious, is Blizzard suing KeSPA due to broadcasting rights of any other games hosted by KeSPA? Or just the broadcasting rights of BW?
Actually, what other games does KeSPA host anyway? Googling "games hosted by kespa" doesn't really help me =[
|
Secondly, just putting it out there, but everyone getting cranky that Kespa may be paying the board too much money, the top salary for the American Red Cross was over 1 million USD in 2008 (according to Forbes)... I'd be tentative to be argue along the lines of salary paying and Kespa.
The US red cross has an annual budget of $4.1 American Billion dollars.
Let that sink for a second.
The CEO salary in 2003 was around $400,000.
For the sake of the arguments lets assume their current CEO makes $1 millions. That is 0.025 % of the budget is CEO Salary. I doubt the Kespa's proportion of managerial salaries to income is anywhere near that percent.
The Red Cross is an organization with far more responsibilities, complexity, logistics, everything you can imagine in terms of complexity, compared to Kespa.
They also rely on public support and donations for most of their budget. They also don't have PR problems. When was the last time you heard the Red cross was in any sort of shady/exploitative business or practice?
|
On October 29 2010 19:39 Caek wrote:Show nested quote +On October 29 2010 18:59 Smog wrote:I don't get why noone pointed this out yet: Even though intellectual property experts have advised us that it is excessive to request joint ownership of broadcast materials created through the expertise of TV stations and the performance of players in addition to charging a licensing fee for a tournament, we have accepted a limited form of joint ownership for the sake of promoting e-Sports and to improve negotiations. I imagine that this is why Blizz/Gretech want a decent amount of money. Kespa wants some form of Joint Ownership. Is this common in a contract for IP rights? I would say no, but I'm not certain. Either way, I imagine this is is what's causing the legality issues, not the money at stake. Anyone agree or enlighten me? I think it's the other way round, Blizzard/Gretech wants joint ownership of the broadcast content on top of charging a licencing fee for the tournament. KeSPA is saying here that, even though IP experts told them that that is excessive, they agreed to it.
Ahh, you're right. I had to re-read it. Thanks!
|
On October 30 2010 02:20 jgad wrote:
What really sucks about this is the fact that SC2 is largely as popular as it is - and was so hotly expected as it was - because Korea kept the Starcraft spirit alive for an entire decade with BW eSports. ESports exists because of KeSPA - for whatever good or bad you want to say about them, on this point there can be no debate. Blizzard now is riding a wave of commercial eSports that KeSPA is responsible for starting. They have new opportunities for income and influence in the gaming sector exactly because someone before them had the vision and the drive to lay down a foundation for them to recognize as potential and build upon. And for this wonderful gift that Blizzard can now profit from, they repay KeSPA by stomping them in the face.
Why?
Because IP rights are so dodgy to begin with and, furthermore, are so poorly defined. If there was any justice in the world, KeSPA should have IP rights over the entire concept of televised professional eSPORTS. Blizzard could just as justifiably be required to pay KeSPA to use THEIR idea of taking what was otherwise a box-on-shelf video game for basement dwellers and turning it into a media and celebrity sensation. Why is it that KeSPA does not have as much right to the genius idea and implementation of broadcasted eSPORTS as Blizzard has to the genius and implementation of Starcraft?
There is no defensible argument here. There are fundamental problems with the letter of the law regarding the entire concept and framework of what intellectual property is and isn't and the mechanisms by which government power can and can not be used to leverage power in cases of dispute. This isn't about true negotiation and cooperation, justice, or fairness - it's about a badly constructed legal system that Blizzard and Gretech have demonstrated the poor judgement to use mercilessly to their own advantage with zero respect or acknowledgement of the fact that they are now stabbing in the back the very organization whose members, teams, and sponsors have sacrificed and worked towards building the professional eSPORTS institution they now profit from and enjoy.
Just think of how much money Blizzard has made from KeSPA's decade of free advertizing for the Starcraft franchise! How many millions of copies of BW have sold in Korea alone SOLELY because KeSPA has been stoking the starcraft fire with their innovative application of an otherwise home-use video game product. How many millions of copies of SC2 will they have helped Blizzard sell also because of this. And to repay this incredibly mutually beneficial symbiosis what does Blizzard do? They treat KeSPA like a parasite rather than a cooperative, free, and highly profitable asset. This is not good business sense and, ethically, is a deplorable way to treat what was otherwise and could have continued to be a helpful friend.
For the service of a decade of keeping SC1 alive - a game that would otherwise have been buried in the closet along with other legacy dinosaurs of its age as a piece of quaint history - and for creating a heavily primed environment for Blizzard to blast onto the scene with SC2, the very least that Blizzard could do to show that they are respectable and honourable human beings is to just let KeSPA keep their BroodWar scene with no strings attached until it finally dies in peace on its own. Anything less is just disrespectful.
Please stop spreading misinformation. The intellectual property laws are clearly and precisely defined and are agreed upon by all members of the United Nations. What you are talking about are liberal criticisms of the law, such as how it creates artificial scarcity and benefits concentrated few instead of the masses, but the law itself is enforceable and well suited for what Blizzard can challenge in court. The fact is Kespa will even have a hard time claiming that they are broadcasting derivative work. As creative as the plays of progamers, they are still playing the game the way Blizzard meant it to be played within the confines of the game it created, nothing is altered or derived out of it. Games like DOTA will have a much easier time going that legal path than ProLeague, etc.
Also, while Blizzard most definitely have reaped the benefit of Kespa's popularity in terms of advertising, they are still a form of advertisement or promotion. Advertising, be it free or paid, does not automatically make the advertisers part owners of the goods it advertises no matter how successful the campaign. I'm sure you've heard of companies that entirely abandon paid advertising and choose to spread their name through word of mouth or news agencies. Popular high class restaurants are a good example. When I tell a friend of how good that restaurant is, I can't automatically claim part ownership or is given stock options of that restaurant, neither does my local newspaper when they write a good review of the restaurant. If Blizzard does somehow reward Kespa for what they have been doing for E-Sport, it is out of good will or its own business strategy, not anything Blizzard is required to do either by law or by ethical business practices.
Finally, Kespa needs to stop raising how it is an NPO (which is still very shady, but I've already discussed that). It does not matter if they are gaining a huge profit, operating at a huge loss or doing it completely for free, IP rights intrusion is in play as long as there is a lack of authorization. The bottom line is that legally, Kespa has little to no ground in this potential lawsuit (unless SK goes the path of its northern brethren and stops giving a fuck about international agreements). For those of us who wish to see BW to continue be backed by Kespa, our best hope is that they cave in further to the demands and reach some sort of agreement out of court.
|
On October 30 2010 05:34 JeBronLames wrote:
Please stop spreading misinformation. The intellectual property laws are clearly and precisely defined and are agreed upon by all members of the United Nations. What you are talking about are liberal criticisms of the law, such as how it creates artificial scarcity and benefits concentrated few instead of the masses, but the law itself is enforceable and well suited for what Blizzard can challenge in court. The fact is Kespa will even have a hard time claiming that they are broadcasting derivative work. As creative as the plays of progamers, they are still playing the game the way Blizzard meant it to be played within the confines of the game it created, nothing is altered or derived out of it. Games like DOTA will have a much easier time going that legal path than ProLeague, etc.
Also, while Blizzard most definitely have reaped the benefit of Kespa's popularity in terms of advertising, they are still a form of advertisement or promotion. Advertising, be it free or paid, does not automatically make the advertisers part owners of the goods it advertises no matter how successful the campaign. I'm sure you've heard of companies that entirely abandon paid advertising and choose to spread their name through word of mouth or news agencies. Popular high class restaurants are a good example. When I tell a friend of how good that restaurant is, I can't automatically claim part ownership or is given stock options of that restaurant, neither does my local newspaper when they write a good review of the restaurant. If Blizzard does somehow reward Kespa for what they have been doing for E-Sport, it is out of good will or its own business strategy, not anything Blizzard is required to do either by law or by ethical business practices.
Finally, Kespa needs to stop raising how it is an NPO (which is still very shady, but I've already discussed that). It does not matter if they are gaining a huge profit, operating at a huge loss or doing it completely for free, IP rights intrusion is in play as long as there is a lack of authorization. The bottom line is that legally, Kespa has little to no ground in this potential lawsuit (unless SK goes the path of its northern brethren and stops giving a fuck about international agreements). For those of us who wish to see BW to continue be backed by Kespa, our best hope is that they cave in further to the demands and reach some sort of agreement out of court.
You speaketh the truth my man. It bothered me that they say that "We are non-profit, we only care about what we do. But this lack of profit is totally bumming us out, we'd like to make some more."
|
On October 30 2010 05:34 JeBronLames wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 02:20 jgad wrote:
What really sucks about this is the fact that SC2 is largely as popular as it is - and was so hotly expected as it was - because Korea kept the Starcraft spirit alive for an entire decade with BW eSports. ESports exists because of KeSPA - for whatever good or bad you want to say about them, on this point there can be no debate. Blizzard now is riding a wave of commercial eSports that KeSPA is responsible for starting. They have new opportunities for income and influence in the gaming sector exactly because someone before them had the vision and the drive to lay down a foundation for them to recognize as potential and build upon. And for this wonderful gift that Blizzard can now profit from, they repay KeSPA by stomping them in the face.
Why?
Because IP rights are so dodgy to begin with and, furthermore, are so poorly defined. If there was any justice in the world, KeSPA should have IP rights over the entire concept of televised professional eSPORTS. Blizzard could just as justifiably be required to pay KeSPA to use THEIR idea of taking what was otherwise a box-on-shelf video game for basement dwellers and turning it into a media and celebrity sensation. Why is it that KeSPA does not have as much right to the genius idea and implementation of broadcasted eSPORTS as Blizzard has to the genius and implementation of Starcraft?
There is no defensible argument here. There are fundamental problems with the letter of the law regarding the entire concept and framework of what intellectual property is and isn't and the mechanisms by which government power can and can not be used to leverage power in cases of dispute. This isn't about true negotiation and cooperation, justice, or fairness - it's about a badly constructed legal system that Blizzard and Gretech have demonstrated the poor judgement to use mercilessly to their own advantage with zero respect or acknowledgement of the fact that they are now stabbing in the back the very organization whose members, teams, and sponsors have sacrificed and worked towards building the professional eSPORTS institution they now profit from and enjoy.
Just think of how much money Blizzard has made from KeSPA's decade of free advertizing for the Starcraft franchise! How many millions of copies of BW have sold in Korea alone SOLELY because KeSPA has been stoking the starcraft fire with their innovative application of an otherwise home-use video game product. How many millions of copies of SC2 will they have helped Blizzard sell also because of this. And to repay this incredibly mutually beneficial symbiosis what does Blizzard do? They treat KeSPA like a parasite rather than a cooperative, free, and highly profitable asset. This is not good business sense and, ethically, is a deplorable way to treat what was otherwise and could have continued to be a helpful friend.
For the service of a decade of keeping SC1 alive - a game that would otherwise have been buried in the closet along with other legacy dinosaurs of its age as a piece of quaint history - and for creating a heavily primed environment for Blizzard to blast onto the scene with SC2, the very least that Blizzard could do to show that they are respectable and honourable human beings is to just let KeSPA keep their BroodWar scene with no strings attached until it finally dies in peace on its own. Anything less is just disrespectful. Please stop spreading misinformation. The intellectual property laws are clearly and precisely defined and are agreed upon by all members of the United Nations. What you are talking about are liberal criticisms of the law, such as how it creates artificial scarcity and benefits concentrated few instead of the masses, but the law itself is enforceable and well suited for what Blizzard can challenge in court. The fact is Kespa will even have a hard time claiming that they are broadcasting derivative work. As creative as the plays of progamers, they are still playing the game the way Blizzard meant it to be played within the confines of the game it created, nothing is altered or derived out of it. Games like DOTA will have a much easier time going that legal path than ProLeague, etc. Also, while Blizzard most definitely have reaped the benefit of Kespa's popularity in terms of advertising, they are still a form of advertisement or promotion. Advertising, be it free or paid, does not automatically make the advertisers part owners of the goods it advertises no matter how successful the campaign. I'm sure you've heard of companies that entirely abandon paid advertising and choose to spread their name through word of mouth or news agencies. Popular high class restaurants are a good example. When I tell a friend of how good that restaurant is, I can't automatically claim part ownership or is given stock options of that restaurant, neither does my local newspaper when they write a good review of the restaurant. If Blizzard does somehow reward Kespa for what they have been doing for E-Sport, it is out of good will or its own business strategy, not anything Blizzard is required to do either by law or by ethical business practices. Finally, Kespa needs to stop raising how it is an NPO (which is still very shady, but I've already discussed that). It does not matter if they are gaining a huge profit, operating at a huge loss or doing it completely for free, IP rights intrusion is in play as long as there is a lack of authorization. The bottom line is that legally, Kespa has little to no ground in this potential lawsuit (unless SK goes the path of its northern brethren and stops giving a fuck about international agreements). For those of us who wish to see BW to continue be backed by Kespa, our best hope is that they cave in further to the demands and reach some sort of agreement out of court.
The bottom line is that legally, Kespa has little to no ground in this potential lawsuit
Of course they don't. That really wasn't the point of anything I wrote, however.
|
On October 30 2010 05:34 JeBronLames wrote:
Please stop spreading misinformation. The intellectual property laws are clearly and precisely defined and are agreed upon by all members of the United Nations.
I'm pretty sure there's no WIPO mediation clause in the Brood War EULA--and indeed the very existence of "mediation" and "arbitration", "lawyers", "lawsuits" etc. are a testament to how the law is far from precisely defined. After all, if it were so precise, there would be no such things as lengthy legal battles to begin with, since it would be simple to rule on a case quickly. Besides, plenty of countries do things like blatantly violating WTO agreements--I don't think it would be shocking for a country to violate a particular interpretation of how some treaty (you don't even mention which) applies to broadcasting videogames.
|
Personally I think that Blizzard has the legal upper hand, whereas Kespa has the moral high ground. Without Kespa then BW probably would have never evolved into what it is today. It probably would have become a classic that we reminisce about today (much like Golden Eye). But I had always assumed that Blizzard and Kespa were in some sort of agreement. One other question I need to ask is "Why now?" I mean Blizzard couldn't have just gotten wind of Kespa surely.
|
On October 30 2010 16:09 HunterX11 wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's no WIPO mediation clause in the Brood War EULA--and indeed the very existence of "mediation" and "arbitration", "lawyers", "lawsuits" etc. are a testament to how the law is far from precisely defined. After all, if it were so precise, there would be no such things as lengthy legal battles to begin with, since it would be simple to rule on a case quickly.
Wait a minute, what does that have to do with how well written the law is? Are you telling me we need to define the laws of rape and murder more clearly because those trials can also take years and involve teams of lawyers?
Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies. The process takes time because in order to reach justice, all sides of the stories must be told and all evidences must be cross-examined. This procedure includes pre-trial (pleadings, discovery, bargains, jury selection etc), trial (presentation, examination, motions, rebuttals, jury instruction/deliberation etc), verdict, and last but perhaps most important in civil cases, appeals. That's not even taking consideration how much lag there is between stages of the trial simply because the courthouse is always overcapacity with cases in queue.
Sigh, it's really annoying how uninformed people can be and yet so blindly confident of what they are posting.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
On October 31 2010 05:14 ricerocket wrote:
Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies.
You have been calling others "peasants" and act like ur the only educated and civilised person around for a while now. I think many would have liked it if you would maintain a more friendly attitude.. There is really no need to fill ur post with disdain and trashtalk for it to make a good argument.
Also fact is that while the law is fairly clear and accurate on certain areas (rape, murder as you mentioned), it is not quite the same in some others. As it has been mentioned many times before, this "broadcasted video-games" case is without a precedent, and depending on how it is argued, either side could win. Since none of us seem to be capable of judging the weightage of either side's argument objectively, the likelyhood of them winning is entirely up to one's opinion. Thats why there is a(n) discussion/argument in the first place.
Again please cut down on that patronizing attitude.
|
On October 31 2010 06:29 ffreakk wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2010 05:14 ricerocket wrote:
Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies. You have been calling others "peasants" and act like ur the only educated and civilised person around for a while now. I think many would have liked it if you would maintain a more friendly attitude.. There is really no need to fill ur post with disdain and trashtalk for it to make a good argument.
If you are referring to how I was amazed at the rampant display of peasant mentality in the other thread, you should know that "peasant mentality" is a learned socio-psychological term: the belief that those who are wealthy and/or in power must also be evil and trying to do me harm. It is quite different from, and frankly quite more pitiful than, being called a "peasant."
On October 31 2010 06:29 ffreakk wrote:
Also fact is that while the law is fairly clear and accurate on certain areas (rape, murder as you mentioned), it is not quite the same in some others. As it has been mentioned many times before, this "broadcasted video-games" case is without a precedent, and depending on how it is argued, either side could win. Since none of us seem to be capable of judging the weightage of either side's argument objectively, the likelyhood of them winning is entirely up to one's opinion. Thats why there is a(n) discussion/argument in the first place.
Again please cut down on that patronizing attitude.
I didn't argue for whether the law is clear or precise. That's for the other guy and those more educated with the law to decide. I simply said the length of trials and the necessity of lawyers and trial protocols have nothing to do with how clearly or precisely defined a piece of law is, which the comments I responded to comically tried to claim. Although I have to say, while there is perhaps no precedent specific to video game broadcasting, there is indeed plenty of precedents to performing and broadcasting intellectual properties. It seems so bizarre to me how you BW zealots keep trying tirelessly to differentiate video game ownership from other IP rights.
And please cut down on those uninformed opinions stated as facts.
|
"It seems so bizarre to me how you BW zealots keep trying tirelessly to differentiate video game ownership from other IP rights."
Maybe because IP rights on a movie kinda differ from the rights on a computer game?
|
Players create the IP of an esports match, not Blizzard.
|
L. O. L.
Thanks for that laugh. I needed one after the Jets got shut out.
|
On October 31 2010 23:12 Xtar wrote:
Players create the IP of an esports match, not Blizzard.
God... Dam it.
What are you smoking?
|
I've been working in a law firm that specializes in IP law for about a year now.
I fail to see how Blizzard can win this argument.
It's basic derivative copyright law.
For example, Microsoft doesn't have copyright ownership over documents created with MS Word.
Unless it's specifically in the terms of sale/use, no company owns the copyright to works created as a result of the use of goods that they have sold.
|
On October 31 2010 05:14 ricerocket wrote:Show nested quote +On October 30 2010 16:09 HunterX11 wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's no WIPO mediation clause in the Brood War EULA--and indeed the very existence of "mediation" and "arbitration", "lawyers", "lawsuits" etc. are a testament to how the law is far from precisely defined. After all, if it were so precise, there would be no such things as lengthy legal battles to begin with, since it would be simple to rule on a case quickly. Wait a minute, what does that have to do with how well written the law is? Are you telling me we need to define the laws of rape and murder more clearly because those trials can also take years and involve teams of lawyers? Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies. The process takes time because in order to reach justice, all sides of the stories must be told and all evidences must be cross-examined. This procedure includes pre-trial (pleadings, discovery, bargains, jury selection etc), trial (presentation, examination, motions, rebuttals, jury instruction/deliberation etc), verdict, and last but perhaps most important in civil cases, appeals. That's not even taking consideration how much lag there is between stages of the trial simply because the courthouse is always overcapacity with cases in queue. Sigh, it's really annoying how uninformed people can be and yet so blindly confident of what they are posting.
The law in criminal cases is quite clear, the lengthy court cases is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged crimes were committed.
In cases such as these, often things already ARE in a grey area of the law where there are few, if any, precedents. It's not just a file charge, present evidence, make testimony type case. This case will take a while before even being brought to a jury, if it even goes in front of a jury. It's not about whether one party broke the law, the actions done are quite clear. It's about whether these actions constitute breaking IP law.
|
Edit: quote and edit are not the same thing.
|
On November 01 2010 12:09 raviy wrote:
I've been working in a law firm that specializes in IP law for about a year now.
I fail to see how Blizzard can win this argument.
It's basic derivative copyright law.
For example, Microsoft doesn't have copyright ownership over documents created with MS Word.
Unless it's specifically in the terms of sale/use, no company owns the copyright to works created as a result of the use of goods that they have sold.
Wow, you are either lying your ass off, or you are working in some pretty fail law firm. Comparing MS Word and Starcraft? Has anyone ever even given you a lessen about basic functionality classifications?
And go and ask your boss about forensics competitions and interpretation festivals vs copyright laws and the two exceptions set in the Copyright Act of 1976 (the very first thing you learn in law school regarding IPs, btw). Or don't, might get yourself fired.
|
On November 01 2010 13:44 sylverfyre wrote:Show nested quote +On October 31 2010 05:14 ricerocket wrote:On October 30 2010 16:09 HunterX11 wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's no WIPO mediation clause in the Brood War EULA--and indeed the very existence of "mediation" and "arbitration", "lawyers", "lawsuits" etc. are a testament to how the law is far from precisely defined. After all, if it were so precise, there would be no such things as lengthy legal battles to begin with, since it would be simple to rule on a case quickly. Wait a minute, what does that have to do with how well written the law is? Are you telling me we need to define the laws of rape and murder more clearly because those trials can also take years and involve teams of lawyers? Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies. The process takes time because in order to reach justice, all sides of the stories must be told and all evidences must be cross-examined. This procedure includes pre-trial (pleadings, discovery, bargains, jury selection etc), trial (presentation, examination, motions, rebuttals, jury instruction/deliberation etc), verdict, and last but perhaps most important in civil cases, appeals. That's not even taking consideration how much lag there is between stages of the trial simply because the courthouse is always overcapacity with cases in queue. Sigh, it's really annoying how uninformed people can be and yet so blindly confident of what they are posting. The law in criminal cases is quite clear, the lengthy court cases is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged crimes were committed. In cases such as these, often things already ARE in a grey area of the law where there are few, if any, precedents. It's not just a file charge, present evidence, make testimony type case. This case will take a while before even being brought to a jury, if it even goes in front of a jury. It's not about whether one party broke the law, the actions done are quite clear. It's about whether these actions constitute breaking IP law.
Are you even reading the post you are responding to?
Let me help you with your reading comprehension issues: again, what does the length of the trial and the existence of lawyers and trial protocols have to do with the clarity of the laws being argued?
And I already commented on you BW zealots' claim that there are "few, if any, precedents." It's still pretty LOL-worthy, though.
|
On November 01 2010 13:47 ricerocket wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 12:09 raviy wrote:
I've been working in a law firm that specializes in IP law for about a year now.
I fail to see how Blizzard can win this argument.
It's basic derivative copyright law.
For example, Microsoft doesn't have copyright ownership over documents created with MS Word.
Unless it's specifically in the terms of sale/use, no company owns the copyright to works created as a result of the use of goods that they have sold. Wow, you are either lying your ass off, or you are working in some pretty fail law firm. Comparing MS Word and Starcraft? Has anyone ever even given you a lessen about basic functionality classifications? And go and ask your boss about forensics competitions and interpretation festivals vs copyright laws and the two exceptions set in the Copyright Act of 1976 (the very first thing you learn in law school regarding IPs, btw). Or don't, might get yourself fired.
Oh I see, the US assumes copyright subsists in the performance of works.
No such copyright exists in my jurisdiction except for dramatic/music works. It's not an exception to copyright, because copyright is not assumed to exist in that circumstance.
Also, there is no difference in the legal argument here as to the use of MS Word and Starcraft, as functionality is not an issue. Although I can see how it would be in the US.
Oh well, that point is moot, since the issue would likely be dealt with under SK law.
|
ricerocket the point he's trying to make is if it was so blindingly obvious as you say it is, there wouldn't be a need for all this negotiation, mediation, and all that bs. Unless you are of the opinion blizzard are nice guys who tried to cut kespa a break or something.
The real reason this is so drawn out, is because it isn't clear cut, and we really dont know who will win. You are obviously pro blizzard on the issue, but you have to admit that if it was so black and white, this wouldn't have taken over 3 years.
Now niether side is able to really discuss this objectively, especially because none of us are IP experts. But its a good point to argue and consider, does blizzard really automatically own a video of 2 pro gamers playing starcraft?
We all know that kespa should pay licensing fees, lets point out that is obvious to both sides, its all the other demands that could never have been agreed upon.
Also, you are being a bastard to people who don't agree with you, a real condescending one. I can say im guilty of this before, but we can't have a decent discussion on the matter when everyone thinks they have enough knowledge to single handedly win the case.
|
On November 01 2010 16:18 raviy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 13:47 ricerocket wrote:On November 01 2010 12:09 raviy wrote:
I've been working in a law firm that specializes in IP law for about a year now.
I fail to see how Blizzard can win this argument.
It's basic derivative copyright law.
For example, Microsoft doesn't have copyright ownership over documents created with MS Word.
Unless it's specifically in the terms of sale/use, no company owns the copyright to works created as a result of the use of goods that they have sold. Wow, you are either lying your ass off, or you are working in some pretty fail law firm. Comparing MS Word and Starcraft? Has anyone ever even given you a lessen about basic functionality classifications? And go and ask your boss about forensics competitions and interpretation festivals vs copyright laws and the two exceptions set in the Copyright Act of 1976 (the very first thing you learn in law school regarding IPs, btw). Or don't, might get yourself fired. Oh I see, the US assumes copyright subsists in the performance of works. No such copyright exists in my jurisdiction except for dramatic/music works. It's not an exception to copyright, because copyright is not assumed to exist in that circumstance. Also, there is no difference in the legal argument here as to the use of MS Word and Starcraft, as functionality is not an issue. Although I can see how it would be in the US. Oh well, that point is moot, since the issue would likely be dealt with under SK law.
Actually, the WIPO Treaty protects computer programs as literary works, which specifically grants the copyright owner the right to reproduce, prepare derivative versions of, distribute, perform publicly and display a work. As far as I know the treaty (and its latest extension in 2000) was adopted by all members of the UN, including SK. It's rather strange Hong Kong would be subject a different rule when it is part of China, which is a UN member, but maybe you are talking about another jurisdiction.
The public performance exceptions come into effect in circumstances of education and charity, neither of which Kespa would qualify for in my opinion. It doesn't even matter anyway, since it looks like Blizzard is suing the station, which is not a NPO by any means.
|
On November 01 2010 16:25 Rikstah wrote:
ricerocket the point he's trying to make is if it was so blindingly obvious as you say it is, there wouldn't be a need for all this negotiation, mediation, and all that bs. Unless you are of the opinion blizzard are nice guys who tried to cut kespa a break or something.
Well, I do in fact think the reason Blizzard has been negotiating in the first place is to preserve the eSport scene of BW as wholesome as possible, out of the consideration for both players and fans and its own PR image. If they wanted to destroy it, they would have sued in 2007.
Also, you are being a bastard to people who don't agree with you, a real condescending one. I can say im guilty of this before, but we can't have a decent discussion on the matter when everyone thinks they have enough knowledge to single handedly win the case.
I'm sorry, but I just can't find myself being nice to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about and still try to sound like experts.
|
True, everyone is trying to sound like experts on the matter... some people are seriously being retarded and they don't know it yet.
|
Haha, well I wasn't the one who said the law is bad because there are lawyers. 
Btw, the negotiation took 3 years, not the lawsuit. I don't know how long the lawsuit will take, but you should know that there actually are differences between those two things other than how they are pronounced.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 01 2010 16:43 ricerocket wrote:
I'm sorry, but I just can't find myself being nice to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about and still try to sound like experts.
That's actually a pretty good case for not arguing at all. I'm not saying you are wrong, but if you are arguing in a condescending way because "somebody is wrong on the internet", then that is just retarded in a long term perspective. There are seriously a lot better things to do with your time. The forum won't get richer. The same point has been argued in a nicer way.
There is a lot of hatred right now, and you are not helping. Please consider that.
|
I am aware theres a big difference.
Just pointing out that if the law was set in stone regarding these exact circumstances, there wouldn't be any room for negotiating on kespa's part, let alone 3 strained years of it.
|
On November 01 2010 17:15 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 16:43 ricerocket wrote:
I'm sorry, but I just can't find myself being nice to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about and still try to sound like experts. That's actually a pretty good case for not arguing at all. I'm not saying you are wrong, but if you are arguing in a condescending way because "somebody is wrong on the internet" is just retarded in a long term perspective. There are seriously a lot better things to do with your time. The forum won't get richer. The same point has been argued in a nicer way. There is a lot of hatred right now, and you are not helping. Please consider that.
So true.
I have to say though for the first few pages I thought this was one of the least hate filled discussions on the matter.
Probably because a bunch of people just realised there isn't actually that much money being made out of BW (if any at all)... considering that we watch pro league for free, everyone does.
- yet still people came up with crazy ideas as to how kespa is actually still secretly ripping a fortune somehow
|
On November 01 2010 17:15 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 16:43 ricerocket wrote:
I'm sorry, but I just can't find myself being nice to people who obviously don't know what they are talking about and still try to sound like experts. That's actually a pretty good case for not arguing at all. I'm not saying you are wrong, but if you are arguing in a condescending way because "somebody is wrong on the internet" is just retarded in a long term perspective. There are seriously a lot better things to do with your time. The forum won't get richer. The same point has been argued in a nicer way. There is a lot of hatred right now, and you are not helping. Please consider that.
Well, for one thing, I'm not "arguing," I'm "correcting."
And I'm not doing it for the sake of the idiots posting the ignorant info, I'm doing it for the sake of others who may not know better and may take those uninformed opinions as facts. Please consider that.
|
On November 01 2010 17:16 Rikstah wrote:
I am aware theres a big difference.
Just pointing out that if the law was set in stone regarding these exact circumstances, there wouldn't be any room for negotiating on kespa's part, let alone 3 strained years of it.
Sure there is, they could shut down the entire operation and force Blizzard and its partners to start from scratch.
Negotiation leverages include plenty aside from the law.
|
I still think its an assumption that blizzards rights go that far. Like other people have said, this specific case is without precedent. We'll have to see what happens in court.
Its going to be interesting. All I know is no matter what the outcome the hate between these 2 sides will only get worse.
|
Wow. Many Internet lawyers wowow. No need for speculation, just wait until law suit Is over please.
|
On November 01 2010 13:55 ricerocket wrote:Show nested quote +On November 01 2010 13:44 sylverfyre wrote:On October 31 2010 05:14 ricerocket wrote:On October 30 2010 16:09 HunterX11 wrote:
I'm pretty sure there's no WIPO mediation clause in the Brood War EULA--and indeed the very existence of "mediation" and "arbitration", "lawyers", "lawsuits" etc. are a testament to how the law is far from precisely defined. After all, if it were so precise, there would be no such things as lengthy legal battles to begin with, since it would be simple to rule on a case quickly. Wait a minute, what does that have to do with how well written the law is? Are you telling me we need to define the laws of rape and murder more clearly because those trials can also take years and involve teams of lawyers? Ok, I guess there's no point to be too harsh on someone clearly without any basic understanding of the legal system in developed societies. The process takes time because in order to reach justice, all sides of the stories must be told and all evidences must be cross-examined. This procedure includes pre-trial (pleadings, discovery, bargains, jury selection etc), trial (presentation, examination, motions, rebuttals, jury instruction/deliberation etc), verdict, and last but perhaps most important in civil cases, appeals. That's not even taking consideration how much lag there is between stages of the trial simply because the courthouse is always overcapacity with cases in queue. Sigh, it's really annoying how uninformed people can be and yet so blindly confident of what they are posting. The law in criminal cases is quite clear, the lengthy court cases is to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the alleged crimes were committed. In cases such as these, often things already ARE in a grey area of the law where there are few, if any, precedents. It's not just a file charge, present evidence, make testimony type case. This case will take a while before even being brought to a jury, if it even goes in front of a jury. It's not about whether one party broke the law, the actions done are quite clear. It's about whether these actions constitute breaking IP law. Are you even reading the post you are responding to? Let me help you with your reading comprehension issues: again, what does the length of the trial and the existence of lawyers and trial protocols have to do with the clarity of the laws being argued? And I already commented on you BW zealots' claim that there are "few, if any, precedents." It's still pretty LOL-worthy, though.
Length of trial is pretty much just a bad thing for all of us fans. It means that this mess isn't going to end, in favor of ANY party, before a lot of damage has been done to the e-sports scene. (Already has been, for that matter)
|
I just don't understand what all the fuss is about. BW is Blizzard's game and if they want to kill it, then let them kill it! It's time for all these Korean BW players to move on, IMO.
Why can't KeSPA just switch to SC2, pay the royalties, and legally broadcast games to make a profit? Why are they so hellbent on keeping a dead game alive and making a living illegally?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
