|
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
At least now there will be a stabilized stance of on the negotiations for one party instead of some random PR shit.
1500th post well used.
Edit:Before lawsuits or not if its final then its final.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
Well, this is in line with what people have been saying the demands were. No real big shockers here...
...except for one thing. I think that the clause about Blizzard's logo being displayed prominently is the first time we've seen direct evidence of a strong influence from Blizzard towards Gretech's negotiation attempts.
|
Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard.
It should be 33 : 33 : 33 between the Broadcasting station , the Player/Team and Gretech/Blizzard. The players contribute the most, second is the Broadcasting station, and next is Gretech/Blizzard. They don't have right to disregard the players/teams in this issue.
The terms are basically saying that Gretech/Blizzard can stop/change the entire esport industry whenever they want, which is not acceptable from the government's point of view. I think the gov won't let that happen, that's why the Broadcasting stations have the guts to go to court on this one.
|
Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again. In my opinion, the only reason Gretech was given the IP rights by Blizzard is because Blizzard wanted a court battle. They assumed that they would lose in a Korean court if the case ended up being foreigner company versus Korean company, so they turned it into Korean company versus Korean company and are hoping this will help them get the result that they want.
|
Yeah, that's not happening. See you in court.
|
I don't quite understand this point.
"Sponsor: All revenue from Sponsorships will be the property of the broadcasting station" Is this like forcing them to not be not for profit? As in since it is not KeSPA who manage the funds but rather OGN or MBC, the operation of leagues will therefore be for profit?
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
Does "revenue split fairly" mean 50:50?
because broadcasting companies just barely make any profit in the first place.
|
Croatia9360 Posts
Just so we're clear, this was posted by Gretech? Meaning, there's no possibility of it being forged or whatever.
I don't see why would anyone do that in the first place, as I'm not even sure who this contracts paints as a bad guys. Gretech for this conditions or broadcasting stations for not accepting it. Can someone with the little more expertize go over this conditions and elaborate?
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
On November 14 2010 01:07 2Pacalypse- wrote: Just so we're clear, this was posted by Gretech? Meaning, there's no possibility of it being forged or whatever.
I don't see why would anyone do that in the first place, as I'm not even sure who this contracts paints as a bad guys. Gretech for this conditions or broadcasting stations for not accepting it. Can someone with the little more expertize go over this conditions and elaborate?
why are you even looking for good guys and bad guys in the first place,it doesn't paint anyone as good or bad it just gives a clear stance of one party.
|
motbob
United States12546 Posts
On November 14 2010 01:06 BLinD-RawR wrote: Does "revenue split fairly" mean 50:50?
because broadcasting companies just barely make any profit in the first place. No, you're misunderstanding that part of the offer. The revenue that they're talking about is the selling of sublicenses. So if MBC wants to sell the right to broadcast games to other entities, they need to give Gretech a piece of the revenue of that sale.
|
What does sub-licenses mean in this matter? Selling osl rights to Chinese broadcaster?
|
I don't get what's so unreasonably about this. Why not agree to this rather than get sued?
|
seriously blizzard and gretech, go to hell
obvioulsy gretech is being influenced by blizzard
|
On November 14 2010 01:15 tirentu wrote: I don't get what's so unreasonably about this. Why not agree to this rather than get sued?
Why not to stop showing Brood War instead?
|
9069 Posts
first 2 points are all cool and fair, after that it goes horribly wrong. just for 1 year, wtf seriously. for 2011 they might want OGN's bosses daughter with 3 ferraris or smth like that. So yeah, no chance mbc/ogn are taking the offer
|
Philadelphia, PA10406 Posts
I really fail to see why Gretech and Blizzard couldn't just sell the rights off for a dollar, make their point, and work on Sc2. Surely this is not a major revenue stream for them.
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
On November 14 2010 01:18 Borknagarush wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:15 tirentu wrote: I don't get what's so unreasonably about this. Why not agree to this rather than get sued? Why not to stop showing Brood War instead?
that makes no sense,please elaborate.He asked why was it unreasonable.I think its because they barely make any money on running these starleagues in the first place
On November 14 2010 01:23 tree.hugger wrote: I really fail to see why Gretech and Blizzard couldn't just sell the rights off for a dollar, make their point, and work on Sc2. Surely this is not a major revenue stream for them.
I agree,but I think its because of competition and the fact that they want these stations to cast SC2 as soon as possible.
Also why does the length say 1 year if they are taking 100,000,000 won per season.
|
The hope is to kill BroodWar, obviously. Blizzard/Gretech think they are losing money to BroodWar when they want to push SC2, so I suppose this is what they think compensation is. Otherwise it would be like the last million years of BroodWar, where they were left alone because all it did was advertise Blizz.
I doubt broadcasters could afford to pay this and even remotely produce the same quality of product that we are accustomed to. Look at GSL: It's a pile of shit. It's like it's 2001 again over there, except somehow worse.
Also why does the length say 1 year if they are taking 100,000,000 won per season.
IE: You can't pay for more than 3 seasons in advance (since they limit 3 seasons per year), meaning that at the end of the year you have to renegotiate the contract... Which means if eSports is suddenly doing amazing, they will ask for more money, or if it's in their interests to just say 'no more BroodWar' they can do that.' If you could pay for a contract over several years, they could not. So basically this controversy will happen every year and no one will ever get any sleep or feel like they have real job security. This creates so many more problems than I think people realise.
|
konadora
Singapore66060 Posts
what disciple said. pretty retarded terms imo, blizzard and gretech are really pushing themselves.
|
On November 14 2010 01:22 disciple wrote: first 2 points are all cool and fair, after that it goes horribly wrong. just for 1 year, wtf seriously. for 2011 they might want OGN's bosses daughter with 3 ferraris or smth like that. So yeah, no chance mbc/ogn are taking the offer
I second this post. Please just think about this: what has Gretech done for BW at all? It seems a bit much to be asking for 50/50 control of all broadcasting material this way; it is no wonder OGN/MBC never had any thought on accepting this offer in the first place. Simply outrageous.
|
It is pretty clear that Blizzard-Gretech dont want fight against Kespa, but against the Broadcasters, because they are not so strong. One thing that was made clear last night was that BW = esports, the new game is just not appealing to watch as a casual.
|
Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard.
can anyone with some experience in law-texts explain what this means?
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
Thanks for the clarification Chef.Its the dark ages of progaming again in SC2....like BW it will grow out of such a situation soon.
To be honest the Broadcasting fee should be halved and the length doubled and split should be like 75:25 in favor of OGN/MBC.Does anyone know the offer made regarding the broadcast of Proleague.
|
probably wont be agreed upon...
|
this won't be agreed upon
we'll see how it plays out in Korea's legal system
I've never been a big fan of Kespa, but I hope they win since I consider them the lesser evil compared to Blizzard
|
The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged.
|
On November 14 2010 01:51 BLinD-RawR wrote: Thanks for the clarification Chef.Its the dark ages of progaming again in SC2....like BW it will grow out of such a situation soon.
To be honest the Broadcasting fee should be halved and the length doubled and split should be like 75:25 in favor of OGN/MBC.Does anyone know the offer made regarding the broadcast of Proleague.
I can show you the future of SC2. Just look at this: future
|
Thanks for translation. I thought they had bigger demands than this...
On November 14 2010 01:42 konadora wrote: what disciple said. pretty retarded terms imo, blizzard and gretech are really pushing themselves.
Be sure to use your 30000th post wisely!
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
On November 14 2010 02:00 Borknagarush wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:51 BLinD-RawR wrote: Thanks for the clarification Chef.Its the dark ages of progaming again in SC2....like BW it will grow out of such a situation soon.
To be honest the Broadcasting fee should be halved and the length doubled and split should be like 75:25 in favor of OGN/MBC.Does anyone know the offer made regarding the broadcast of Proleague. I can show you the future of SC2. Just look at this: future
Please don't pick a fight with everything I say,I just want you guys to do the same.....You don't like SC2,thats fine but I like it an I think it will go far.Enough with me derailing the topic.
|
On November 14 2010 02:06 BLinD-RawR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 02:00 Borknagarush wrote:On November 14 2010 01:51 BLinD-RawR wrote: Thanks for the clarification Chef.Its the dark ages of progaming again in SC2....like BW it will grow out of such a situation soon.
To be honest the Broadcasting fee should be halved and the length doubled and split should be like 75:25 in favor of OGN/MBC.Does anyone know the offer made regarding the broadcast of Proleague. I can show you the future of SC2. Just look at this: future Please don't pick a fight with everything I say,I just want you guys to do the same.....You don't like SC2,thats fine but I like it an I think it will go far.Enough with me derailing the topic.
Did you saw the link? What do you think?
|
On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. They demand that for one year. They arent some company which makes $ but a nonprofit organization, how can you ask that much of someone who doesnt even have the money, the only solution is cutting the prize pool or something, which will affect the players They dont even purchase the rights to be alone, they dont even keep their content or anything
I fail to see how the demands ARENT unreasonable
|
On November 14 2010 01:49 xlep wrote:Show nested quote +
Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard.
can anyone with some experience in law-texts explain what this means?
The specific wording of contracts is very important.
While I don't mean to insult Milkis' translation skills, it's hard to say you are giving an accurate explanation based on a third party translation.
|
On November 14 2010 02:12 Iplaythings wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. They demand that for one year. They arent some company which makes $ but a nonprofit organization, how can you ask that much of someone who doesnt even have the money, the only solution is cutting the prize pool or something, which will affect the players They dont even purchase the rights to be alone, they dont even keep their content or anything I fail to see how the demands ARENT unreasonable
100 million Won is about 90.000$ which is nothing for a program that gets broacasted on cable TV every week for one year. Also this contract is for MBC/OGN and not for Kespa. Also I'm pretty shure that Kespa demanded broadcasting fees from the stations even before Blizzard/Gretech interfered at all.
Money really isn't the issue here, it's all about the formal rights IP and broadcasting rights.
|
no sane person/company would agree with these terms it's like you have to pay them for giving them half of your content you create
|
Did anyone else find this part hilarious? "Contest License Fees: 1 won per year" I giggled. Gretech/blizz clearly trolling with that line.
|
Read through it pretty quick, but it does seem fair.
|
On November 14 2010 02:18 Qeet wrote: no sane person/company would agree with these terms it's like you have to pay them for giving them half of your content you create
Have you ever seen the contracts for example FIFA has with the broadcasting stations? Those are ridiculous.
As I said 90.000$ are really irrelevant and the half of the content line is just formal. Like do you think Blizzard takes half of the programm and keeps it for themselves?
This is all comes down to the formal IP and Broadcasting rights.
|
On November 14 2010 02:19 Comeh wrote: Did anyone else find this part hilarious? "Contest License Fees: 1 won per year" I giggled. Gretech/blizz clearly trolling with that line.
It's so amateurs can still host tournaments, only professional broadcasters have to pay the real fee.
|
On November 14 2010 02:19 Comeh wrote: Did anyone else find this part hilarious? "Contest License Fees: 1 won per year" I giggled. Gretech/blizz clearly trolling with that line. Theres actually comment somewhere from Gretech that it's intentional, but they said they have big broadcasting fee for stations that provide bad services... or something like that
|
ALLEYCAT BLUES48987 Posts
I doubt they said anything about providing bad services
|
On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged.
The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!!
- 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created. - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. - And many other smaller things...
Actually SC2 players and mapmakers are victims of Blizz's greed too : The EULA states that every game they play belong to Blizz, every maps they make belongs to Blizz, and every broastcasts/vods they make belong to Blizz. Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that).
Battle.Net 2.0 are created with the ultimate purpose to control every people who play the game, every mapmakers who create map for the game, and every tournaments of the game. ALL BELONGS TO THEM.
SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that).
We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that).
|
i have a question:
does ogn/mbc currently give broadcasting fees to kespa?
if so, how much?
|
Yes they do. I forget how much though :/
|
On November 14 2010 02:41 whoseline wrote: i have a question:
does ogn/mbc currently give broadcasting fees to kespa?
if so, how much?
They do, but recently Kespa revealed that one part of the money (dunno how much) was given back to MBC/OGN to maintain their star-leagues, Kespa takes the rest to maintain Proleague. That's why they accepted Kespa's offer in the first place.
|
This is really old news..
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=161549
In any case, I'm fairly sure the broadcasting fees are on par to the fees ogn/mbc currently pay kespa. The only thing I see wrong about these conditions is the 1 year contract, 3-5 years sounds more reasonable. Even then, I'd rather just accept the conditions than going to court.
|
|
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!! - 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created. - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. - And many other smaller things... Actually SC2 players and mapmakers are victims of Blizz's greed too : The EULA states that every game they play belong to Blizz, every maps they make belongs to Blizz, and every broastcasts/vods they make belong to Blizz. Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that). Battle.Net 2.0 are created with the ultimate purpose to control every people who play the game, every mapmakers who create map for the game, and every tournaments of the game. ALL BELONGS TO THEM. SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that). We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that).
The only thing unreasonable is the 1year length of the contract. And I really don't think Blizzard would just not give a next contract after 1year. That would be far too bad publicity considering they gave them a contract before in that case. The rest is just standard IP rights things. That's how every contract in the western world concerning IP rights work. I don't think people here complain about IP right contracts when they buy a game or go to the cinema or whatever.
And you act like Blizzard invented the whole "you don't own they game you buy". They didn't. Yes many of those IP right terms are bullshit, but that's not Blizzard's fault. They just do what everyone does and they have to since they are a multi billionen dollar company.
|
The Kespa-IEG-MBC-OGN 3-year contract expired back in early 2010. The terms of their current deal, if they even have one, are unknown afaik.
@youngminii, MBC has said that the fees would be more than what they paid to Kespa. They also said that Kespa subsidized part of the production costs, so the costs end up being significantly more than what they paid with Kespa.
|
People saying Blizzard is doing this to kill BW don't know what the kark they're talking about.
Blizzard wants control; it's as simple as that. All they have ever wanted is control over the scene.
The reason for this is because Blizzard is one of the most image-based and logo-based companies in the world, which makes a great deal of money merely off the Blizzard image and reputation in the gaming world. Thus, they don't want anyone using their logo or their image or their games in any way that could possibly tarnish them by association, and they don't want anyone else making money off of it.
Kespa's profitisation of their game in the selling of broadcast rights and other such things, their mistreatment of players, and their numerous embarrassing scandals and mismanagements seem to have convinced Blizzard (for better or for worse) that they can't simply allow people to do whatever they want with their games, especially now that the Starcraft name and logo is once more big in the gaming world. Thus, Blizzard wants a situation where they can control exactly who uses their name and logo and their game, and exactly how they use it; where they're in a position to control the scene and prevent embarrassing scandals, mishaps, and profitisations.
Along with that, Blizzard views e-sports as a powerful marketing tool, and wants to encourage it wherever possible; as long as they control how their name and image is marketed, and by whom. They don't want 'BW dead'; they want control over it, just like they've always wanted.
Now, that doesn't mean they're in the right, or that you should support them or anything; but it does mean you should stop making up stupid conspiracy theories that don't make sense of the facts as we know them or Blizzard's public statements on the matter.
Personally, while I think that a Blizzard-and-Gretech-run e-sports scene would be much healthier and happier than a Kespa-led one, I think these terms are excessive, though not grossly so.
If either side cared more for the fans than they did for their turf and the bottom-line, though, then we wouldn't be in this mess to begin with; both sides have behaved in a deplorable manner befitting small children fighting over candy bars.
Also, could someone translate some netizen comments on this story? I'd be interested to see what they Koreans think...
|
On November 14 2010 03:04 Captain Peabody wrote: Also, could someone translate some netizen comments on this story? I'd be interested to see what they Koreans think...
Depending on which site (SC2 or BW site) you are it's going to be pro-Gretech/Blizzard or pro Kespa just like here.
|
United States238 Posts
The supposed leak of this offer document originally surfaced from e-daily few weeks ago, afaik. Take it as what you will.
|
I find it extremely hilarious that the foreign scene tends to favor KESPA/TV stations and the koreans tend to side with Blizzard/Gretech... I really wonder why
BTW, the terms look very reasonable to me.
|
United States7481 Posts
On November 14 2010 03:19 Selith wrote: The supposed leak of this offer document originally surfaced from e-daily few weeks ago, afaik. Take it as what you will. is e-daily the same as DES?
|
United States238 Posts
|
5003 Posts
On November 14 2010 03:19 Selith wrote: The supposed leak of this offer document originally surfaced from e-daily few weeks ago, afaik. Take it as what you will.
And notice it's written by Yi Sora, who is, actually, credible.
Note that Fomos won't publish things like this *because* they're pro Blizzard. DES will talk about stuff like this, but as long as you take the quotes and not their interpretation it's okay -_-
|
On November 14 2010 02:53 Nyxs wrote: Let the lawsuit begin. it did few weeks ago
|
United States238 Posts
On November 14 2010 03:29 Milkis wrote: And notice it's written by Yi Sora, who is, actually, credible.
Note that Fomos won't publish things like this *because* they're pro Blizzard. DES will talk about stuff like this, but as long as you take the quotes and not their interpretation it's okay -_-
That is true. The document itself doesn't look forged since it only includes what we already know. Seems there are more pages, but for whatever reason, they weren't included.
|
On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged.
They should see a normal broadcasting contract and compare it to this. These terms are actually rather good...
|
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote: The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!!
- 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created.
Imagine next year. Big SC:BW tournament. We see Blizzard logo everywhere on stage. Really flashy ones. We see map selection with maps like: BIG PLATFORM - a max map with no ramps, single level (yeah i used the wrong word propably), no obstructions to movement...
The match begins we see two CC/Hatcheries/Nexuse with their workers... For few minutes nothing moves. People begin to wonder what the hell is going on... Then the camera show plater cabins... No players in them... The program runs for 2h and the producers are switching the cameras between 2 not working mains....
Then they show a man in the audience with a sign "We got robbed of our work. Signed players, mapmakers" Beware it could happen
|
im siding with blizz/gretech, but i do think the contract only lasting 1 year is a little unfair. perhaps if it was 2 or 3 it would be reasonable.
|
As I have never been a BW fan, in fact being completely oblivious to the koreans-sports scene before I ran into SC2 and this site, I'm having a really hard time understanding this situation, why it's unsolvable and why BW fans thinks that Blizzard is out to destroy BW. The last part about wanting to destroy BW seems to me to be a lack of understanding of how money, business and the world goes round.
Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent.
Blizzard want their rights as creater and owner of the game to be achknowledged. Money is not an issue here. Reallly $90000 is a drop in the water in the budgets involved and Kespas statements about how they are a non-profit organisation is merely a way win the hearts of the before mentioned people who lacks understanding of finances. It's not about money, it's all about rights and control to which it 100% belongs to Blizzard.
Blizzard do not wish to kill BW, if they really wanted to they could easily have done so and there is nothing, absolutely nothing in those demands that in any way would kill BW or hurt Kespas business as long as they agree that SC:BW is Blizzards products, which it unarguably is.
So for a young gamer who have yet to experience and get a prober understanding of how the world goes round, this may all seem unfair to you and Blizzard is being the big bad wolf that want to dominate the universe, but really it isnt. It's just business, how the world goes round.
|
On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere
|
On November 14 2010 04:08 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere
Uh...no, they're never there. I'll rewatch some vods on VioleTAK, but I am pretty sure they've never been present on BW stages.
|
Wow, 50:50?? Bad news for the industry. At least its public.
|
On November 14 2010 04:08 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere
I've seen a few, didnt spot the Blizzard logos, but could be that I missed them. Anyway probally the smallest part of it all which has little to no influence in this matter. I should probally have left it out of my post as people will inevetably try to find flaws in my arguments, no matter how small and pointless they are.
|
On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Reallly $90000 is a drop in the water in the budgets involved and Kespas statements about how they are a non-profit organisation is merely a way win the hearts of the before mentioned people who lacks understanding of finances.
It's ironic that you suggest others dont know much of finances and yet you think 90 grand American is a drop in the bucket for an esports event. What do you think this is, the NFL?
Funny, I havent seen any TV stations other than MBC and OGN succeed. What about the CGS? Oh yeah, it lasted all of 2 seasons.
Blizzard is doing now what valve did a few years ago; try as hard as they can to shut down the old version of a game by denying access to it for televised events whenever they feel like it. Granted, I like their new game, but that is what they are trying to do.
|
On November 14 2010 04:17 Chibalicious wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:08 Frankon wrote:On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Kespa, as far as I have been able to pick up, completely disregards Blizzard as the creater and owner of SC:BW. No logos, no achknowledgement and worst of all has been completely uncooperative with Blizzard in all matters, not just the recent. Did you seen any stream of BW? There are Blizzard and SC:BW logos everywhere I've seen a few, didnt spot the Blizzard logos, but could be that I missed them. Anyway probally the smallest part of it all which has little to no influence in this matter. I should probally have left it out of my post as people will inevetably try to find flaws in my arguments, no matter how small and pointless they are.
If there are any blizzard logos I didn't see them in any of the videos I looked at (the closing ceremony parts, which looks at the entire stage, as well as the opening themes), so your original statement stands as correct.
|
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote: - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company.
Can you explain why exactly you think Blizzard making all the calls about a game they made and own is in any way comparable to slavery?
If the entire Korean e-sport setup and the government doesn't find "foreign companies" relevant or doesn't find protecting their rights and interests necessary in their country, then maybe they should stop using foreign products (BW included).
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote: SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that).
We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that).
I would rather say that the e-sports fans are too obsessed with e-sports that they don't take this issue seriously because they are overprotective of the bw scene.
Neither SCBW nor SC2 are "liberal sports" open for anybody to exploit - and Blizzard would be completely insane to allow something like that to happen and essentially give away a potential gold mine they created and own. These games are - first and foremost - video games and property of their developer and it is their will that matters.
You can't break those rules just because you want the Korean e-sports scene to stay like it is. Because if you break the rules for the sake of what you like, that means the Korean government can also decide that it's in their "national interest" to allow the music I make to be used freely (or in a Samsung TV commercial) tomorrow.
And I kind of don't want that.
|
On November 14 2010 04:17 red_b wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:05 Chibalicious wrote: Reallly $90000 is a drop in the water in the budgets involved and Kespas statements about how they are a non-profit organisation is merely a way win the hearts of the before mentioned people who lacks understanding of finances. It's ironic that you suggest others dont know much of finances and yet you think 90 grand American is a drop in the bucket for an esports event. What do you think this is, the NFL? Funny, I havent seen any TV stations other than MBC and OGN succeed. What about the CGS? Oh yeah, it lasted all of 2 seasons. Blizzard is doing now what valve did a few years ago; try as hard as they can to shut down the old version of a game by denying access to it for televised events whenever they feel like it. Granted, I like their new game, but that is what they are trying to do.
Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that.
|
United States10328 Posts
On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that.
Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136
MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum.
I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though.
|
I love the conspiricy theories that float around, blizz wants to kill BW, they only went into business with gretech to sue kespa etc.
Is it not perfectly possible that blizzard got into business with gretech because they share a common goal or philosophy about esports? That they did this because they tried to deal with kespa first but couldn't come to an agreement so took their IP rights elsewhere? That sounds far more likely to me
As for blizz influencing the terms gretech offered... ofc they did lol... its their game. What in the hell is unreasonable about having the blizzard logo plastered everywhere while broadcasting a blizzard game? They do it in GSL, MLG constantly thank blizzard for the game.... its how you do things in a civilized world.
Its like watching a football (soccer) game from the premiership and not expecting to see the FA sign anywhere, or watching the NBA and not seeing the NBA logo..... anyone who thinks it is unreasonable really needs to get over themselves.
edit: and if its about money..... $90k is pittance to blizzard. they spend that much each day on toilet paper ffs ;p This is about blizz getting acknowledgment as creators and owners of the game.....
how would you feel if you made a product and then someone else made money off that product and refused to even acknowledge that it was your product?
|
On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. That would be 100 million x3 for a year's worth of MSL ($265k) not to mention more fees for proleague on top, and this is all AFTER the actual cost and financing that goes into it now (salaries, production, etc etc). While in theory Blizzard may deserve some royalties for the game, taking the bw finely tuned economic structure that has evolved and extorting more off the top might just topple the whole thing, then again Blizzard is ok with that.
|
As others have said, 1 year is really not stable.
50/50 ownership is something I would never agree to if I were sitting on the other side of the table... All the player houses, the mapmakers, the commentating, the production values and structure supplied by one side...and merely the license supplied by other other side results in this other side getting 50% ownership?
And I don't know what the last point involves, but depending on its implications it could be a huge drag as well.
Years ago Blizzard branding was pretty prominent in broadcasts, but recently it's all faded away. The bad blood might have started earlier, when it seems Kespa tried to get a license but Blizzard wouldn't talk, long before SC2 was announced.
I definitely agree with Captain Peabody's assertion that Activision Blizzard wants control...just look at the new Bnet for more evidence - the foundation of the new Bnet is that everything is controlled by Activision Blizzard's servers. However the desire for control does not necessarily mean they'll work hard to preserve what's been built.
Kespa has had many missteps on the way - but if you examine governing authorities in the births of other sports - including prominent sports like baseball, football, basketball and more - you'll see that they all had problems in their infancy, too. Scandals, player mistreatment, prejudice, and more - and on a larger scale. It's too much to describe in one post, but how Blizzard handled tournaments and such in the past does not make me confident in them as stewards of a pro scene.
As well, it's not necessarily in a game publisher's interest to have a long-lasting pro scene for their games, since they are constantly trying to sell new games. I've mulled over issues for quite awhile and I've come to the conclusion that the time when the game publisher's (or developer's) interests and the competitive scene's interest are aligned is when the publisher benefits from continued interest in the same game. This occurs in games such as free-to-play ad-supported games. Games structured in this manner would be ideal to create a competitive scene around (if the particular game allows it), as it's also in the publisher's interest to extend interest in, and the lifetime of the game.
One thing I do wish is for everyone to not assume that a scene like BW's can be easily built...after all there have been NONE like it in the decades that electronic gaming have existed. If the contributions of players such as Ongamenet, MBCGame, or the progaming team sponsors (i.e. the sponsors Kespa represent) were so easy to duplicate, we've have dozens of competitive scenes like BW by now. But we don't have any like that at all.
A possible end result of this mess is great damage to the BW scene, and no scene to rise up to replace it on the same scale. After all, it's been virtually a decade and nothing quite like it has appeared.
|
On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though.
Yea I've seen that and Kespa has also been making similair claims, that its all non-profit and whatever fee is charged will kill off the industri etc. I'm sorry but I have no better argument to this other then I dont beleive in non-profit charity TV-stations that cant pay a 90k fee.
Kespa and the TV-stations dont want to loose control for whatever reason. That is the whole case here. Whether they are actually worried that with the release of SC2, Blizzard do actually want to kill them off or maybe their business model doesnt work out with Blizzard/Gretech in the picture. It could be anything and your guess is as good as mine cause there are probally a lot of hidden intentions that arent revealed to the public.
I do hope for a solution to all this though as BW have at least a couple of years left despite all the setbacks that SC2 and this legal issue have caused. Also SC2 is far away from being polished enough to take over from BW so I think it would be really bad for everyone including Blizzard and Gretech if BW died right now.
|
Can someone please explain to me why YOU think this unreasonable? All I see here is hardcore BW fans crying, and no one eplaining why it's unreasonable...
|
+ Show Spoiler +On November 14 2010 05:02 Zona wrote: As others have said, 1 year is really not stable.
50/50 ownership is something I would never agree to if I were sitting on the other side of the table... All the player houses, the mapmakers, the commentating, the production values and structure supplied by one side...and merely the license supplied by other other side results in this other side getting 50% ownership?
And I don't know what the last point involves, but depending on its implications it could be a huge drag as well.
Years ago Blizzard branding was pretty prominent in broadcasts, but recently it's all faded away. The bad blood might have started earlier, when it seems Kespa tried to get a license but Blizzard wouldn't talk, long before SC2 was announced.
I definitely agree with Captain Peabody's assertion that Activision Blizzard wants control...just look at the new Bnet for more evidence - the foundation of the new Bnet is that everything is controlled by Activision Blizzard's servers. However the desire for control does not necessarily mean they'll work hard to preserve what's been built.
Kespa has had many missteps on the way - but if you examine governing authorities in the births of other sports - including prominent sports like baseball, football, basketball and more - you'll see that they all had problems in their infancy, too. Scandals, player mistreatment, prejudice, and more - and on a larger scale. It's too much to describe in one post, but how Blizzard handled tournaments and such in the past does not make me confident in them as stewards of a pro scene.
As well, it's not necessarily in a game publisher's interest to have a long-lasting pro scene for their games, since they are constantly trying to sell new games. I've mulled over issues for quite awhile and I've come to the conclusion that the time when the game publisher's (or developer's) interests and the competitive scene's interest are aligned is when the publisher benefits from continued interest in the same game. This occurs in games such as free-to-play ad-supported games. Games structured in this manner would be ideal to create a competitive scene around (if the particular game allows it), as it's also in the publisher's interest to extend interest in, and the lifetime of the game.
One thing I do wish is for everyone to not assume that a scene like BW's can be easily built...after all there have been NONE like it in the decades that electronic gaming have existed. If the contributions of players such as Ongamenet, MBCGame, or the progaming team sponsors (i.e. the sponsors Kespa represent) were so easy to duplicate, we've have dozens of competitive scenes like BW by now. But we don't have any like that at all.
A possible end result of this mess is great damage to the BW scene, and no scene to rise up to replace it on the same scale. After all, it's been virtually a decade and nothing quite like it has appeared.
Spoilered due to length, just quoting..
Just like Zona for a quality post (here or in LR threads). I agree with everything.
Again, 1 year term means that they can pull these stunts every year. Whether they will do it, only time will tell, but since this is an industry involving jobs of many people (in the thousands, at least), we really cant have their future being put on the chopping board every year. These people need a peace of mind too, in knowing that their futures are secure (at least for a while).
50/50 ownership sounds unreasonable as well. Considering how much both sides has put into this (10 years worth of players' salary, housing, traveling, food, prize money, organising events, maps innovations, paying Blizz for the copies of their games vs a license).
Edit: typos
|
On November 14 2010 01:02 McDonalds wrote: Well, I've said it before and I'll say it again. In my opinion, the only reason Gretech was given the IP rights by Blizzard is because Blizzard wanted a court battle. They assumed that they would lose in a Korean court if the case ended up being foreigner company versus Korean company, so they turned it into Korean company versus Korean company and are hoping this will help them get the result that they want.
The only problem with this logic is that it's Blizzard suiting MBCGame and OnGameNet, not Gretech. I would have agreed with you, but since Blizzard went ahead and filed lawsuits on those two already it seems like maybe that wasn't the only reason. However I do agree that Blizzard probably did want this to go to court as I think they most definitely want to get Brood War out of the way so that SC2 can "take off." Although maybe the courts will notice Gretech and sympathize with them, it would have made more sense for Gretech to be the one doing the suiting though.
And I don't really blame KeSPA, OGN, or MBCGame for not accepting those terms. It's nice to know exactly what the terms were though.
|
United States238 Posts
On November 14 2010 05:03 Chibalicious wrote: ... your guess is as good as mine cause there are probally a lot of hidden intentions that arent revealed to the public. ...
It's all about the money, both KeSPA and Gretech/Blizzard stands to either gain or lose a lot of money based on how the lawsuit / negotiation goes.
Either way, broadcasters lose. They end up paying anyway, either to KeSPA or Gretech/Blizzard. I would think broadcasters really don't like either parties (sour relations happened when KeSPA first tried to charge the broadcasters way back then), but prefers KeSPA, since at least, they are fully Korean, knows how to keep progaming teams rolling in Korea, and has connections to chaebols (big businesses) and government.
|
Hah. Basically the very last part says that Blizzard will have all rights to control every aspect of BW, just like they control and regulate every bit of sc2. No thanks.
|
The revenue from the sub-licenses will be fairly split between Gretech and the Broadcasting Station Sponsor: All revenue from Sponsorships will be the property of the broadcasting station
These two are completely out-of-line for the amount of money they are requesting for the right to broadcast. I can understand part of that clause for ownership but Blizzard is just going out way too much for IP rights.
Can someone...anyone...please explain to me the significance of IP rights to the point where it has to be defended this harshly? Is Blizzard going to explode because some league is going to continue running and broadcasting tournaments of a game that 10+ years old? I don't understand the why other than "Oh lets crush this league so we can make even more money off of it". As I see it, StarCraft 2 was a huge success to them regardless of the StarLeague, MSL, and ProLeague circuits.
|
+ Show Spoiler +On November 14 2010 05:02 Zona wrote: As others have said, 1 year is really not stable.
50/50 ownership is something I would never agree to if I were sitting on the other side of the table... All the player houses, the mapmakers, the commentating, the production values and structure supplied by one side...and merely the license supplied by other other side results in this other side getting 50% ownership?
And I don't know what the last point involves, but depending on its implications it could be a huge drag as well.
Years ago Blizzard branding was pretty prominent in broadcasts, but recently it's all faded away. The bad blood might have started earlier, when it seems Kespa tried to get a license but Blizzard wouldn't talk, long before SC2 was announced.
I definitely agree with Captain Peabody's assertion that Activision Blizzard wants control...just look at the new Bnet for more evidence - the foundation of the new Bnet is that everything is controlled by Activision Blizzard's servers. However the desire for control does not necessarily mean they'll work hard to preserve what's been built.
Kespa has had many missteps on the way - but if you examine governing authorities in the births of other sports - including prominent sports like baseball, football, basketball and more - you'll see that they all had problems in their infancy, too. Scandals, player mistreatment, prejudice, and more - and on a larger scale. It's too much to describe in one post, but how Blizzard handled tournaments and such in the past does not make me confident in them as stewards of a pro scene.
As well, it's not necessarily in a game publisher's interest to have a long-lasting pro scene for their games, since they are constantly trying to sell new games. I've mulled over issues for quite awhile and I've come to the conclusion that the time when the game publisher's (or developer's) interests and the competitive scene's interest are aligned is when the publisher benefits from continued interest in the same game. This occurs in games such as free-to-play ad-supported games. Games structured in this manner would be ideal to create a competitive scene around (if the particular game allows it), as it's also in the publisher's interest to extend interest in, and the lifetime of the game.
One thing I do wish is for everyone to not assume that a scene like BW's can be easily built...after all there have been NONE like it in the decades that electronic gaming have existed. If the contributions of players such as Ongamenet, MBCGame, or the progaming team sponsors (i.e. the sponsors Kespa represent) were so easy to duplicate, we've have dozens of competitive scenes like BW by now. But we don't have any like that at all.
A possible end result of this mess is great damage to the BW scene, and no scene to rise up to replace it on the same scale. After all, it's been virtually a decade and nothing quite like it has appeared.
Zona, thanks for your efforts in making such a well-done post; I could not have said it better myself! Indeed, there is just too much corporate meddling in this and I do fear for the survival of BW. Like you said, there will never be another proscene like BW in Korea ever for a long time to come, not with its huge depth, and I fail to have any confidence in the thought that Blizzard can hope to sustain all that with good intentions. =\
|
On November 14 2010 05:24 Neo7 wrote: The revenue from the sub-licenses will be fairly split between Gretech and the Broadcasting Station Sponsor: All revenue from Sponsorships will be the property of the broadcasting station
These two are completely out-of-line for the amount of money they are requesting for the right to broadcast. I can understand part of that clause for ownership but Blizzard is just going out way too much for IP rights.
Can someone...anyone...please explain to me the significance of IP rights to the point where it has to be defended this harshly? Is Blizzard going to explode because some league is going to continue running and broadcasting tournaments of a game that 10+ years old? I don't understand the why other than "Oh lets crush this league so we can make even more money off of it". As I see it, StarCraft 2 was a huge success to them regardless of the StarLeague, MSL, and ProLeague circuits.
StarCraft 2 was very successful and is still being sold decently well. But the thing is, it didn't sell 11 million copies like Brood War did. Why settle for a lot of money when, if Blizzard can get rid of Brood War and have SC2 take off in South Korea, they can make a huge shit ton of money?
I'm not trying to say that KeSPA is sparkling clean or anything, both KeSPA and Blizzard are in this for monetary gain. But the difference is that if KeSPA wins we could easily see Brood War continue for another decade imo, if Blizzard wins we'll soon see the death of Brood War as we know it.
This is all opinion based, but I think Blizzard has done a good job of reinforcing my opinion. Especially with the terms offered by Gretech (which probably were influenced by Blizz).
|
I'd have to say that Activision/Blizzard have once again shown that they value money now over money in the future. No one has ever owned a sport, so why do they think that they can get away with that now? This game should have been huge in Korea, but Blizzard screwed it up.
|
KeSPA has a very child-like attitude when things don't go their way and I've seen it throw some ugly fits that were just wrong. Even so, it's not going to kill Blizzard to let them continue on much less harsh terms. I don't see Namco throwing a hissy fit over "IP Rights" for Tekken 6 in MBCGame's Tekken Crash tournaments and Namco is doing strong as ever.
|
United States238 Posts
On November 14 2010 05:31 Neo7 wrote: KeSPA has a very child-like attitude when things don't go their way and I've seen it throw some ugly fits that were just wrong. Even so, it's not going to kill Blizzard to let them continue on much less harsh terms. I don't see Namco throwing a hissy fit over "IP Rights" for Tekken 6 in MBCGame's Tekken Crash tournaments and Namco is doing strong as ever.
I'm sure Namco would have few words to say if MBCGame suddenly decided to say "Tekken's copyright doesn't exist. No one owns it. Now we're going to make money from it, and we are going to use Tekken in whatever way we want to use it. Thanks."
|
thats alot of money to pay for advertising the game for them
|
The length should be longer. Otherwise it seems pretty reasonable.
|
Should definitely be more years, or x number of season/starleagues IMO.
Does anyone know how much MBC game and OGN make. Or know how much they pay Kespa/sponsors for their current license?, I hear alot about how it is too expensive yet no evidence to support it...
The bottom line is that Blizzard has nothing to lose, they don't make any money of off BW anyway, if it does die, it is no skin off their back. They can hold here as long as they want.
|
To me it seems like alot of people come to a conclusion in this without knowing background information or knowing how this kind of negotiations usually go. I personally find it very hard to say whether the terms are unrealistic or not. It would probably require someone who has at least some knowledge over this kind of contract to give more insight into why certain are in it etc.
|
On November 14 2010 02:41 whoseline wrote: i have a question:
does ogn/mbc currently give broadcasting fees to kespa?
if so, how much? Yes, and it makes sense too. All the sponsors pay for their teams/salaries/outfitting/housing/etc. As for revenues, MBC and OGN are the only ones that draw any (in the form of ads/viewership) while all the other sponsors do not. So they pay a part of said revenue back to fund the leagues.
|
It's my uninformed guess that this contract is designed to give blizzard/gretch an unfair negotiating advantage after the contract, so that certain smaller points that would be incredibly convenient for ogn/mbc in their success with their leagues must be seperately approved by blizzard, like for example time slots, and blizzard could be making this contract seem more generous than it really is.
|
Sometimes I wish there would come along an open source 2D RTS that gets embraced by the gamers so that we don't have to deal with these dinosaurs and their quest for world domination. You heard it here first.
|
9069 Posts
the terms dont really matter, even if we ignore them all for a second the contract is for only one bloody year - thats laughable. It pretty much means OGN/MBC or KeSPa for that matter are in no way in control of their own production, they cant make longterm plans or even say where the companies will go in just a year. What Blizzard is saying is like "we will allow you to do your shit for just one year, go figure", its completely retarded - imagine if Microsoft could pull out the same thing for example "hey blizzard, SC2 will run on windows for just one year, then we will talk again"... this contract is so fucking in your face, its completely out of my mind how someone could think of one year long period for smth like that.
If Blizzard are so confident, they should just sell the rights of BW for 10 or so years for the price of 20p and watch how their magnificent new creation, SC2, replaces the old lady.
Edit 2: the whole thing doesnt really look like "final offer". Its more like the original intentions of Blizzard/Gretech.
|
Lol at SC2 stops running in Windows next year.. How could i have not think of that xD
Anyhow, yea 1 year is pretty ridiculous.. Not to mention the part where you must be Blizz's approval whenever you wanna touch SC.. If Ksepa sign this it is like a death sentence..
@ people who said: "lol noobs who speculate w/o evidence that Blizz is trying to kill blah blah blah"
Whether or not they will kill is a separate matter. Signing off to another person the rights to kill you (pro-scene) at any given moment is suicide. All the more so if guy in question have good reasons to want you dead (killing off competitors to make up for the underwhelming GSL2 finals). If Kespa signs this here, imo theres no telling what kind of hell they ll be in for in the future.
|
anyone figure out that the 50/50 gretech gets will be donated to charity? Possibly as in gamers.
|
I think the terms are reasonable. The NFL/NBA/FIFA have way more restrictive legalese with their TV broadcasters.
I don't know what it is in Korea, but the US has tons of "good faith" clauses or such in contract negotiations. If this happened here, the broadcasters can agree to the one year term and Gretech/Blizzard just can't materially change the contract for the next year without justification. Does anyone know if Korea has estoppel?
And I think it's unreasonable for people to claim how successful BW is in Korea then turn around and make the argument that nobody makes any money out of it. If the progamers are significantly underpaid, Kespa is a non-profit and the broadcasters aren't making any money out of it, why does this industry even exist in the first place? The fact that it's been existing for 10 years mean that at least one of those things must not be true. Somebody must be financially benefiting from it.
|
People seem to assume that after the first year Blizzard would require some outrageous terms. It's not in their best interest. They want to make money and asking for the biggest fee the stations are willing to pay is in their best interest.
Unions and employers often make contracts for one year and people around the world are still working.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 07:30 Lokian wrote: anyone figure out that the 50/50 gretech gets will be donated to charity? Possibly as in gamers. How can you possibly consider that a charity? IMO, they should also set their money demands really low, and ask for less than 50% of the content. This would give the other side some room for breathing, and allow for trust building from here on out. Making this a "final" offer, especially considering you want the ginormous sum of 540k per year from both combined for CHARITY, of all things, seems like a huge dick move. Give them something they want, get something you want (recognition of most of your rights, for example).
|
On November 14 2010 07:35 andrewlt wrote: I think the terms are reasonable. The NFL/NBA/FIFA have way more restrictive legalese with their TV broadcasters.
I don't know what it is in Korea, but the US has tons of "good faith" clauses or such in contract negotiations. If this happened here, the broadcasters can agree to the one year term and Gretech/Blizzard just can't materially change the contract for the next year without justification. Does anyone know if Korea has estoppel?
And I think it's unreasonable for people to claim how successful BW is in Korea then turn around and make the argument that nobody makes any money out of it. If the progamers are significantly underpaid, Kespa is a non-profit and the broadcasters aren't making any money out of it, why does this industry even exist in the first place? The fact that it's been existing for 10 years mean that at least one of those things must not be true. Somebody must be financially benefiting from it. Exactly, everybody has to understand that money is what keeps this industry going. There is no way the licence fee could be the issue here, even gomtv manages to come up with around that amount in prize money.
Even the 1 year limit isn't that outrageous considering that esport has only been around for ~10 years.
|
On November 14 2010 05:41 Fadetowhite wrote: thats alot of money to pay for advertising the game for them
Except they're not paying to "advertise for them", they're paying for the right to exploit Blizzard's product in their own business. I wonder who needs this more - a company that just happens to run World of Warcraft with monthly income on the side, or an organization whose sole purpose of existence is leeching off of a game that doesn't belong to them in the first place.
Quite honestly, if this were happening anywhere in Europe or NA, it would be a non-issue and any negotiations would be fairly short and one sided. There is no ground for these guys to negotiate on, so pretty much any terms should be good terms, and $90k is a ridiculously good offer.
Nationwide commercials cost more, yet they claim that an industry that runs pro leagues and teams all backed by corporate sponsors isn't able to generate enough money somewhere to be able to cover a licence for $90k?
It seems that whoever you talk to in Korea, they just push the "no profit" sign in your face and shrug innocently. Well, somebody somewhere down the Korean e-sports rabbit hole is definitely making considerable profit out of it, because that's how the world works. Either that, or all the sponsors aren't churning out nearly enough money for the level of advertising they get through the e-sports scene.
Hello, there's a team with "Samsung" in its name. They got that same name on the shirt of Chelsea Football Club kit (which is alone probably worth more than the entire Korean e-sports), and them alongside several other major corporations backing the BW scene can't ensure that BW broadcasters can cover the petty licence fee and make sure Blizzard's rightful demands are met? See, somehow I don't think so.
I'll even link the football kit deal for you: http://www.footballshirtculture.com/sponsorship/chelsea-and-samsung-keen-to-renew-kit-deal.html
|
Seriously, in any other country this would never go to court and the companies would come to a fast agreement. Blizzard didn't care about kespa til 2007 because that when they started trying to sell the IP to broadcasting companies for a game they own.
Personal feelings aside here are my predictions. There will be a preliminary trial where gretech will try to issue an injunction against the continuation of the league. The judge will issue an injunction to block matches until the trial is over and that is the moment when mbc and ogn will come to their senses. There is nothing wrong with kespa trying to run a starcraft league, otherwise they would have taken down iccup a long time ago, the problem is when kespa tries to sell video broadcasting liscences without approval. I predict a very short negotion with mbc and ogn agreeing to the terms listed in the OP.
EDIT: Took out a part that i wrote when i was angry. Blizzard is a good company and would probably even negotiate for half their amount just to get them to acknowledge IP rights.
|
I don't find the demands particularly taxing, though I'm guessing they never were. This whole 4~ year battle has just been a pissing contest between a large corporation who want to cash in on their golden egg, which they left in another gooses nest for 7 years, and a group of large corporations all sticking their heads in the sand while refusing to change their business model built on someone elses property.
Whoever wins, we lose. Neither company is looking for a more progressive model of Esports and both groups are looking out for their own interests. Which is actually a completely understandable stance for both parties.
|
1 year is way too short, and complete control over the starleague is bullshit. There's no way ogn/mbc will agree on this term.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 08:07 darmousseh wrote: I hope gretech wins and then changes the terms to 200,000,000 won per season. Seriously, in any other country this would never go to court and the companies would come to a fast agreement. Blizzard didn't care about kespa til 2007 because that when they started trying to sell the IP to broadcasting companies for a game they own.
Personal feelings aside here are my predictions. There will be a preliminary trial where gretech will try to issue an injunction against the continuation of the league. The judge will issue an injunction to block matches until the trial is over and that is the moment when mbc and ogn will come to their senses. There is nothing wrong with kespa trying to run a starcraft league, otherwise they would have taken down iccup a long time ago, the problem is when kespa tries to sell video broadcasting liscences without approval. I predict a very short negotion with mbc and ogn agreeing to the terms listed in the OP.
If it were that way, KeSPA would have changed the name of the tax asked from Broadcasting companies, it would be that simple. Blizzard wants a lot more and also asks for a lot more. If this continues, why wouldn't they want to get rid of ICCup next after they merge SC1 with B.net 2? B.net 2 is excellent for advertising all sorts of junk, earning its owner money.
|
Hah, I laugh at you people stating that 1 year is unreasonable. First of all, these are the terms and conditions to use for Blizzard's games/IP to the parties that haven't been working along well together. You have to start negotiating in small steps and somewhere to build a foundation of a good relationship, then you can build better terms and conditions.
IF something bad were to happen to either party when the contract is more than one year, then that party will have to wait longer until the contract ends to change the terms. This offer is just to see if it can work, and if not, then maybe make a better one. The main issue they're striving for is to build a good relationship and negotiations now in small steps, instead of gambling what they have now for many years.
|
On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though.
Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ?
No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game.
To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene.
|
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!! - 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created. - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. - And many other smaller things... Actually SC2 players and mapmakers are victims of Blizz's greed too : The EULA states that every game they play belong to Blizz, every maps they make belongs to Blizz, and every broastcasts/vods they make belong to Blizz. Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that). Battle.Net 2.0 are created with the ultimate purpose to control every people who play the game, every mapmakers who create map for the game, and every tournaments of the game. ALL BELONGS TO THEM. SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that). We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that).
I'm not going to say you are wrong, because neither of us know. In fact, you are probably right. But I do find it how you take everything and just put a worse case scenario to it. Example:
1) 1 Year Duration = END INDUSTRY WHENEVER THEY WANT
Really? Do you really think that one day, they will wake up and say "Well, this is at the very least not profitable (aka they don't get a return). Let us just make sure none of these tournaments run, so we can make sure we kill our company's reputation and kill off any free advertising and long-term basis for our game". Like, you guys do realize its impossible to put Blizzard as the evil money-making bastards, and say they don't want E-sports to succeed, right? They very much want it to succeed. Like WoW, it would be awesome to have a constant revenue without having to rely on game sales.
2) 50/50 split --> Players/map makers get screwed
Well, if they can't even agree on a 50/50, do you think they will agree to a 33/33/33? Players/map makers never even got rights over "what they created" back in BW, so whats the big deal now? I don't see how the introduction of SC2 and the oppression of KESPA does anything BUT give players more freedom and rights over their "content".
"Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that)."
More like, they reserve the right to terminate a players account if they are cheating, which they really didn't have the ability to do before. Have you heard of a case where Blizzard randomly decided to terminate a players account? No. Have you heard of stories where accounts got banned for cheating? Yes. Is this good? Yes. Are you an idiot? Probably.
3) Everything must be approved by Blizzard --> everyone is SLAVES
Holy shit this is the holy grail of stupid. Really? Actually I'm going to quote your statement just because.
"Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company."
Yes, needing your tournaments approved will mean that EVERYONE IN THE INDUSTRY ARE YOUR SLAVES. This is probably so they can keep track of all the tournaments being broadcasted. I can see this being important to them, as these tournaments represent Blizzard and their games, so its pretty important that they can make sure all tournaments are up to par. Or so they can enslave humans in the e-sports industry.
4) Battle.net = CONTROL
Yeah, they get to control pretty much everything. For example, removing/adding ladder maps as they create them. Also, stop cheating players from playing ladder and the ability to clear their ladder stats. OR THEY CAN RANDOMLY BAN ALL THEIR PLAYERS FOR NO REASON. I don't see the logic. Yes they do have the ability to control things very strongly, which is scary. But everything that is in your benefit as a player, is also in their benefit. I don't get it, yo.
5) If the creators don't give up on their game and give it up to the community, e-sports won't mature.
Opposite. The GSL has been a smash hit, MLG has been a smash hit, both not possible without Blizzards help. I don't see why their game needs to be "liberated"? Its actually doing perfectly fine right now. In fact, SC2 has been the defibrillator to e-sports in the world outside Korea. You are actually NOT allowed to make the argument for e-sports and for BW. If you go up to a business man and say "I'll give you a trillion dollars if you make e-sports successful", he'll say okay, kill BW and go full force on SC2. BW will never ever be a smashing hit in Europe or North America. If your idea of a successful e-sport is watching Koreans duke it out at odd hours, then I don't know what to say.
Sounds like you are bitter that more people like SC2 than BW, and is getting a lot of support from everyone and everywhere. Regardless, Blizzard said they want to see both BW and SC2 to succeed, so I don't see why this is even an issue. If I was a business, and I had to decide between one successful product or two, the choice is obvious. If its doable, they will try to do it.
|
this is non-sense: # Contest License Fees: 1 won per year - this can be removed this is joke so they have argument we want 1 won only # Broadcasting License Fees: 100,000,000 won per season (up to 3 seasons a year) this license fee is ok if others things bellow are removed... # Length: One Year # Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard. - this is just way too much.... You either pay license for broadcast right or give 50% ownership both is just nonsense # Logo and Branding: The Starcraft: Broodwar logo and Blizzard's logo must be clearly visible in the stage, the set, and in broadcasted material - if there is no license fee this is good but 1st you want to get paid then you want free ad... not good way to make business with people that made blizzard so popular in korea and worldwide # IP rights: Every license needs a clause acknowledging Blizzard for creating the game and for the ownership of the IP. # Sub-license: Gretech will have the rights to approve all sub-license contracts. # The revenue from the sub-licenses will be fairly split between Gretech and the Broadcasting Station. I won't comment this becouse I don't realy understand what they mean by sub-license # Sponsor: All revenue from Sponsorships will be the property of the broadcasting station - Why ? This don't make sense lets split 33 broadcasting station/33 greetech/33 blizard(sarcasm) # Approval: Whenever you use the Intellectual Property rights, you need approval from Blizzard and Gretech I still don't see how broadcasting someone playing a game require the game developer to allow it ? I want to see how in court greetech will prove that broadcasting a game hurt IP right owner, is it reducing their game sales, is it forcing people to not play or buy the game becouse they prefer to watch pros ? I'm really pissed off at blizzard and greetec for this.I realy hope they bankrupt and are forced to pay to every single pro sc player money for making their game popular.
|
One thing people have to realize is that if Blizzard does lose this and cannot benefit at all by making SC2 a game for esports, is then why would they put resources towards making it an esport game?
Why would any company in the future make a game that is going to be supported well enough with infrastructure, patching, balance, etc to be an esport if they know they won't make any money off of it? It would not make sense for them to do so.
Blizzard deserves to make some money of SC2 and SC:BW being an esport. The question should be how to split that and who deserves what. Kespa seems to be taking the stance that blizzard deserves nothing for making SC:BW. If that's the case, why should blizzard bother making SC2 into a game good enough to be the next big esport?
|
I think the terms are reasonable. Anyone who thinks otherwise clearly hasn't seen a broadcasting contract and are just fueled by the anti-Blizzard sentiment. 1 year is a trial to see if it works and they can trust each other.
Also, ^ mprs is right, you guys are taking things to extreme with conspiracy theories of the worst possible outcomes when it's highly unlikely it'll go that way. Having 2 games running on TV is better than 1. I'll repeat, if it's doable, they will try to do it.
That's about all I've got to say on the subject.
|
Agreed, completely unreasonable terms. Fucking Blizzard...I used to be a fan
|
On November 14 2010 09:24 Legace wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ? No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game. To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene.
Yes, but to MBC, 100 million won x 3 seasons is asking for 30,000 dollars from a hobo. They've stated they only break even from broadcasting BW.
There is no doubt why MBC didn't accept the offer. At worst, if MBC gets sued, they can't broadcast proleague. Okay, well atleast they don't lose money this way. However, if MBC does decide to pay the 300 million won per year, along with everything else, they lose pretty much, 300 million won per year. Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property.
|
it's very simple to me from seeing reactions on these boards what the camps are.
The BW fanatics, they don't care about justice, they don't care what is right, they just want their leagues to continue and for them to keep getting their dose of BW. Nothing wrong with that, completely understandable, i wake up at 6 am to watch proleague, but you are being totally subjective. You cannot posibly really believe these terms from gretech are somehow abusive in any kind, unless you really dont know how things work in the world. I mean arguing about the 1 year duration by saying that Blizzard can kill the game whenever and they can raise the money if things go well... WELL DUH, ofc that in any bussiness, if things go well the price goes up, if they go bad, price goes down. Its not like when you go rent a condo you are upset if they dont rent it to you for 10 years, or if after 1 year of contract they raise the rent if the condo market sees a high. 1 year is a good time to start a working relation based on trust, and if things go well, i see no reason for Blizzard not to renew it for another year and so on.
There was a great post above, someone discussed the sillyness of actually thinking huge companies like Samsung, Telecom, CJ, actually not gaining anything from the esports scene, being "non profit". That is boloney, they win allot, they dont keep the scene running from the kindness of their hearts or "for the fans".
If Kespa and the broadcasting stations want to keep esports going, there is nothing on that contract that is a "kill deal". Everything is reasonable, from the duration, to the cost, to the acknowledgement of the ip rights, to the sublicensing money sharing.
|
On November 14 2010 10:00 renzy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 09:24 Legace wrote:On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ? No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game. To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene. Yes, but to MBC, 100 million won x 3 seasons is asking for 30,000 dollars from a hobo. They've stated they only break even from broadcasting BW. There is no doubt why MBC didn't accept the offer. At worst, if MBC gets sued, they can't broadcast proleague. Okay, well atleast they don't lose money this way. However, if MBC does decide to pay the 300 million won per year, along with everything else, they lose pretty much, 300 million won per year. Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property.
they stated ? What costs does mbc have of running their starleague ? Because 300 million would be for 3 seasons of starleague, proleague would be 50k since ogn would pay half i suppose. So they have sponsors that give out the actual cash prizes. What are the operational costs of MBC ? Getting casters, booths, having a place where matches happen, and getting some k pop pussy to sing at the start of the show. They have like a shitload of commercials during those , because surely their proleague and starleague broadcasts are the ones that get the highest ratings, so selling air time should be easiest here. Howcome they dont break even ? They run a bad management if they dont make money off this free stuff, they should move on to something that can work for them if they hardly break even with sc. /sarcasm
|
On November 14 2010 09:45 Lunares wrote: One thing people have to realize is that if Blizzard does lose this and cannot benefit at all by making SC2 a game for esports, is then why would they put resources towards making it an esport game?
Why would any company in the future make a game that is going to be supported well enough with infrastructure, patching, balance, etc to be an esport if they know they won't make any money off of it? It would not make sense for them to do so.
Blizzard deserves to make some money of SC2 and SC:BW being an esport. The question should be how to split that and who deserves what. Kespa seems to be taking the stance that blizzard deserves nothing for making SC:BW. If that's the case, why should blizzard bother making SC2 into a game good enough to be the next big esport? Well, think about this, how many current e-sports games were released with that in mind? Blizzard pushed for SC2 to be an e-sport right at the start, capitalizing on BW's success. DotA grew to become an e-sport, as did CS, WoW, TF2, CoD4..
Basically, the difference here is that Blizzard designed SC2 with e-sports in mind, whereas many other successful games didn't have that; they just grew up through the community.
Also, Blizzard had 0 effort towards what BW became today, which is why many TLers are against them. They stopped b.net ladder like 6-7 years ago, they stopped trying to patch hacks, they stopped releasing new maps and patches. They did NOTHING to develop the game into what we know today AND they constantly say "We will continue to support BW."
|
These are very reasonable terms
|
hmm
User was warned for this post
|
On November 14 2010 10:01 ptz wrote: it's very simple to me from seeing reactions on these boards what the camps are.
The BW fanatics, they don't care about justice, they don't care what is right, they just want their leagues to continue and for them to keep getting their dose of BW. Nothing wrong with that, completely understandable, i wake up at 6 am to watch proleague, but you are being totally subjective. You cannot posibly really believe these terms from gretech are somehow abusive in any kind, unless you really dont know how things work in the world. I mean arguing about the 1 year duration by saying that Blizzard can kill the game whenever and they can raise the money if things go well... WELL DUH, ofc that in any bussiness, if things go well the price goes up, if they go bad, price goes down. Its not like when you go rent a condo you are upset if they dont rent it to you for 10 years, or if after 1 year of contract they raise the rent if the condo market sees a high. 1 year is a good time to start a working relation based on trust, and if things go well, i see no reason for Blizzard not to renew it for another year and so on.
There was a great post above, someone discussed the sillyness of actually thinking huge companies like Samsung, Telecom, CJ, actually not gaining anything from the esports scene, being "non profit". That is boloney, they win allot, they dont keep the scene running from the kindness of their hearts or "for the fans".
If Kespa and the broadcasting stations want to keep esports going, there is nothing on that contract that is a "kill deal". Everything is reasonable, from the duration, to the cost, to the acknowledgement of the ip rights, to the sublicensing money sharing.
Sorry to tell you but the guy who knows nothing about RL business is you, broadcasting fees are usually paid for a medium term contract, one year? you got to kidding me, if you dont realize it has nothing to do with broadcasting fees , it is about control, let me explain it to you (i am not condemning Blizz because i would do the same), the main profit of Blizzard in this case is for selling games, SC2 has all this hype and sold very well because is the "sucessor" of SC and that recognition comes from being the only RTS game with a real proscene, any obstacle for Blizzard to assure that kind of recognition for SC2 doesnt look good for its profits, while BW continues kicking ass in the e-sports scene, SC2 will be only a secondary game (lets face it, that game right now is a normal good game but very far from BW, why dou you think that Blizzard marketing is focused in a big money push?), do you really think that people will buy SC3 or whatever in those big amounts if BW remains the king of e-sports?, NOT, because gamers are going to have the feeling that SC2 just was a step backwards from BW, it is all about business and long term money, and no about fans or whatever, but the main reason of the existence of Kespa, and MBC and OGN is BW (for money or recognition), the main reason of Blizzard is selling big amounts of its new games, please think and tell me who are the fans of BW going to support?, once Broadcasters and Kespa give total control to Blizzard, BW proscene wont last more than 2 years, that is for sure.
|
T.O.P.
Hong Kong4685 Posts
On November 14 2010 02:12 Iplaythings wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. They demand that for one year. They arent some company which makes $ but a nonprofit organization, how can you ask that much of someone who doesnt even have the money, the only solution is cutting the prize pool or something, which will affect the players They dont even purchase the rights to be alone, they dont even keep their content or anything I fail to see how the demands ARENT unreasonable If OGN and MBCgame agrees to these demands, then they have effectively acknowledged that Blizzard owns the ip rights to starcraft broadcasts and they must get Blizzard's approval every time they want to broadcast something starcraft. That's a big problem because Gretech is only offering a 1 year contract. There's no stopping Gretech from demanding (like someone earlier said) OGN and MBCGame's CEO's daughter and 1,000,000,000 won next year. If OGN and MBCgame signs this, bw will die in one year.
|
Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so.
|
These terms are ridiculous. Blizzard and Gretech demand an absurd amount of money from a scene that they did jack shit to help create. Yes they created the game. But so what? People PAID MONEY to get it! Why then should blizzard have the rights to demand additional money to broadcast the game? I could understand if they released a perfectly balanced game with professional maps and constant support and kespa just ripped it off to "make money". However this is completely not the case. Blizzard has done virtually nothing for BW esports. Not to mention the korean BW scene has given blizzard so much free advertising over the years. How else do you think starcraft has sold so many copies in korea? Both parties were benefiting until Blizzard decided to get greedy.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so.
But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose.
And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it.
EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen.
|
United States4053 Posts
Milkis, you might want to link this excellent post you made at the top of your OP, just to make sure this doesn't devolve into another polarized and/or uninformed flame war.
|
if MBC/OGN agree to the terms, all they are doing is establishing the broadcasting license fees and that MBC/OGN will recognize Blizzard's IP.
MBC/OGN will still have to go through Blizzard/Gretech to gain approval for when they want to use Blizzard's IP which is a huge issue in my opinion. while I doubt Blizzard has much issue with whatever content OGN/MBC creates for Proleague, Starleague, and whatever else they broadcast, I believe Blizzard/Gretech will attempt to control BW broadcast times so that they do not clash with SC2 GSL times.
this has huge implications because Blizzard/Gretech will want to run SC2 GSL during prime hours, thus putting BW broadcast times at less than ideal times affecting revenue streams and profits generated by BW. perhaps they'll find a way to all schedule it out so that every league gets their desired times/dates, but I seriously doubt it.
one year contract length also sucks
|
On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen.
What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games.
Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA?
|
United States4053 Posts
On November 14 2010 11:45 toadstool wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen. What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games. Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA? I've seen a lot of polarization similar to what's happening in these threads, but since I don't actually read Korean, I don't have the full picture. I won't hesitate to say that there are many in Korea who despise kespa though.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 11:45 toadstool wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen. What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games. Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA?
Exactly my point. Everyone knows of the possibility, yet are possibly way too stunned from the success of the new big thing to care about the old leagues that gave them so much entertainment. They have not seen Blizzard fuck up yet, and I'm wondering what will happen if they do.
I'm also wondering if sayings like "in a few years, SC2 will be as deep as BW" will be enough if they do see BW die in a few months. Taking something for granted and losing it for years must be horrible.
|
I think if we see BW as just a video game, the terms are more than reasonable. 100m won is a token sum for Blizzard although it might not be the case for MBC/OGN. However, It makes perfect sense that a game creator will have the IP right to a game and the prerogative to control what to do with it. As others have pointed out, if KESPA suddenly claims that Super Mario is public property and does not recognize Nintendo as its owner, then Nintendo will probably go apeshit and sue.
Problem is, BW is more than just a video game but a national sport. If we see it from that pov then there are some points that are probably contentious as it means Blizzard might have too much a say in something that has grown in Korean culture despite Blizzard not really doing anything to promote it.
•Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard. •Approval: Whenever you use the Intellectual Property rights, you need approval from Blizzard and Gretech
The success of Esports in Korea cannot be attributed to Blizzard and thus if we see BW as a culture and Esports, i can understand those who find Blizzard's final offer very limiting and damaging to BW especially the 2 clauses quoted above.
But to be honest, i think if this is anywhere but Korea , Blizzard has this easily. Bureaucracy in Korea is different though and i think foreign bias might work against Blizzard here if the court can be convinced that GRETECH is acting as a Blizzard puppet.
|
On November 14 2010 10:07 ptz wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 10:00 renzy wrote:On November 14 2010 09:24 Legace wrote:On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ? No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game. To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene. Yes, but to MBC, 100 million won x 3 seasons is asking for 30,000 dollars from a hobo. They've stated they only break even from broadcasting BW. There is no doubt why MBC didn't accept the offer. At worst, if MBC gets sued, they can't broadcast proleague. Okay, well atleast they don't lose money this way. However, if MBC does decide to pay the 300 million won per year, along with everything else, they lose pretty much, 300 million won per year. Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property. they stated ? What costs does mbc have of running their starleague ? Because 300 million would be for 3 seasons of starleague, proleague would be 50k since ogn would pay half i suppose. So they have sponsors that give out the actual cash prizes. What are the operational costs of MBC ? Getting casters, booths, having a place where matches happen, and getting some k pop pussy to sing at the start of the show. They have like a shitload of commercials during those , because surely their proleague and starleague broadcasts are the ones that get the highest ratings, so selling air time should be easiest here. Howcome they dont break even ? They run a bad management if they dont make money off this free stuff, they should move on to something that can work for them if they hardly break even with sc. /sarcasm
Yes, they stated. I'll link you a thread that is 3 posts above. MBCgame makes no money off of broadcasting BW, unless you think MBC's CEO is bsing.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136
Edit: Oops, posted in the quote.
|
On November 14 2010 12:26 renzy wrote:unless you think MBC's CEO is bsing. Just wanted to note that it wasn't the CEO, it was the Business Director for MBC Plus Media
|
5003 Posts
On November 14 2010 11:45 toadstool wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen. What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games. Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA?
Korean netizens hardly reflect actual Korean fans.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 12:57 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:45 toadstool wrote:On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen. What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games. Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA? Korean netizens hardly reflect actual Korean fans. Could you elaborate? It comes up often enough to be important.
|
5003 Posts
On November 14 2010 13:00 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 12:57 Milkis wrote:On November 14 2010 11:45 toadstool wrote:On November 14 2010 11:25 mustaju wrote:On November 14 2010 11:17 toadstool wrote: Imagine how bad everyone in Korea would react if Blizzard pulls the plug on OGN/MBC/Proleague. It would be almost like suicide. Even I would hate Blizzard if they did something like that.
Would they do it? Would they create ultra bad publicity for themselves? It's like negative advertising.
Somehow I don't think so. But they didn't do it, did they? It was the broadcasting studios/KeSPA themselves who did it. That's what is being argued now, that's what is being argued later by the supporters. Everything but the actual thing has already been done, and you don't see mass demonstrations in front of the Ministry of Culture, I suppose. And after it's dead, I really think no-one other than the ones already complaining will care enough to make a difference. It's not enough to prevent Blizzard supporters from buying their games or playing on B.net 2. And Blizzard know it. EDIT: Please do note, that I did not argue anyone's intentions, just the ability of Blizzard to distance itself if this would happen. What about the negative reactions from the Korean fans? Korea is a huge target market for Blizzard games. Although judging from what little I've gathered from reading these threads, the Korean fans have more trust in Blizzard than KESPA? Korean netizens hardly reflect actual Korean fans. Could you elaborate? It comes up often enough to be important.
Most Korean fans are the people who just simply watch the game and enjoy the game whenever they can.
The negative reactions in Korea is heavily exaggerated. I think a lot of these netizens view these events as another reason to trash kespa and honestly that's probably the only reason why there's negative comments -- it has nothing to do with blizzard but rather koreans finding another reason to dislike kespa
|
I dont think that OGN and MBC will agree with these kinda terms honnestly...
|
The fee is nothing, anyone saying it's unreasonable pretty much doesn't know what they're talking about lol
The only thing that is a bit unreasonable is the 1 year term, but that's obviously to test the waters so it's understandable.
Will OGN and MBC agree to this though? Doubt it.
|
On November 14 2010 14:34 Vista wrote: The fee is nothing, anyone saying it's unreasonable pretty much doesn't know what they're talking about lol
The only thing that is a bit unreasonable is the 1 year term, but that's obviously to test the waters so it's understandable.
Will OGN and MBC agree to this though? Doubt it.
the NFL and all americans companies negotiate for rights to the superbowl and other events on a yearly basis for the most part. No difference here.
|
5003 Posts
On November 14 2010 14:41 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 14:34 Vista wrote: The fee is nothing, anyone saying it's unreasonable pretty much doesn't know what they're talking about lol
The only thing that is a bit unreasonable is the 1 year term, but that's obviously to test the waters so it's understandable.
Will OGN and MBC agree to this though? Doubt it. the NFL and all americans companies negotiate for rights to the superbowl and other events on a yearly basis for the most part. No difference here.
Except the broadcasting stations didn't create the leagues in this case. OGN and MBC are directly responsible for creating the e-sports scene. In fact, they created it and ran it themselves before KeSPA took control of the scene.
Also NFL and "all other american companies" actually are directly involved in making the scene happen.
Don't make comparisons that attempt to trivialize the situation at hand, much like how much you guys rage whenever someone makes an IP rights comparison.
|
On November 14 2010 11:08 T.O.P. wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 02:12 Iplaythings wrote:On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. They demand that for one year. They arent some company which makes $ but a nonprofit organization, how can you ask that much of someone who doesnt even have the money, the only solution is cutting the prize pool or something, which will affect the players They dont even purchase the rights to be alone, they dont even keep their content or anything I fail to see how the demands ARENT unreasonable If OGN and MBCgame agrees to these demands, then they have effectively acknowledged that Blizzard owns the ip rights to starcraft broadcasts and they must get Blizzard's approval every time they want to broadcast something starcraft. That's a big problem because Gretech is only offering a 1 year contract. There's no stopping Gretech from demanding (like someone earlier said) OGN and MBCGame's CEO's daughter and 1,000,000,000 won next year. If OGN and MBCgame signs this, bw will die in one year.
That's just ignorant. Unless South Korea is a third world country, there are plenty of protections against changing contracts unreasonably. Anybody who raises prices like crazy from one contract to the next is going to be scrutinized like you wouldn't believe.
We don't have to be lawyers but the level of legal ignorance in TL is just crazy. Too many people don't even know the basics of copyright and contract law to make informed comments.
|
On November 14 2010 12:26 renzy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 10:07 ptz wrote:On November 14 2010 10:00 renzy wrote:On November 14 2010 09:24 Legace wrote:On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ? No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game. To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene. Yes, but to MBC, 100 million won x 3 seasons is asking for 30,000 dollars from a hobo. They've stated they only break even from broadcasting BW. There is no doubt why MBC didn't accept the offer. At worst, if MBC gets sued, they can't broadcast proleague. Okay, well atleast they don't lose money this way. However, if MBC does decide to pay the 300 million won per year, along with everything else, they lose pretty much, 300 million won per year. Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property. they stated ? What costs does mbc have of running their starleague ? Because 300 million would be for 3 seasons of starleague, proleague would be 50k since ogn would pay half i suppose. So they have sponsors that give out the actual cash prizes. What are the operational costs of MBC ? Getting casters, booths, having a place where matches happen, and getting some k pop pussy to sing at the start of the show. They have like a shitload of commercials during those , because surely their proleague and starleague broadcasts are the ones that get the highest ratings, so selling air time should be easiest here. Howcome they dont break even ? They run a bad management if they dont make money off this free stuff, they should move on to something that can work for them if they hardly break even with sc. /sarcasm Yes, they stated. I'll link you a thread that is 3 posts above. MBCgame makes no money off of broadcasting BW, unless you think MBC's CEO is bsing. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136Edit: Oops, posted in the quote.
Yeah, that's just BS. If they really are not making any money broadcasting BW, they should just broadcast "I Love Lucy" reruns and infomercials like local stations here in the US do if they have nothing else to broadcast.
|
On November 14 2010 14:41 darmousseh wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 14:34 Vista wrote: The fee is nothing, anyone saying it's unreasonable pretty much doesn't know what they're talking about lol
The only thing that is a bit unreasonable is the 1 year term, but that's obviously to test the waters so it's understandable.
Will OGN and MBC agree to this though? Doubt it. the NFL and all americans companies negotiate for rights to the superbowl and other events on a yearly basis for the most part. No difference here.
Do those "American companies" pay the players, house them, organise the Superbowl, own the stadium? If they do, i think that MBC and OGN would have a thing or two to learn from them, and their willingness to get abused.
On November 14 2010 15:24 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 11:08 T.O.P. wrote:On November 14 2010 02:12 Iplaythings wrote:On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. They demand that for one year. They arent some company which makes $ but a nonprofit organization, how can you ask that much of someone who doesnt even have the money, the only solution is cutting the prize pool or something, which will affect the players They dont even purchase the rights to be alone, they dont even keep their content or anything I fail to see how the demands ARENT unreasonable If OGN and MBCgame agrees to these demands, then they have effectively acknowledged that Blizzard owns the ip rights to starcraft broadcasts and they must get Blizzard's approval every time they want to broadcast something starcraft. That's a big problem because Gretech is only offering a 1 year contract. There's no stopping Gretech from demanding (like someone earlier said) OGN and MBCGame's CEO's daughter and 1,000,000,000 won next year. If OGN and MBCgame signs this, bw will die in one year. That's just ignorant. Unless South Korea is a third world country, there are plenty of protections against changing contracts unreasonably. Anybody who raises prices like crazy from one contract to the next is going to be scrutinized like you wouldn't believe.We don't have to be lawyers but the level of legal ignorance in TL is just crazy. Too many people don't even know the basics of copyright and contract law to make informed comments.
1/ Instead of raising price, they can do many other things to slowly kill off/hamper the scene. Limiting broadcasting time, for example, could hurt BW a lot.. Getting pushed back to early morning, or after midnight, or can only broadcast 1-2 times a week would obviously hurt. Thats just one example, there are WAY many more things Blizz can do to wreck BW if they are given total control
2/ I may not be a law expert but i do know that this case is one without a precedent, so we do not have a definite right/wrong parties here. Also do take note that while talking in high-handed manner may make you feel good, it only serves to decredit your arguments.
|
On November 14 2010 13:48 SoJu.WeRRa wrote: I dont think that OGN and MBC will agree with these kinda terms honnestly... They already rejected these stupid terms which is why it's come down to a court battle now.
|
|
the only problem is the contract term, and basically blizzard can say fuck off after 1 year, rests are just normal formality you will see in any other contracts in business. blizzard created BW so it is theirs, is that wrong?
90k is a pretty good annual salary for a person in US, and thats all.
|
So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP.
|
On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000)
|
On November 14 2010 15:26 andrewlt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 12:26 renzy wrote:On November 14 2010 10:07 ptz wrote:On November 14 2010 10:00 renzy wrote:On November 14 2010 09:24 Legace wrote:On November 14 2010 04:49 ]343[ wrote:On November 14 2010 04:25 Chibalicious wrote: Yes it's just an e-sports but you have to ackknowledge how big SC:BW is in Korea. Compared to other e-sports like SC2 in the rest of the world, compared to counterstrike and other great e-sport, SC:BW in Korea is HUGE. What SC2 players and others often dont realise is how great BW is in Korea. With hundreds, maybe even thousands of paid employees, 2 TV-stations and the sponsors involved 90k is a drop in the water.
SC:BW is a great game and an industry that foreigners often cant even comprehend. Blizzard terms wont kill or hurt any of that. Hmm, have you seen this? http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136MBC actually doesn't make any profits from broadcasting BW... 100 million won is definitely not a small sum. I guess broadcasters should have the Blizzard logo more prominently though. Let's reverse. Is a 100 million won per year a lot of money to Blizzard ? No, anyway you look at it - a 100 million won is, to say the least, pocket money for Blizzard. They probably spend more money on champagne everytime they launch a new game. To Blizzard, there are probably ten more important reason as to why they're doing this rather then just earning a buck or killing off BW. They could have, just as easily, demanded ten times as much money if they effectively wanted to kill off the BW scene. Yes, but to MBC, 100 million won x 3 seasons is asking for 30,000 dollars from a hobo. They've stated they only break even from broadcasting BW. There is no doubt why MBC didn't accept the offer. At worst, if MBC gets sued, they can't broadcast proleague. Okay, well atleast they don't lose money this way. However, if MBC does decide to pay the 300 million won per year, along with everything else, they lose pretty much, 300 million won per year. Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property. they stated ? What costs does mbc have of running their starleague ? Because 300 million would be for 3 seasons of starleague, proleague would be 50k since ogn would pay half i suppose. So they have sponsors that give out the actual cash prizes. What are the operational costs of MBC ? Getting casters, booths, having a place where matches happen, and getting some k pop pussy to sing at the start of the show. They have like a shitload of commercials during those , because surely their proleague and starleague broadcasts are the ones that get the highest ratings, so selling air time should be easiest here. Howcome they dont break even ? They run a bad management if they dont make money off this free stuff, they should move on to something that can work for them if they hardly break even with sc. /sarcasm Yes, they stated. I'll link you a thread that is 3 posts above. MBCgame makes no money off of broadcasting BW, unless you think MBC's CEO is bsing. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=162136Edit: Oops, posted in the quote. Yeah, that's just BS. If they really are not making any money broadcasting BW, they should just broadcast "I Love Lucy" reruns and infomercials like local stations here in the US do if they have nothing else to broadcast.
Your blindness to what constitutes love for e-sports is appalling. The BW proscene was made entirely out of tears, hard work and love, and only in South Korea. Why then would the people involved care about making profits in the first place?
It is not BS, as you so claim. MBC and OGN are two of the biggest tv stations in SK, beside KBS and such. They do not only broadcast BW, but they also broadcast tv shows among other things. Have you even watched their other channels? I for once enjoy watching them myself. Quit your anti-Korean rhetoric, please.
The main reason why the SK BW proscene is so successful after 10 whole years is their love for it, nothing more. Not some hidden agenda of profit-making behind the scenes, but simply reinvesting back into the proscene to help it develop and thrive.
And Blizzard is taking that all away, judging by its latest actions. That is my opinion, and you are free to debate it as you wish.
|
On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000)
You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post?
It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side.
also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793,
On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys."
T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday...
Follow your heart...
|
On November 14 2010 18:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000) You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post? It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side. also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793, Show nested quote +On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys." T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday... Follow your heart... The people are the reason esports grew in Korea. KeSPA is just a group of corporations that saw a potential for profit, stepped in and supported it, on a local level. If esports was truly their goal, they would have supported the GOM classic as it supported a much more global approach to esports.
This is KeSPA's official goal (according to wikipedia): Its official goal is to make e-Sports an official sporting event, and to solidify the commercial position of e-Sports in all sectors.
Note that 2nd part. A group of corporations control KeSPA, and one of their goals is to solidify the commercial position of esports. This is natural, and I am fine with it.
I see nothing in the contract that would limit the growth of esports, and I havent seen a global attempt in esports by anybody but GOMtv so far, even in terms of BW. The ONLY thing that isnt good is the 1 year term, but again... why not sign the term for a year instead of try to fight in court? If things go sour in a year, I am pretty sure that the korean courts would intervene to protect it.
|
Korea (South)1897 Posts
Business is business, but sometimes, the little people get hurt, I'm sure it could have not come to Blizzard suing the broadcasters, but the situation is much more complicated than just IP issues, there are montary issues involved, even if one believes that SCBW and SC2 can co-exsit.
|
On November 14 2010 18:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000) You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post? It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side. also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793, On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys." T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday... Follow your heart... The people are the reason esports grew in Korea. KeSPA is just a group of corporations that saw a potential for profit, stepped in and supported it, on a local level. If esports was truly their goal, they would have supported the GOM classic as it supported a much more global approach to esports. This is KeSPA's official goal (according to wikipedia): Its official goal is to make e-Sports an official sporting event, and to solidify the commercial position of e-Sports in all sectors. Note that 2nd part. A group of corporations control KeSPA, and one of their goals is to solidify the commercial position of esports. This is natural, and I am fine with it. I see nothing in the contract that would limit the growth of esports, and I havent seen a global attempt in esports by anybody but GOMtv so far, even in terms of BW. The ONLY thing that isnt good is the 1 year term, but again... why not sign the term for a year instead of try to fight in court? If things go sour in a year, I am pretty sure that the korean courts would intervene to protect it.
The initial argument of Blizzard fans is that "The broadcasting stations are the reason esports grew in Korea, and Kespa is evil trying to control the broadcasting stations", now that Blizzard is suing the broadcasting stations, and it is clear that both broadcasting stations are siding with Kespa, they say "The people are the reason esports grew in Korea" lol. There would be no esport if OGN didn't try to put a SC match on TV in the first place.
If you already signed that ridiculous contract (or I can say, that "slave contract"), no court will intervene to "protect" you, you accepted it in the first place. If they go to court they still have a chance to win because the Korean gov is siding with Kespa, that's all.
And I loled at Blizzard trying to sue the only 2 television channels that broadcast SC, so that in the future they can only broadcast SC2 via the internet. So much for a "global attempt" when you can't even get your game into the local TV.
|
On November 14 2010 19:11 kamikami wrote: And I loled at Blizzard trying to sue the only 2 television channels that broadcast SC, so that in the future they can only broadcast SC2 via the internet. So much for a "global attempt" when you can't even get your game into the local TV.
I think this is the main point here. If Blizzard/Gretech wins this, we'll never see SC2 in broadcast television in Korea. Starcraft as a "mainstream" e-sport will be over.
|
It's hard to read the logic and made up facts of Kespa supporters without rolling your eyes.
|
On November 14 2010 18:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000) You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post? It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side. also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793, On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys." T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday... Follow your heart... The people are the reason esports grew in Korea. KeSPA is just a group of corporations that saw a potential for profit, stepped in and supported it, on a local level. If esports was truly their goal, they would have supported the GOM classic as it supported a much more global approach to esports. This is KeSPA's official goal (according to wikipedia): Its official goal is to make e-Sports an official sporting event, and to solidify the commercial position of e-Sports in all sectors. Note that 2nd part. A group of corporations control KeSPA, and one of their goals is to solidify the commercial position of esports. This is natural, and I am fine with it. I see nothing in the contract that would limit the growth of esports, and I havent seen a global attempt in esports by anybody but GOMtv so far, even in terms of BW. The ONLY thing that isnt good is the 1 year term, but again... why not sign the term for a year instead of try to fight in court? If things go sour in a year, I am pretty sure that the korean courts would intervene to protect it.
Here you are in another thread bringing back the old Zombie of GOMTV Classic yet again (i feel so trolled replying to this but somehow i (stupidly) cant help it).. In case your memory fails you, i ll try to reiterate the points again.
1/ GOMTV Classic was supported for a few seasons (2-3 depending on how you look at it).. Their own unpopularity brought about their downfall.
2/ In the word Kespa, K stands for Korean, i do not see any sense in complaining that they are not reaching out to Europe and America (in fact, people around the world are watching Proleague and Starleagues just fine, much better than (free) streams from GSL too).
3/Now they did try to reach out to China, since China has a good fanbase as well. If you want them to reach out to ur region, give them fans!! If there are 1 million fans in Antartica, they would likely consider flying there for OSL finals.. Blame ur own (EU, NA) society for shunning gaming the way they do.
Lastly, whatever their goals are, you and i probably have about as good a guess as any other. But facts are they have managed to built a stable professional e-Sport scene, and are the only ones that have managed to do so. (If the recent GSL2 finals were at a level that you can consider it e-Sports, then we will just have to agree to disagree).
|
On November 14 2010 19:11 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000) You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post? It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side. also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793, On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys." T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday... Follow your heart... The people are the reason esports grew in Korea. KeSPA is just a group of corporations that saw a potential for profit, stepped in and supported it, on a local level. If esports was truly their goal, they would have supported the GOM classic as it supported a much more global approach to esports. This is KeSPA's official goal (according to wikipedia): Its official goal is to make e-Sports an official sporting event, and to solidify the commercial position of e-Sports in all sectors. Note that 2nd part. A group of corporations control KeSPA, and one of their goals is to solidify the commercial position of esports. This is natural, and I am fine with it. I see nothing in the contract that would limit the growth of esports, and I havent seen a global attempt in esports by anybody but GOMtv so far, even in terms of BW. The ONLY thing that isnt good is the 1 year term, but again... why not sign the term for a year instead of try to fight in court? If things go sour in a year, I am pretty sure that the korean courts would intervene to protect it. The initial argument of Blizzard fans is that "The broadcasting stations are the reason esports grew in Korea, and Kespa is evil trying to control the broadcasting stations", now that Blizzard is suing the broadcasting stations, and it is clear that both broadcasting stations are siding with Kespa, they say "The people are the reason esports grew in Korea" lol. There would be no esport if OGN didn't try to put a SC match on TV in the first place. If you already signed that ridiculous contract (or I can say, that "slave contract"), no court will intervene to "protect" you, you accepted it in the first place. If they go to court they still have a chance to win because the Korean gov is siding with Kespa, that's all. And I loled at Blizzard trying to sue the only 2 television channels that broadcast SC, so that in the future they can only broadcast SC2 via the internet. So much for a "global attempt" when you can't even get your game into the local TV. KeSPA is not necessarily evil, they are wrong though. They had no right to sell broadcast rights to TV broadcasters when they were previously broadcasting without paying KeSPA. In addition, the fact that if they dont pay then they get no players to broadcast kind of puts a strangle on them, it forces the contract.
Also, a court (particularly the korean courts, given that they should be wanting to protect e-sports) is very likely to intervene and protect you if the contract that appears after this year contract is over turns out to be absurd. As of right now, the korean courts see that gretech/blizzard have given them a reasonable offer that is comparable if not better than their current contract with KeSPA (the only thing that isnt better is the length, but OGN/MBC paid 8 times more 3 years ago for that 3 year contract). I mean, seriously... there is such a thing where a contract is too absurd and a government would step in to protect a national sport.
Last I checked, having an actual global audience is quite a bit more of a global attempt than never having a real global audience and only a local audience via TV (even if that local audience is large, its not global).
|
On November 14 2010 18:55 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:43 IntoTheEmo wrote:On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000) You make it seem that money is the issue here, have you read disciple's post? It's all about control of the e-sports scene they grew; in my opinion, in this case, it would be idiocy if KeSPA did agree to those terms, there is always potential for revenge-killing from the other side. also from http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168346¤tpage=240#4793, On November 13 2010 21:49 Gaius Baltar wrote: Summary of John's speech
He basically encouraged people to follow their hearts if they want to do e-Sports. Even in Korea it is still looked down on by many people who ask, "Why do you play a game as a job? You should grow up." But John says you should ask those people, "Are you truly happy in your job following your dream like I am? Do you have a fan who will make a banner just for you?" He closed by saying, "If you're nervous that you will be all alone if you try to do e-Sports, don't worry. I (John), Dan and Nick will support you. Everyone here at GOM will support you, we love you guys." T_T and look what they are doing to the players/staff in BW. Felt pretty sick reading this yesterday... Follow your heart... The people are the reason esports grew in Korea. KeSPA is just a group of corporations that saw a potential for profit, stepped in and supported it, on a local level. If esports was truly their goal, they would have supported the GOM classic as it supported a much more global approach to esports. This is KeSPA's official goal (according to wikipedia): Its official goal is to make e-Sports an official sporting event, and to solidify the commercial position of e-Sports in all sectors. Note that 2nd part. A group of corporations control KeSPA, and one of their goals is to solidify the commercial position of esports. This is natural, and I am fine with it. I see nothing in the contract that would limit the growth of esports, and I havent seen a global attempt in esports by anybody but GOMtv so far, even in terms of BW. The ONLY thing that isnt good is the 1 year term, but again... why not sign the term for a year instead of try to fight in court? If things go sour in a year, I am pretty sure that the korean courts would intervene to protect it.
Think I disagree with you on this one, while KeSPA did confine BW to Korean TV exclusively, I think having any sort of e-sport broadcasted on TV on TWO channels 24/7 is a huge step towards promoting e-sports. Not to mention the other leagues they started - Tekken, Dungeon Fighter, Sudden Attack, Kart Rider etc. Furthermore, they have experimented expanding BW outside of Korea (Shanghai Korean OSL S2 Finals) and have never stopped any of their progamers from participating in WCG, Blizzcon and other international tournaments.
(To me) it seems like the progamers pulled out of GOM Classic S4 to focus on Proleague/OSL/MSL which is what they are paid to do. There has been speculation that people like Jaedong may have prioritized OSL over GOM to lose to Tempest and EffOrt (he did win two OSLs that year). If KeSPA did not support GOM then, GOM would not have been able to host the STAR Invitational plus Seasons 1 through 3. They also supported MSL in the past.
GOMTV is only internet based media, and while they do have increased numbers of viewers since the GSL started, stirring up trouble with the two major e-sports broadcasting companies is not a good way to get your game across to the public. Ultimately, you'd want SC2 broadcasted on TV so that it is accessible to the general public rather than supporters of the game. Also, have people forgotten that GOMTV initially planned to have no free stream of the first GSL and wanted viewers to pay $20 for live and $30 for VODs per season? Does that show that GOM is trying to promote e-sports to you?
The decision might be simple for you, but faced with conditions like that, I wouldn't want to be in the shoes of whoever's making the decisions in KeSPA.
Edit: Wow do I type slow, about 3 long replies to your post already ><
|
On November 14 2010 19:22 Ocedic wrote: It's hard to read the logic and made up facts of Kespa supporters without rolling your eyes.
I wholeheartedly agree. A lot of dreamers around here trying to give kespa their happy ending when we truly honestly don't know what the hell they are thinking.
It's all about money kids. The world doesn't run on bottle caps. This sort of reminds me when CounterStrike:Source took over Counterstrike 1.6 over in the states when they were running the big tournaments. It was new and it was going to cost money to upgrade your hardware to play it. Everyone knew that and now the same thing is happening over in SK.
When GSL for SC2 came out it didn't surprise me their first sponsor was Intel. The way its taking off I guarantee you'll see more hardware sponsors in the upcoming events. Maybe even for the popular players. Intel throws plenty of money around to gamers for sponsorship. Just embrace the new eSports in SK.. I know I am.
Actually.. didn't BoxeR just receive tons of money from a hardware sponsor just recently? heh.
|
On November 14 2010 18:37 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 18:28 overt wrote: So I think it'd be hilarious if KeSPA wins this case to demand Blizzard pay them every year for promoting their game. It wouldn't be anymore ridiculous than the terms offered in the OP. What is ridiculous about the terms offered in the OP? The only thing resembling ridiculous is the 1 year term, but at this point its not really too bad of an idea if KeSPA dissolves due to idiocy. A cheap 1 year term is probably better than the likely much more expensive possibility of a 3 year term (3 year term for KeSPA was 780,000,000 won, whereas the 1 year term was 130,000,000)
The terms are 100,000,000 won per tournament. MSL and OSL runs around 3 times a year. It works out to cost more. MBC and Kespa both claim that Kespa subsidized part of the production costs too.
Though I wonder if MBC counts managing their team as part of their BW costs.
|
On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: KeSPA is not necessarily evil, they are wrong though. They had no right to sell broadcast rights to TV broadcasters when they were previously broadcasting without paying KeSPA. In addition, the fact that if they dont pay then they get no players to broadcast kind of puts a strangle on them, it forces the contract.
I think you didn't follow the latest news in this issue (search teamliquid). Kespa took the money from OGN/MBC and invested it back to OGN/MBC for their Starleagues, the part of the money that is not invested back it used to maintain/improve Proleague - which is good for OGN/MBC interest because they are the ones who broadcast Proleague too.
That is why OGN/MBC accepted Kespa's offer and not Blizzard's offer, because the terms aren't as ridiculous as Blizzard's. If they are pressured by Kespa they should have sided with Blizzard/Gretech already.
On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Also, a court (particularly the korean courts, given that they should be wanting to protect e-sports) is very likely to intervene and protect you if the contract that appears after this year contract is over turns out to be absurd. As of right now, the korean courts see that gretech/blizzard have given them a reasonable offer that is comparable if not better than their current contract with KeSPA (the only thing that isnt better is the length, but OGN/MBC paid 8 times more 3 years ago for that 3 year contract). I mean, seriously... there is such a thing where a contract is too absurd and a government would step in to protect a national sport.
A contract that gives Blizzard absolute control over the scene is absurd, and as you said, the gov is likely to step in to protect their sport. Do you wonder why Blizzard didn't sue Kespa but the broadcasting stations ? Kespa recently says "as if we cannot win a court battle against a mere game company", strongly implying that their have the gov as their back, so Blizzard has no choice but to put down the broadcasting stations (after several attempts to pull them to their side).
On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Last I checked, having an actual global audience is quite a bit more of a global attempt than never having a real global audience and only a local audience via TV (even if that local audience is large, its not global).
They did have Chinese audience. They don't care about the Western world because the West has no interest in BW whatsoever. SC2 is new and sparks some interests in the West, if SC2 is in the hand of the e-sport department of the Korean Ministry of Culture, it is sure that they will spread that game to the West too (it's easy, set up a stream, invite some good players, they already did that in BW). Blizzard did that for the sake of selling more SC2 in the West, their intention is not even pure at all. When the West lost interest in SC2 (given the attitude of westerners toward gaming this is likely), they will simply give up.
Get the game on TV is the most crucial point for a game to become a sport, BW would not become a sport if the chairman (or CEO) of OGN didn't try to broadcast a match on TV in the first place. Trying to sue the broadcasting stations is the most stupid move in my opinion.
|
On November 14 2010 20:07 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: KeSPA is not necessarily evil, they are wrong though. They had no right to sell broadcast rights to TV broadcasters when they were previously broadcasting without paying KeSPA. In addition, the fact that if they dont pay then they get no players to broadcast kind of puts a strangle on them, it forces the contract.
I think you didn't follow the latest news in this issue (search teamliquid). Kespa took the money from OGN/MBC and invested it back to OGN/MBC for their Starleagues, the part of the money that is not invested back it used to maintain/improve Proleague - which is good for OGN/MBC interest because they are the ones who broadcast Proleague too. That is why OGN/MBC accepted Kespa's offer and not Blizzard's offer, because the terms aren't as ridiculous as Blizzard's. If they are pressured by Kespa they should have sided with Blizzard/Gretech already. Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Also, a court (particularly the korean courts, given that they should be wanting to protect e-sports) is very likely to intervene and protect you if the contract that appears after this year contract is over turns out to be absurd. As of right now, the korean courts see that gretech/blizzard have given them a reasonable offer that is comparable if not better than their current contract with KeSPA (the only thing that isnt better is the length, but OGN/MBC paid 8 times more 3 years ago for that 3 year contract). I mean, seriously... there is such a thing where a contract is too absurd and a government would step in to protect a national sport.
A contract that gives Blizzard absolute control over the scene is absurd, and as you said, the gov is likely to step in to protect their sport. Do you wonder why Blizzard didn't sue Kespa but the broadcasting stations ? Kespa recently says "as if we cannot win a court battle against a mere game company", strongly implying that their have the gov as their back, so Blizzard has no choice but to put down the broadcasting stations (after several attempts to pull them to their side). Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Last I checked, having an actual global audience is quite a bit more of a global attempt than never having a real global audience and only a local audience via TV (even if that local audience is large, its not global). They did have Chinese audience. They don't care about the Western world because the West has no interest in BW whatsoever. SC2 is new and sparks some interests in the West, if SC2 is in the hand of the e-sport department of the Korean Ministry of Culture, it is sure that they will spread that game to the West too (it's easy, set up a stream, invite some good players, they already did that in BW). Blizzard did that for the sake of selling more SC2 in the West, their intention is not even pure at all. When the West lost interest in SC2 (given the attitude of westerners toward gaming this is likely), they will simply give up. Get the game on TV is the most crucial point for a game to become a sport, BW would not become a sport if the chairman (or CEO) of OGN didn't try to broadcast a match on TV in the first place. Trying to sue the broadcasting stations is the most stupid move in my opinion. I apparently havent heard that KeSPA invested all of the money back into the leagues. But, this confuses me... why did the leagues have to pay KeSPA if it was just going to be invested into their own leagues? Why could they not invest it themselves? If they did this, then the whole mess wouldve been avoided in the first place since Blizzard only hopped on KeSPA's case when they started to force the purchase of broadcasting rights from them.
Also, in regards to the lawsuit, why would korea back KeSPA and not back the broadcast stations? If they were to back one, they would logically back the other under the same premise... so why would blizzard have any gain in how they approach the lawsuit? If OGN loses then KeSPA would have logically also lost, if OGN wins then KeSPA also wouldve won.
Its also not just the western world... yes NA has a lot of people, but the EU is also a part of this global aspect of e-sports, and the EU in particular has been fairly good with it in certain areas.
On an aside, I am questioning my own sources on the costs that KeSPA forced onto OGN/MBC, as I have seen some other posts mention 1.7 billion won for 3 years...
Anyway, I dont really have anything more to say on this topic... time will tell and nothing that I say will change anybodies mind. I have tried many times in the past and this is getting just as annoying to discuss as lots of other things that I have stopped discussing.
|
On November 14 2010 20:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:
I apparently havent heard that KeSPA invested all of the money back into the leagues. But, this confuses me... why did the leagues have to pay KeSPA if it was just going to be invested into their own leagues? Why could they not invest it themselves? If they did this, then the whole mess wouldve been avoided in the first place since Blizzard only hopped on KeSPA's case when they started to force the purchase of broadcasting rights from them.
Hi this is the source : http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=164545 http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=164545
"KeSPA is reinvesting all revenue made from the sale of broadcasting rights into the operation of leagues."
"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."
They didn't reinvest all the money to OGN/MBC, they kept one part of it for Proleague, which is still in OGN/MBC interest since they are the ones who broadcast and profit from ProLeague.
On November 14 2010 20:28 TheRabidDeer wrote: Also, in regards to the lawsuit, why would korea back KeSPA and not back the broadcast stations? If they were to back one, they would logically back the other under the same premise... so why would blizzard have any gain in how they approach the lawsuit? If OGN loses then KeSPA would have logically also lost, if OGN wins then KeSPA also wouldve won.
Kespa is created under the approval of the Korean Ministry of Culture, so the gov has a solid reason to back them. OGN/MBC in the other hand are private companies and it will be unnatural for the government to actively protect them in a lawsuit.
I don't want to continue discussing this matter either, you are right let time decide how it will turn out.
|
Everyone needs to come to grips with reality. Kespa and OGN/MBC have basically been shitting on Blizzard for a while now, and while I love everything about the pro scene and how it operates, I have lost all respect for those organizations. All Blizzard is trying to do is protect their rights; the difference between e-sports and athletic sports is that e-sports are based around someone's intellectual property. Intellectual property comes with royalties; that's just how it works.
These comments about Blizzard trying to kill off BroodWar are almost too stupid to address. Why the fuck would Blizzard want to destroy all the buzz around one of their games? Believe it or not, they're pretty intelligent (unlike most of the people trashing them here). They know there is a decent crowd of fans who still prefer BroodWar to SC2, and they have no intention of slapping all those fans in the face. The fact that all this is going on during the launch of SC2 is a coincidence.
I'm 100% behind Blizzard/Gretech here, and I think they're being perfectly reasonable. Of course they want control over the intellectual property. It's Blizzard's fucking game. Who in here really believes that it would EVER be in Blizzard's best interest to abuse their rights in order to damage e-sports? The 1-year part doesn't concern me at all; as stated before it's just a way of testing the water, and they will probably be able to put longer, more solid contracts in place later on.
The fact is, everyone needs to wake up from this fairy-tale land and understand that every sport goes corporate when it goes big. E-sports is at a point where it can become huge, but if that's going to happen it needs to be done right. If OGN/MBC can't afford the completely reasonable offer that's been made, then they need to get their shit together and start moving some money. I hate to say it because I love the OSL/MSL, but corporate sports has no place for this kind of behavior.
</rant>
|
@ Ferago
Read around the forums a little.. There are answers (or rebuttals) to all of your points and more. Plus everything you have posted are based purely on your personal feelings. You should bank arguments on certain facts (i.e. ABC had happened, therefore i infer that DEF is their intention and XYZ is the outcome that will likely take place in the future)
PS: These comments about Blizzard trying to kill off BroodWar are almost too stupid to address. Patronizing comments like these will do nothing outside of sparking needless negative confrontational attitudes, i suggest you cut down on these.
|
@ ffreakk
Read around the forums a little.... yourself. There are answers(or rebuttal) to all of your points and more. Plus 90% of the pro kespa posts are based purely on their personal feelings. YOU should bank arguments on certain facts aka the very reasonable price, 1 year is reasonable, especially considering they are negotiating with a company that has said fuck you the past 3 years.
Patronizing comments like the one you just made do nothing except make you look like a douche. I suggest you cut down on these, and I should prolly cut down on them myself, but your post just pissed me off, and the majority of the OMG THEY WANT TO END BW POSTS as well, yeah... totally in Blizzards bests interests to kill the e-sports scene on their own game... and totally weird for them to expect to get the credit for the game they made....
|
You call that reasonable?
Some people really ought to do more searching. Getting tired of repeating myself. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, just wow. If there is one thing Blizzard and KeSPA have agreed on it's that their should be a fee for the IP rights, as for the rest of the terms including price. No.
There is a search function for a reason. If you want to post on the matter, it might be advisable to read up on the threads before posting. Seriously.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 14 2010 20:28 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 20:07 kamikami wrote:On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: KeSPA is not necessarily evil, they are wrong though. They had no right to sell broadcast rights to TV broadcasters when they were previously broadcasting without paying KeSPA. In addition, the fact that if they dont pay then they get no players to broadcast kind of puts a strangle on them, it forces the contract.
I think you didn't follow the latest news in this issue (search teamliquid). Kespa took the money from OGN/MBC and invested it back to OGN/MBC for their Starleagues, the part of the money that is not invested back it used to maintain/improve Proleague - which is good for OGN/MBC interest because they are the ones who broadcast Proleague too. That is why OGN/MBC accepted Kespa's offer and not Blizzard's offer, because the terms aren't as ridiculous as Blizzard's. If they are pressured by Kespa they should have sided with Blizzard/Gretech already. On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Also, a court (particularly the korean courts, given that they should be wanting to protect e-sports) is very likely to intervene and protect you if the contract that appears after this year contract is over turns out to be absurd. As of right now, the korean courts see that gretech/blizzard have given them a reasonable offer that is comparable if not better than their current contract with KeSPA (the only thing that isnt better is the length, but OGN/MBC paid 8 times more 3 years ago for that 3 year contract). I mean, seriously... there is such a thing where a contract is too absurd and a government would step in to protect a national sport.
A contract that gives Blizzard absolute control over the scene is absurd, and as you said, the gov is likely to step in to protect their sport. Do you wonder why Blizzard didn't sue Kespa but the broadcasting stations ? Kespa recently says "as if we cannot win a court battle against a mere game company", strongly implying that their have the gov as their back, so Blizzard has no choice but to put down the broadcasting stations (after several attempts to pull them to their side). On November 14 2010 19:26 TheRabidDeer wrote: Last I checked, having an actual global audience is quite a bit more of a global attempt than never having a real global audience and only a local audience via TV (even if that local audience is large, its not global). They did have Chinese audience. They don't care about the Western world because the West has no interest in BW whatsoever. SC2 is new and sparks some interests in the West, if SC2 is in the hand of the e-sport department of the Korean Ministry of Culture, it is sure that they will spread that game to the West too (it's easy, set up a stream, invite some good players, they already did that in BW). Blizzard did that for the sake of selling more SC2 in the West, their intention is not even pure at all. When the West lost interest in SC2 (given the attitude of westerners toward gaming this is likely), they will simply give up. Get the game on TV is the most crucial point for a game to become a sport, BW would not become a sport if the chairman (or CEO) of OGN didn't try to broadcast a match on TV in the first place. Trying to sue the broadcasting stations is the most stupid move in my opinion. I apparently havent heard that KeSPA invested all of the money back into the leagues. But, this confuses me... why did the leagues have to pay KeSPA if it was just going to be invested into their own leagues? Why could they not invest it themselves? If they did this, then the whole mess wouldve been avoided in the first place since Blizzard only hopped on KeSPA's case when they started to force the purchase of broadcasting rights from them. Also, in regards to the lawsuit, why would korea back KeSPA and not back the broadcast stations? If they were to back one, they would logically back the other under the same premise... so why would blizzard have any gain in how they approach the lawsuit? If OGN loses then KeSPA would have logically also lost, if OGN wins then KeSPA also wouldve won. Its also not just the western world... yes NA has a lot of people, but the EU is also a part of this global aspect of e-sports, and the EU in particular has been fairly good with it in certain areas. On an aside, I am questioning my own sources on the costs that KeSPA forced onto OGN/MBC, as I have seen some other posts mention 1.7 billion won for 3 years... Anyway, I dont really have anything more to say on this topic... time will tell and nothing that I say will change anybodies mind. I have tried many times in the past and this is getting just as annoying to discuss as lots of other things that I have stopped discussing.
Why not invest it themselves? I don't know for sure, but OGN and MBC are the only ones receiving any direct revenue from it (they get payed for selling advertising spots between games), instead of the PR the other firms receive. I guess that's why they are expected to carry a bit more of a burden. Would make sense of me.
|
On November 14 2010 22:46 Varth wrote: OMG THEY WANT TO END BW POSTS as well, yeah... totally in Blizzards bests interests to kill the e-sports scene on their own game...
Why wouldn't it be? It's not like they get anything from the BW scene. While I won't say that that is what they want, it's undeniable that it's more beneficial for them if the current BW scene was not around anymore if they want to sell more copies SC2. Selling games is their primary business, not e-sports.
|
On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!! - 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created. - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. - And many other smaller things... Actually SC2 players and mapmakers are victims of Blizz's greed too : The EULA states that every game they play belong to Blizz, every maps they make belongs to Blizz, and every broastcasts/vods they make belong to Blizz. Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that). Battle.Net 2.0 are created with the ultimate purpose to control every people who play the game, every mapmakers who create map for the game, and every tournaments of the game. ALL BELONGS TO THEM. SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that). We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that).
I know this is an older post but I feel like it exemplifies a lot of the points I've heard made against Blizzard.
You are treating the whole situation as if it is a doomsday scenario. Why would Blizzard shut down the whole korean e-sports scene? What good does it do them?
Now, I agree the terms seem to be a bit expensive for an industry that is reported to not be making exorbitant amounts of money, but that is really the crux of the legal argument.
All this stuff about squashing BW and hording broadcasts and rights is ridiculous and is born out of unfounded fears.
The only argument I can imagine holding any water is that they might want to literally shut down BW to promote SC2. But if that was the case, why are they going through all this trouble? Why not claim that they want all broadcasts and tournys shut down? Because they don't want to look like bad guys? Obviously not since everyone is through the roof already over the current state.
|
Reported by who though? They broadcast on two major stations in SK, how could they *NOT* be making a nice amount of money.
|
Sorry im only at page 4 of this thread. I cant find how the 50/50 split on "Ownership Rights: The ownership of the broadcasting material created under this contract will be split 50:50 between the Broadcasting station and Gretech/Blizzard." applies to players houses, training teams, etc. It applies only to elements being broadcasted, so how can you make that leap?
|
On November 15 2010 02:47 Bijan wrote:Show nested quote +On November 14 2010 02:32 kamikami wrote:On November 14 2010 01:57 exeprime wrote: The anti-blizzard bias here is palpable. The terms are quite normal and reasonable, I fail to see why everyone is so outraged. The terms are extremely unreasonable. Wake up !!!! - 1 year duration contract means that Blizz can end the entire industry whenever they want, it is a freaking industry with many jobs involved, not just some small business. - 50:50 split of broastcasting ownership means that the players/teams/mapmakers don't even have one bit of ownership on what they created. - Everything must be approved by Blizz means that everyone in the industry is Blizz's slaves and Blizz maintains absolute control over the scene - which is shit considering this game has become a sport under the government's approval, there is no way it can be controlled by one foreign company. - And many other smaller things... Actually SC2 players and mapmakers are victims of Blizz's greed too : The EULA states that every game they play belong to Blizz, every maps they make belongs to Blizz, and every broastcasts/vods they make belong to Blizz. Blizz can terminate a player's account for no reason and steal the 60$ whenever they want. They change some terms in Korea because only in that country that the government takes gaming seriously but basically SC2 is not even a fair trade for the player despite its high potential to grow into a mature sport (it won't if Blizz continue to maintain absolute control like that). Battle.Net 2.0 are created with the ultimate purpose to control every people who play the game, every mapmakers who create map for the game, and every tournaments of the game. ALL BELONGS TO THEM. SC2 players are too obsessed with the game that they don't take those issues seriously at all, if SC2 is not "liberated" from Blizz in the future I failed to see how it will evolve into a mature spectator sport. (even now Blizz is suing the 2 only esport television channels, so in the future they can only broadcasts SC2 through internet streams lol, not to mention they go against the government for that). We BW fans have no problem with SC2, but we have problems with Blizz and their greed (omg they make "greed is good" a cheat code for their game, how can people argue against that). I know this is an older post but I feel like it exemplifies a lot of the points I've heard made against Blizzard. You are treating the whole situation as if it is a doomsday scenario. Why would Blizzard shut down the whole korean e-sports scene? What good does it do them? Now, I agree the terms seem to be a bit expensive for an industry that is reported to not be making exorbitant amounts of money, but that is really the crux of the legal argument. All this stuff about squashing BW and hording broadcasts and rights is ridiculous and is born out of unfounded fears. The only argument I can imagine holding any water is that they might want to literally shut down BW to promote SC2. But if that was the case, why are they going through all this trouble? Why not claim that they want all broadcasts and tournys shut down? Because they don't want to look like bad guys? Obviously not since everyone is through the roof already over the current state.
Even the Blizz boys can answer you that. They ve been saying it time and again actually. Directly ordering the death of Brood War is real real real bad PR, they stand to lose MUCH more than they stand to gain.
1/ If they are successful in abruptly killing off Brood War, imagine the public outcry of the players, the fans of those players, the sponsors (much bigger firms than Blizz, btw), not to mention it dashes ANY hope for Starcraft 2 to live in Korea. A national boycott is not too unlikely.
2/ As the Korean Ministry of Culture has stated before, e-Sport is part of Korean culture. They wont sit still and let a foreign firm kill off that cultural value so easily.. Now if Blizz somehow legally gain control of everything, and slowly choke BW to death (modify terms little by little till its virtually impossible to have any BW leagues anymore, end result: players either switch to SC2 or go jobless.. Fans either switch to SC2 or go back to watching Pokemon).
Im sure you see how it would best serve Blizz to do the things they are doing now. As someone stated before, Blizz as a game developer will only care as far as selling more copies of their games. They arent in it for the development of e-Sport (so many reasons have been cited i wont go through them again), only reason they are there now is because the sales that e-Sport will reap them (tgt with Heart of the Swarm and Legacy of the Void).
|
@freakk You sure have a wild imagination. God forbid you ever create something in this world and someone profits off of your work.
What sponsors? Sponsors go where the money is at, I wouldn't be surprised if they pushed for SC2 to make broadcast on national television. I bet you MBC would gladly take a nice payment to host it, then a whole country can once again thrive on someone else work.
|
i just read this gem and i wanted to point out the following
Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property.
For every major sport in the world, The TV station pays to the teams a broadcast fee, for something that they do not own. They do not own a thing, as in 0% of the broadcasted material. The content itself belongs to the league, this applies to Basketball, football, soccer, the Olympics, etc. Why is suddenly e-sports different? Why now are the TV stations golden cows that must have a stake in ownership? 50% to the stations is a lot more than they would get on a traditional sports settings.
|
I am completely amazed at people's logic here.
"All Blizzard wants is to protect their rights" "They dont want to kill off the korean BW e-sports scene"
Really? Are you really that naive? Lets just suppose that this conflict escalated just as SC2 hit Korean markets as pure coincidence.
|
The game is made by blizzard, maintained by blizzard.. therefore they have all rights to be selfish, inconsiderate and unreasonable but I don't think the contract is unreasonable.
If it was 5-6 years ago, I doubt anyone would battle these terms in court since there was still so much money to milk and with no SC2 as competitor. These terms right now, makes the company think "Hmm is BW worth 100 M won?.. will the tournament return a positive revenue"
|
On November 15 2010 04:46 battarro wrote:i just read this gem and i wanted to point out the following Show nested quote +Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property. For every major sport in the world, The TV station pays to the teams a broadcast fee, for something that they do not own. They do not own a thing, as in 0% of the broadcasted material. The content itself belongs to the league, this applies to Basketball, football, soccer, the Olympics, etc. Why is suddenly e-sports different? Why now are the TV stations golden cows that must have a stake in ownership? 50% to the stations is a lot more than they would get on a traditional sports settings.
Really? The teams are represented by Kespa and the TV stations are the league operators.
|
The arguing here is ridiculous. Blizzard created BW, and Kespa never acknowledges it. This industry was built upon the efforts of Blizzard before anyone else. These terms are completely reasonable in that light.
|
I really don't think anyone can fault Blizzard for wanting full controll of their own intellectual property. Clauses like those are common and are not neccessarily enforced. They just include everything so they can step in and shut it down if anyone should grossly overstep the boundries with amoral or unethical behaviour. Blizzards stance towards KeSPA is warranted because KeSPA pretty much claimed ownership over StarCraft (specifically) broadcasting rights in Korea. The only thing they could rightfully claim ownership to is the scene they built around it, not StarCraft itself. As I understand it, when Blizzard approached KeSPA saying they didn't appreciate them claiming ownership over their intellectual property, KeSPA pretty much laughed and spit in their face, arrogant because they felt safe being a government body. So why are people opposing Blizzard in this case? Are you afraid Blizzard will take a too active part in the scene and ruin it? Doubt it will happen. Afraid Brood War broadcasting will end because Blizzard doesn't want it overshadowing StarCraft2? Hardly. Brood War broadcasting will promote StarCraft 2 more than thwart it.
Blizzard deserves respect and recognition for their work. This case interfering with MSL, OSL and Starleague is KeSPAs fault, not Blizzard. You can't fault Blizzard for defending their rights against someone acting that disrespectfull toward them.
|
On November 15 2010 03:47 reg0ner wrote: Reported by who though? They broadcast on two major stations in SK, how could they *NOT* be making a nice amount of money. You might want to take note that everything SC:BW related in Korea is absolutely free for the fans. Free to roll up and watch live free to stream free to download vods. (also free to commentate. want english commentary of gsl but hate tastosis? badluck) The proscene for the fans in Korea is the equivalent of your local council holding free to participate tai chi sessions every sunday morning.
|
Show nested quote +seriously blizzard and gretech, go to hell
obvioulsy gretech is being influenced by b lizzard
Yeah, people who made starcraft for us which we love, go to hell. For making this awesome game. Yup.
Hmm don't understand all the parts of the profit, I think Blizzard/Gretech should definitely try to let the broadcasting stations make more money than Bliz/Gre does from the broadcasting though. The broadcasting stations will own the sponsorship money though, so I guess they will do fine? Or no?
|
You call that reasonable?
Some people really ought to do more searching. Getting tired of repeating myself. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, just wow. If there is one thing Blizzard and KeSPA have agreed on it's that their should be a fee for the IP rights, as for the rest of the terms including price. No.
There is a search function for a reason. If you want to post on the matter, it might be advisable to read up on the threads before posting. Seriously.
Or perhaps you should stop blaming people for not searching enough. No one's going to know 100% of everything, so does that mean no one should post?
And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable?
|
5003 Posts
On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +You call that reasonable?
Some people really ought to do more searching. Getting tired of repeating myself. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, just wow. If there is one thing Blizzard and KeSPA have agreed on it's that their should be a fee for the IP rights, as for the rest of the terms including price. No.
There is a search function for a reason. If you want to post on the matter, it might be advisable to read up on the threads before posting. Seriously. Or perhaps you should stop blaming people for not searching enough. No one's going to know 100% of everything, so does that mean no one should post? And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable?
hey i have a great idea
despite being completely ignorant of the context and of the entire progaming scene and how it work, i'm gonna make a comment on the subject just because i can, and i'm not going to look up the context or how the progaming scene worked just so i can throw in my 2 cents
It's clear Blizzard doesn't want KeSPA in charge of the progamer scene. No one doubts that. Your last line is clearly and utterly ignorant of the situation and how shit has worked for the past 10 years though
|
Anyone who have any desire to ever see LAN in SC2 should support Blizzard in this conflict. Implementing LAN is not an option until the IP dispute has been settled.
|
On November 15 2010 08:11 Longshank wrote: Anyone who have any desire to ever see LAN in SC2 should support Blizzard in this conflict. Implementing LAN is not an option until the IP dispute has been settled. I can see the logical progression you've made here, but it's hardly smart to support the downfall of the only sustainable system of progaming in order to put all your eggs in a game that hasn't even proven itself as a viable eSport.
|
Estonia4504 Posts
On November 15 2010 06:57 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +seriously blizzard and gretech, go to hell
obvioulsy gretech is being influenced by b lizzard Yeah, people who made starcraft for us which we love, go to hell. For making this awesome game. Yup. Hmm don't understand all the parts of the profit, I think Blizzard/Gretech should definitely try to let the broadcasting stations make more money than Bliz/Gre does from the broadcasting though. The broadcasting stations will own the sponsorship money though, so I guess they will do fine? Or no? If you read the thread, you should have found a link where one broadcasting station already stated how it barely breaks even as is. And now their expenses for the broadcasting allowance supposedly quadruple. Unlike the KeSPA system though, they don't get anything reinvested (the Blizzard COO explicitly stated the money is supposed to go to "charities") and if their statement holds true, they might need to either decrease costs ( prize money is already much lower than the competitors) or even worse, as has been rumored, disband their teams (the rumors mentioned MBC). As of now, they already have the sponsorship money, and they don't get to charge for tickets or anything alike. In short, I'm entirely sure the Broadcasting companies can only lose from any result favoring Blizzard. Why throw statements like these into the air if you state yourself you don't understand anything about the finances?
|
On November 15 2010 08:41 ShadeR wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 08:11 Longshank wrote: Anyone who have any desire to ever see LAN in SC2 should support Blizzard in this conflict. Implementing LAN is not an option until the IP dispute has been settled. I can see the logical progression you've made here, but it's hardly smart to support the downfall of the only sustainable system of progaming in order to put all your eggs in a game that hasn't even proven itself as a viable eSport.
I'd rather put my eggs in a game that has a chance of growing and expanding esports than in one that is dead and buried in every aspect except for a handful of teams in Korea. The BW scene won't grow no matter what, SC2 will - so anything that improves SC2 chances of growing is good in my book. Your 'sustainable system' isn't so sustainable seeing that it is, due to its' actions, stuck in BW while the rest of the world has moved on.
|
Im going out on a limb and propose that the reason that MBC is barely breaking even, while OGN is not it's because their product is inferior to the OGN product.
I am still disgusted by the PowerGate incident. How can I as a fan support such poorly made decisions? On their greatest stage they allow such a mishap to happen, and to add insult to injury, they resolve it on the worst possible way. Just because they are doing poorly does not gives them a free pass in terms of legality.
|
On November 15 2010 04:53 night terrors wrote: I am completely amazed at people's logic here.
"All Blizzard wants is to protect their rights" "They dont want to kill off the korean BW e-sports scene"
Really? Are you really that naive? Lets just suppose that this conflict escalated just as SC2 hit Korean markets as pure coincidence.
I guess the fact that the escalation actually started the moment KeSPA tried to control and sell broadcast rights completely slipped by you. Nope, it all happened purely because SC2 hit the korean market (this doesnt even make sense... this has been going on for years =\)
On November 15 2010 07:42 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:You call that reasonable?
Some people really ought to do more searching. Getting tired of repeating myself. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, just wow. If there is one thing Blizzard and KeSPA have agreed on it's that their should be a fee for the IP rights, as for the rest of the terms including price. No.
There is a search function for a reason. If you want to post on the matter, it might be advisable to read up on the threads before posting. Seriously. Or perhaps you should stop blaming people for not searching enough. No one's going to know 100% of everything, so does that mean no one should post? And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable? ...and how shit has worked for the past 10 years though I am curious, why should we keep on the same path? Was the KeSPA path really that great as of these last few years? Personally, all I have heard about KeSPA lately are bad things, poor treatment of players.... scandals... and just generally ignoring IP rights (strictly speaking, SC is property of blizzard, if they want to play "starcraft" without acknowledging this, why not make their own version of the same game) among other things. Why not have somebody new step in to try and get things going in a good direction again? Why does it have to be KeSPA?
I mean, things started off well. They got the foundation set for everybody, they got sponsors interested, they got the country interested. Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it.
|
5003 Posts
I am curious, why should we keep on the same path? Was the KeSPA path really that great as of these last few years? Personally, all I have heard about KeSPA lately are bad things, poor treatment of players.... scandals... and just generally ignoring IP rights (strictly speaking, SC is property of blizzard, if they want to play "starcraft" without acknowledging this, why not make their own version of the same game) among other things. Why not have somebody new step in to try and get things going in a good direction again? Why does it have to be KeSPA?
I mean, things started off well. They got the foundation set for everybody, they got sponsors interested, they got the country interested. Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it.
We shouldn't -- you're right. But let's be honest -- Blizzard hasn't shown any serious dedication to the scene, and Gretech does not have the infrastructure to handle this -- considering their "complaints" that they've made public in these forums a while back. The reason why people "support" KeSPA is because Blizzard's interests and the interest of e-Sports don't exactly align, considering Blizzard's moves in the recent years.
My comment is simply saying that you can't ignore the 10 years that has been there -- the context matters a lot, which is exactly why people aren't so fond of Blizzard either, as much as they're not that fond of KeSPA. The reason is in interests -- an organization that started "for e-Sports" will likely have that a lot more in interests than a company like blizzard, who has a rather... bad track record overall.
|
On November 15 2010 04:46 battarro wrote:i just read this gem and i wanted to point out the following Show nested quote +Who in the right mind would pay 300 million won to broadcast something that's only 50% theirs? Honestly, the broadcasted material isn't even all their property. For every major sport in the world, The TV station pays to the teams a broadcast fee, for something that they do not own. They do not own a thing, as in 0% of the broadcasted material. The content itself belongs to the league, this applies to Basketball, football, soccer, the Olympics, etc. Why is suddenly e-sports different? Why now are the TV stations golden cows that must have a stake in ownership? 50% to the stations is a lot more than they would get on a traditional sports settings.
If you're quoting me, quote all that I've wrote or else it distorts the meaning. For those of you wondering, I wrote before the line he quoted that the broadcasting stations are not making money. NOW, if you take that into context, the quote actually means, who would pay 300 million dollars to broadcast something that is only 50% theirs.
|
On November 15 2010 11:08 Milkis wrote:Show nested quote +I am curious, why should we keep on the same path? Was the KeSPA path really that great as of these last few years? Personally, all I have heard about KeSPA lately are bad things, poor treatment of players.... scandals... and just generally ignoring IP rights (strictly speaking, SC is property of blizzard, if they want to play "starcraft" without acknowledging this, why not make their own version of the same game) among other things. Why not have somebody new step in to try and get things going in a good direction again? Why does it have to be KeSPA?
I mean, things started off well. They got the foundation set for everybody, they got sponsors interested, they got the country interested. Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it. My comment is simply saying that you can't ignore the 10 years that has been there -- the context matters a lot, which is exactly why people aren't so fond of Blizzard either, as much as they're not that fond of KeSPA. The reason is in interests -- an organization that started "for e-Sports" will likely have that a lot more in interests than a company like blizzard, who has a rather... bad track record overall. I know you cant ignore the last 10 years, but I disagree with you that they were necessarily started for e-sports. I see you put that in quotes, so maybe you yourself agree? I mean, these are large companies, their primary interest is still to drive a profit for their company. KeSPA itself is just something that they created so they can say, "hey, we arent making any profits" even though the companies that make up KeSPA do make money from it. It is kind of a glorified sponsorship system in my mind, one that has gained a bit too much power over things. I would much rather the korean government itself be in control, or some other system at this point in time.
|
On November 15 2010 10:27 TheRabidDeer wrote: Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it.
Your "someone else" don't have :
1> Media support : BW won't have TV coverage. 2> Government support : No help from the gov to maintain its sport status, not to mention bad press / harass from them. 3> Programing team support : The existing teams of Kespa won't participate in their leagues, they will disband and I don't think more than 1/3 of the actual players will continue to play. The scene will become too small it cannot exist.
The matter is simple, your "someone else" is technically not qualified for the job. Not to mention they treat their business partner like slaves and their customers like shit.
|
On November 15 2010 11:27 kamikami wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 10:27 TheRabidDeer wrote: Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it. Your "someone else" don't have : 1> Media support : BW won't have TV coverage. 2> Government support : No help from the gov to maintain its sport status, not to mention bad press / harass from them. 3> Programing team support : The existing teams of Kespa won't participate in their leagues, they will disband and I don't think more than 1/3 of the actual players will continue to play. The scene will become too small it cannot exist. The matter is simple, your "someone else" is technically not qualified for the job. Not to mention they treat their business partner like slaves and their customers like shit. 1) Why would the next group not have media support? Last I checked the broadcasters that already invested into it would want to continue to keep their investment alive. 2) Why would the government stop supporting it? Just because it isnt kespa doesnt mean it cant have support. Keep in mind, I am not saying that blizzard is this "someone else". 3) Why would only 1/3 of the players continue to play? Many people that try to play BW professionally have given up lots of things in their life to pursue this dream. How many would be able to live a life as good as they have if they dont keep playing under sponsorship?
Honestly, you are making completely nonsensical doomsday conclusions here with nothing to back them up. At all.
|
On November 15 2010 11:12 renzy wrote: If you're quoting me, quote all that I've wrote or else it distorts the meaning. For those of you wondering, I wrote before the line he quoted that the broadcasting stations are not making money. NOW, if you take that into context, the quote actually means, who would pay 300 million dollars to broadcast something that is only 50% theirs.
how much are the Olympics contract worth on the USA?
Try billions of dollars for content that is not own by them, ill get you quick NBA example.
When NBC Sports' contract with the NBA expired in 2002, the broadcast rights were passed to ABC, which began airing games the next season. NBC had made a four-year, $1.3 billion bid in the spring of 2002 to renew its NBA coverage, but the league instead made six-year deals worth $4.6 billion with ESPN, ABC, and TNT. In the last four years of the final contract, NBC lost $300 million dollars. NBC only offered $325 million a year compared to ESPN's $400 million.
Do you know how much Fox paid for the Superbowl broadcasting fees, and again they d not own the content, nor can they reproduce it ever again. It is a one time broadcasting license.
I can get you numbers for everything from hockey to the Olympics. The point is that TV station routinely pay to broadcast content that is not owned by them.
|
On November 15 2010 11:45 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 11:12 renzy wrote: If you're quoting me, quote all that I've wrote or else it distorts the meaning. For those of you wondering, I wrote before the line he quoted that the broadcasting stations are not making money. NOW, if you take that into context, the quote actually means, who would pay 300 million dollars to broadcast something that is only 50% theirs. how much are the Olympics contract worth on the USA? Try billions of dollars for content that is not own by them, ill get you quick NBA example. Show nested quote + When NBC Sports' contract with the NBA expired in 2002, the broadcast rights were passed to ABC, which began airing games the next season. NBC had made a four-year, $1.3 billion bid in the spring of 2002 to renew its NBA coverage, but the league instead made six-year deals worth $4.6 billion with ESPN, ABC, and TNT. In the last four years of the final contract, NBC lost $300 million dollars. NBC only offered $325 million a year compared to ESPN's $400 million.
Do you know how much Fox paid for the Superbowl broadcasting fees, and again they d not own the content, nor can they reproduce it ever again. It is a one time broadcasting license. I can get you numbers for everything from hockey to the Olympics. The point is that TV station routinely pay to broadcast content that is not owned by them.
Yes, but TV stations don't routinely pay for a broadcast that does not make any money to begin with. I'm pretty certain TV stations MAKE MONEY from broadcasting superbowl, even though they have to pay money to start with. It is not the case for SCBW
|
Also i want to say that the whole "MBC" is not amking money argument is bullshit. Here is why
The day I see a MBC ran tournament, where they run zero advertisement and have no sponsor, And no product placement takes place, (h2u logos on the shirts of the team), Then that tournament I will agree to "They are not making money".
Every single advertisement, product placement/sponsor paid money to get their name /product broadcasted. What you are referencing to is "They are not making profit", but they are making money. Operating financially at a loss it is not a legal excuse to not respect other peoples rights.
|
On November 15 2010 11:48 renzy wrote: Yes, but TV stations don't routinely pay for a broadcast that does not make any money to begin with. I'm pretty certain TV stations MAKE MONEY from broadcasting superbowl, even though they have to pay money to start with. It is not the case for SCBW
Have you heard this thing called Public television? I heard it is where the government broadcast programs free of advertisement for the interest / well being / education of the population.
Also let supposed for a second just for the sake of argument that the reason of being broke is an excuse for not honoring someones IP rights. Then what about OGN? Last time i checked, they were doing good financially with their starleague. The JD /flash final for the OSL on China must have been watched by half the young population in Korea. What is the excuse for OGN not paying Blizzard a cut for using their game as a tool for revenue?
|
On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote:Show nested quote +You call that reasonable?
Some people really ought to do more searching. Getting tired of repeating myself. Ignorance is bliss. Some people, just wow. If there is one thing Blizzard and KeSPA have agreed on it's that their should be a fee for the IP rights, as for the rest of the terms including price. No.
There is a search function for a reason. If you want to post on the matter, it might be advisable to read up on the threads before posting. Seriously. Or perhaps you should stop blaming people for not searching enough. No one's going to know 100% of everything, so does that mean no one should post? And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable?
Blizzard made the game with the intention of charging people to play it, not watch it. There shouldn't be any charge to broadcast it, it's like a soccer ball manufacturer claiming the IP rights to televised soccer games...
Also to people citing the law as ultimate moral arbitrator in this dispute: current copyright and IP laws are seriously fucked up and desperately need reform. They're meant to foster growth in the economy but really in their current state they only stagnate it, as evidenced here by Blizzard basically shutting down an entire industry and thousands of jobs in order to promote their new game better.
|
If you invent a square ball, and I create a game around it that is so popular, much more than your sales of the square ball. Am I entitled to just milk the square ball? Because that is what you are proposing,
|
The proposal, while unfailingly polarizing, is tremendously reasonable. Simple as that.
|
On November 15 2010 13:38 battarro wrote: If you invent a square ball, and I create a game around it that is so popular, much more than your sales of the square ball. Am I entitled to just milk the square ball? Because that is what you are proposing,
your scenario makes no sense, am I making money from "inventing" the ball? are you making money from "creating" your game? and if so, how? your metaphor is insane and detached entirely from reality, so idk whether or not you're morally or legally entitled to "milk" the ball (w/e you think that means)
|
On November 15 2010 11:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 11:27 kamikami wrote:On November 15 2010 10:27 TheRabidDeer wrote: Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it. Your "someone else" don't have : 1> Media support : BW won't have TV coverage. 2> Government support : No help from the gov to maintain its sport status, not to mention bad press / harass from them. 3> Programing team support : The existing teams of Kespa won't participate in their leagues, they will disband and I don't think more than 1/3 of the actual players will continue to play. The scene will become too small it cannot exist. The matter is simple, your "someone else" is technically not qualified for the job. Not to mention they treat their business partner like slaves and their customers like shit. 1) Why would the next group not have media support? Last I checked the broadcasters that already invested into it would want to continue to keep their investment alive. 2) Why would the government stop supporting it? Just because it isnt kespa doesnt mean it cant have support. Keep in mind, I am not saying that blizzard is this "someone else". 3) Why would only 1/3 of the players continue to play? Many people that try to play BW professionally have given up lots of things in their life to pursue this dream. How many would be able to live a life as good as they have if they dont keep playing under sponsorship? Honestly, you are making completely nonsensical doomsday conclusions here with nothing to back them up. At all.
1/ Blizz has just finished sueing the only TV stations that would Broadcast BW. Now i do not know how things work over at your end, but here in the East, "face" is something pretty important. If you just spitted on someone, it greatly decrease the chance of you two working together even if there are good money involved. Not to mention, i am highly doubtful that Blizz is willing to put much money in BW at all, thus making it even more unlikely for TV stations to have a reason to work with them.
2/ Kespa is founded by Ministry of Culture. Now if Blizz successfully sue this organisation and wrestle all rights to BW off their hand and give it to a little private firm like Gretech, i dont see how the government would want to support it.
3/ Blizzard simply dont have the money and infrastructure to keep things going. The amount of money they put into SC2's e-Sport is peanut compared to the money involved in BW. And just in case you dont know, Blizz wont find the sponsors for BW, at least not ones in the same level as the current sponsors anw.
I would also like to say that your "maybe Blizz can do it" attitude are just wishful thinking and have nothing to back them up. At all.
|
On November 15 2010 10:27 TheRabidDeer wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 04:53 night terrors wrote: I am completely amazed at people's logic here.
"All Blizzard wants is to protect their rights" "They dont want to kill off the korean BW e-sports scene"
Really? Are you really that naive? Lets just suppose that this conflict escalated just as SC2 hit Korean markets as pure coincidence.
I guess the fact that the escalation actually started the moment KeSPA tried to control and sell broadcast rights completely slipped by you. Nope, it all happened purely because SC2 hit the korean market (this doesnt even make sense... this has been going on for years =\) I'm only going quote part of what you've written because i only feel like like addressing this part. I don't think i'm taking anything out of context, if so let me know.
I think the two of you are both right and wrong about some parts. Negotiations between Blizzard and KeSPA began in 2007 and when SC2 was nearing release the shit hit the fan.
|
On November 15 2010 14:20 ffreakk wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 11:34 TheRabidDeer wrote:On November 15 2010 11:27 kamikami wrote:On November 15 2010 10:27 TheRabidDeer wrote: Maybe its just time to hand things off? By all means, keep BW around... but let somebody else handle it. Your "someone else" don't have : 1> Media support : BW won't have TV coverage. 2> Government support : No help from the gov to maintain its sport status, not to mention bad press / harass from them. 3> Programing team support : The existing teams of Kespa won't participate in their leagues, they will disband and I don't think more than 1/3 of the actual players will continue to play. The scene will become too small it cannot exist. The matter is simple, your "someone else" is technically not qualified for the job. Not to mention they treat their business partner like slaves and their customers like shit. 1) Why would the next group not have media support? Last I checked the broadcasters that already invested into it would want to continue to keep their investment alive. 2) Why would the government stop supporting it? Just because it isnt kespa doesnt mean it cant have support. Keep in mind, I am not saying that blizzard is this "someone else". 3) Why would only 1/3 of the players continue to play? Many people that try to play BW professionally have given up lots of things in their life to pursue this dream. How many would be able to live a life as good as they have if they dont keep playing under sponsorship? Honestly, you are making completely nonsensical doomsday conclusions here with nothing to back them up. At all. 1/ Blizz has just finished sueing the only TV stations that would Broadcast BW. Now i do not know how things work over at your end, but here in the East, "face" is something pretty important. If you just spitted on someone, it greatly decrease the chance of you two working together even if there are good money involved. Not to mention, i am highly doubtful that Blizz is willing to put much money in BW at all, thus making it even more unlikely for TV stations to have a reason to work with them. 2/ Kespa is founded by Ministry of Culture. Now if Blizz successfully sue this organisation and wrestle all rights to BW off their hand and give it to a little private firm like Gretech, i dont see how the government would want to support it. 3/ Blizzard simply dont have the money and infrastructure to keep things going. The amount of money they put into SC2's e-Sport is peanut compared to the money involved in BW. And just in case you dont know, Blizz wont find the sponsors for BW, at least not ones in the same level as the current sponsors anw. I would also like to say that your "maybe Blizz can do it" attitude are just wishful thinking and have nothing to back them up. At all.
I agree, the SC2 scene will basically be like any other competitive gaming scene, which isn't much. Attempting to kill the BW scene at whim will scare off potential long-term sponsors, and that combined with the general genericness of SC2 really limits it's future potential. That and once SC3 is ready to ship Blizzard will just pull the same stunt again and pull the plug on SC2 (which will be easier than with BW since they already have 100% control). SC2 is not being set up for the long-term.
|
So, they want money for the Seasons. Alright, that sounds fair, considering gretech has the sole rights to air it.
All sublisences are split 50:50, again, that sounds fair.
Then all sponsorship money made stays with the Broadcasting stations to do with as they have in the past.
Sounds pretty even to me.
On November 15 2010 14:35 attackfighter wrote: . SC2 is not being set up for the long-term.
To be fair, with 18 months between expansions, and the time it takes them to make a new game once the two expansions are over, it really is set up for atleast 10 years.
|
I dont know, personally, i dont feel that a 50/50 split is reasonable.
- Blizzard didnt sponsor the games, they had to pay for all the copies of games that they used. - Blizzard did not have any part in the organisation of the tournaments as well as the management of the teams. - They (the teams) also had to pay for the license.
Now if Blizz gave the license for free, let them use their game freely, and took a minor but non-trivial part in the tournaments (and teams), i would understand splitting it that way. Right now 50/50 on top of all the rest looks nothing short of a rip-off to me.
Edit: clarifications
|
On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable?
Its not reasonable cause KESPA = SC:BW progamer scene. They own the teams, pay the players, organize the TV coverage.
So if Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of proscene then it has to make one from nothing and we know that they arent interested in puting much money into sc:bw now that they have sc2. And Blizzard idea about how to run a Sc2 pro scene isn't the best one...
|
On November 15 2010 17:50 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable? And Blizzard idea about how to run a Sc2 pro scene isn't the best one...
qualify that.
|
On November 15 2010 18:05 Thurokiir wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 17:50 Frankon wrote:On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable? And Blizzard idea about how to run a Sc2 pro scene isn't the best one... qualify that. Basically Blizzard idea is big SOLO tournaments with huge prices.
And here are the problems. How long can they pump in money for the prices? What are the perspectives for new players to live from the esport?
We know that Korean pro scene is focused on teams. This model ensures that a pro gamer is actually a job where you get paid for playing and get bonuses as a addition to normal pay (so basically you have a steady income while you are on team).
The Blizzard idea is be no1 so you can get any money. So as long as you win or (be in top 4 or 8) you get the money. The problem is that there are sheduled 12 tourneys per year in Sc2 (so lets say ~80 people would get price money - scratch that tournament would be for 32 players with code S)) the rest get ZERO. This will lead to players having to get a normal job (god know how many hours they work in korea) and practice Sc in free time that will lead to: a) worse level of games b) decline of life (im sure i got that right but you should be able to figure out what i meant)
Remember we are talking about korea not NA or EU
Basically with Blizzard idea about turnaments you can't have a steady income so its a bad career choice for young people. You have better chances at playing some lottery. why do i say that? Nada the PRO failed to qualify to GSL3.
Kespa pro teams solution was way better than this.
Kespa runed SC:BW offered a stable job (if you dont perform too good you get sacked but it happens in normal jobs too).
Blizard idea is basically get a lottery ticket and hope you can win a torunament to get some money.
|
Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting.
|
On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting.
I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch.
Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene.
Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time.
|
On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time.
You would have a hard time arguing that point, considering that nobody have been able to do that. And i really cant picture that there are more organisations like Kespa around.. Unless you dont know what Kespa is? oO
|
On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time.
Blizzard sold 9 million copies of starcraft, that's their reward for making it. To say they deserve a slice of the Korean esports scene as well is just baseless. To bring back this metaphor: a soccer ball manufacturer doesn't own the IP rights to televised soccer matches. Giving video game developers control over not only the sale of their games, but how they're used as well only stifles innovation. No new esports industry can spring up, modders are at the mercy of the devs, it is just horrible all around for the consumer. It would better to have a completely free market in regards to entertainment media, that way you wouldn't have big corporations stomping all over the little guy and stifling competition with these ridiculous laws.
|
On November 15 2010 18:37 Frankon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 18:05 Thurokiir wrote:On November 15 2010 17:50 Frankon wrote:On November 15 2010 07:16 Yoshi Kirishima wrote: And how the heck is that not reasonable? Seriously. They OWN THE GAME. How is it NOT reasonable to OWN control of THEIR game??? For those that say, "Kespa made the proscene" well may be Blizzard doesn't want Kespa in charge of the progamer scene. May be they want to do it themselves. Is that not reasonable? And Blizzard idea about how to run a Sc2 pro scene isn't the best one... qualify that. Basically Blizzard idea is big SOLO tournaments with huge prices. And here are the problems. How long can they pump in money for the prices? What are the perspectives for new players to live from the esport? We know that Korean pro scene is focused on teams. This model ensures that a pro gamer is actually a job where you get paid for playing and get bonuses as a addition to normal pay (so basically you have a steady income while you are on team). The Blizzard idea is be no1 so you can get any money. So as long as you win or (be in top 4 or 8) you get the money. The problem is that there are sheduled 12 tourneys per year in Sc2 (so lets say ~80 people would get price money - scratch that tournament would be for 32 players with code S)) the rest get ZERO. This will lead to players having to get a normal job (god know how many hours they work in korea) and practice Sc in free time that will lead to: a) worse level of games b) decline of life (im sure i got that right but you should be able to figure out what i meant) Remember we are talking about korea not NA or EUBasically with Blizzard idea about turnaments you can't have a steady income so its a bad career choice for young people. You have better chances at playing some lottery. why do i say that? Nada the PRO failed to qualify to GSL3. Kespa pro teams solution was way better than this. Kespa runed SC:BW offered a stable job (if you dont perform too good you get sacked but it happens in normal jobs too). Blizard idea is basically get a lottery ticket and hope you can win a torunament to get some money.
If you really want to do an SCBW vs SC2 comparison. The proscene for Sc1 was much much much... much much much... much much much... Smaller than SC2s current scene when it was of the same age as it is now. It took a long time to pick up and get to the point it is now, and arguably even picked up momentum when Starcraft 2 was announced.
The only difference between the two scenes is experience and age.
I don't want to turn this into a game war since I love both games, so I'll just go to what is on the table now...
The Deal? It is(was) a good one, keeping sponsorship money with a split on revenue on sublicensing is reasonable. Why isn't it working? Because the key factor of acknowledging IP rights, which would make the existence of KESPA questionable, and the history between the two organizations.
I believe intellectual property is the reason we get good quality games. I also believe in an IP owners rights to protect his IP. So no I won't be convinced that KESPA stance on this is the better one for games in general since it discourages game devs to put in things like LAN or balance games for the Esport scene since all that extra effort will only facilitate other people from making money.
Blizzard sold 9 million copies of starcraft, that's their reward for making it. To say they deserve a slice of the Korean esports scene as well is just baseless. To bring back this metaphor: a soccer ball manufacturer doesn't own the IP rights to televised soccer matches. Giving video game developers control over not only the sale of their games, but how they're used as well only stifles innovation. No new esports industry can spring up, modders are at the mercy of the devs, it is just horrible all around for the consumer. It would better to have a completely free market in regards to entertainment media, that way you wouldn't have big corporations stomping all over the little guy and stifling competition with these ridiculous laws. Last edit: 2010-11-16 01:12:12
If you invented the Soccer ball, better yet, invented a basic ruleset to what would consist todays football... Then yes you would have rights over the guy televising matches and making money off your invention. You could then sell those rights for whatever price you want, however no one currently living can claim that... and at best you could invent a better way of manufacturing a soccer ball... So despite being called a sport, it makes most sport analogies ridiculous.
KESPA doesn't even want to acknowledge the basic rights. Since there isn't a real precendent to starcraft I don't know for how long rights with regards to a game should belong to the creator. However the basis of IP is that I shouldn't be allowed to make money over someone elses invention it's not "ridiculous laws".
|
On November 16 2010 01:11 attackfighter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time. Blizzard sold 9 million copies of starcraft, that's their reward for making it. To say they deserve a slice of the Korean esports scene as well is just baseless. To bring back this metaphor: a soccer ball manufacturer doesn't own the IP rights to televised soccer matches. Giving video game developers control over not only the sale of their games, but how they're used as well only stifles innovation. No new esports industry can spring up, modders are at the mercy of the devs, it is just horrible all around for the consumer. It would better to have a completely free market in regards to entertainment media, that way you wouldn't have big corporations stomping all over the little guy and stifling competition with these ridiculous laws.
It's not about the money, it's about the rights. I don't think Blizzard plans on actively using their share of the "control", they just need to have it in their back pocket in case a situation arises where their rights are being infringed upon (who knows how this could happen, unprecedented shit happens all the time). This is perfectly normal and it's absurd that so many people are angry about it. This is an agreement that should have happened in 2001 (and probably wouldn't have changed much about today's pro scene).
Also, while this situation can be compared in many ways to athletic sports, that soccer ball metaphor is very poor. Starcraft isn't a generic piece of material that's shipped out of a factory. It's a piece of software, 100% subject to IP laws. It was invented by Blizzard, who fully own the rights to it. The ball was invented by cavemen (and to my knowledge, that organization went under a while ago).
|
On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time.
You assume other organizations could've pulled off what kespa, ogn, mbc have done. I don't see any other such organizations. It's also been established that BW became an esport game through pure luck. SCBW could have just be another popular game, and another random game could've become the main esport game.
Also, developing a game from scratch is not as hard as you make it out to be. Maintaining a successful national esport model for 10 years is far far far harder than developing a 1998 game. Take this from a software engineer. Budgetwise, Kespa and the broadcasting stations have spent much more than Blizzard in developing SCBW.
|
This football manufacturer metaphor getting thrown around lately is completely inaccurate. There are several major companies making footballs and hundreds, if not thousands, of smaller companies doing the same thing. Nobody owns the rights to "A Football." However, Blizzard does own the rights to "Starcraft." There is only one company making that game and they do own all the rights to it, legally.
|
On November 16 2010 04:57 Zechs wrote: This football manufacturer metaphor getting thrown around lately is completely inaccurate. There are several major companies making footballs and hundreds, if not thousands, of smaller companies doing the same thing. Nobody owns the rights to "A Football." However, Blizzard does own the rights to "Starcraft." There is only one company making that game and they do own all the rights to it, legally.
All rights to sell the game? Definitely.
All rights to televising the game? You can't say they do own that right, legally. This is STILL vague.
|
Wow these are horrible terms from a business perspective. No wonder they got rejected. 50/50 ownership split?? That's ridiculously high considering all they did was make the game. 75/25 in MBC/OGN's favor would already be generous. 50/50 is a slap in the face.
|
On November 16 2010 04:51 buhhy wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time. You assume other organizations could've pulled off what kespa, ogn, mbc have done. I don't see any other such organizations. It's also been established that BW became an esport game through pure luck. SCBW could have just be another popular game, and another random game could've become the main esport game. Also, developing a game from scratch is not as hard as you make it out to be. Maintaining a successful national esport model for 10 years is far far far harder than developing a 1998 game. Take this from a software engineer. Budgetwise, Kespa and the broadcasting stations have spent much more than Blizzard in developing SCBW.
I disagree that another game could've gone as far as BroodWar did. The reason BroodWar is so popular is because Blizzard made it so evenly balanced between 3 races that function completely differently. If it was unbalanced, it wouldn't be a viable game competitively. If all the races were basically the same (like in Age of Empires for example) it would get boring very fast. Blizzard made a game so dynamic that the metagame is still evolving 12 years later, which is unprecedented. No other game company in the world has achieved such a feat.
Again, I believe that the game itself, not Kespa or the broadcasting stations, has been the biggest factor in the success of today's pro scene. The budgets are irrelevent and impossible to gauge, and being a game designer myself, I think you're downplaying the amount of work Blizzard put into the game. The fact that it was made in 1998 has no bearing; the only difference is graphics and visuals really. The game logic is where the money is, and Blizzard has perfected that.
Regardless of how much money or work was put into their respective efforts, Blizzard clearly brought more to the table by designing the game that started all of this.
|
On November 16 2010 05:24 TheGreatHegemon wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 04:57 Zechs wrote: This football manufacturer metaphor getting thrown around lately is completely inaccurate. There are several major companies making footballs and hundreds, if not thousands, of smaller companies doing the same thing. Nobody owns the rights to "A Football." However, Blizzard does own the rights to "Starcraft." There is only one company making that game and they do own all the rights to it, legally. All rights to sell the game? Definitely. All rights to televising the game? You can't say they do own that right, legally. This is STILL vague.
That's the thing it isn't. IP doesn't say you own the rights to make money off certain aspect of your product, it says you have the rights all around and can choose to sell those rights however way they want... Like how 3d engines or software devs have a vast variety of licenses you can find. So when you consider that they are designing SC2 for instance
What's vague is how long you should or can hold the rights to how a particular piece of software is being used. (By the way this is likely ONE major reason SC2 doesn't have LAN and likely won't have LAN till they know they have the law on their side when it comes to these matters) What's vague is how much you should pay for these rights. What's vague is how much you can charge for those rights fully knowing that like taxes if you charge too much you will stunt growth.
|
On November 16 2010 06:37 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 04:51 buhhy wrote:On November 15 2010 23:43 Ferago wrote:On November 15 2010 19:44 Pippah wrote: Blizzard should pay OGN/MBC for showing their game for a decade instead of suing them beacuse of greed. They have enough money stacked around their wow servers to feed the continent of Africa for 60 years, so wanting control of something they didnt create (the culture around one of their games) is just disgusting. I think Kespa and OGN/MBC are getting way too much credit for what they've done. Sure, they've done a great job of organizing this league and these tournaments, but that pales in comparison to the work Blizzard put into making the game from scratch. Tons of organizations could have pulled off what Kespa has accomplished, because the culture revolves around Starcraft, not something specifically done by Kespa or OGN/MBC. No other game could have filled the role of BroodWar in today's pro scene. Blizzard's revenue from WoW is irrelevent; they've earned every penny by making several of the best video games of all time. You assume other organizations could've pulled off what kespa, ogn, mbc have done. I don't see any other such organizations. It's also been established that BW became an esport game through pure luck. SCBW could have just be another popular game, and another random game could've become the main esport game. Also, developing a game from scratch is not as hard as you make it out to be. Maintaining a successful national esport model for 10 years is far far far harder than developing a 1998 game. Take this from a software engineer. Budgetwise, Kespa and the broadcasting stations have spent much more than Blizzard in developing SCBW. I disagree that another game could've gone as far as BroodWar did. The reason BroodWar is so popular is because Blizzard made it so evenly balanced between 3 races that function completely differently. If it was unbalanced, it wouldn't be a viable game competitively. If all the races were basically the same (like in Age of Empires for example) it would get boring very fast. Blizzard made a game so dynamic that the metagame is still evolving 12 years later, which is unprecedented. No other game company in the world has achieved such a feat. Again, I believe that the game itself, not Kespa or the broadcasting stations, has been the biggest factor in the success of today's pro scene. The budgets are irrelevent and impossible to gauge, and being a game designer myself, I think you're downplaying the amount of work Blizzard put into the game. The fact that it was made in 1998 has no bearing; the only difference is graphics and visuals really. The game logic is where the money is, and Blizzard has perfected that. Regardless of how much money or work was put into their respective efforts, Blizzard clearly brought more to the table by designing the game that started all of this.
Most balancing of BW was done though maps. Also I don't think Blizz put an exceptional effort into balance or dynamic gameplay, many other devs put more effort into their games.
|
On November 16 2010 06:54 Furycrab wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 05:24 TheGreatHegemon wrote:On November 16 2010 04:57 Zechs wrote: This football manufacturer metaphor getting thrown around lately is completely inaccurate. There are several major companies making footballs and hundreds, if not thousands, of smaller companies doing the same thing. Nobody owns the rights to "A Football." However, Blizzard does own the rights to "Starcraft." There is only one company making that game and they do own all the rights to it, legally. All rights to sell the game? Definitely. All rights to televising the game? You can't say they do own that right, legally. This is STILL vague. That's the thing it isn't. IP doesn't say you own the rights to make money off certain aspect of your product, it says you have the rights all around and can choose to sell those rights however way they want... Like how 3d engines or software devs have a vast variety of licenses you can find. So when you consider that they are designing SC2 for instance What's vague is how long you should or can hold the rights to how a particular piece of software is being used. (By the way this is likely ONE major reason SC2 doesn't have LAN and likely won't have LAN till they know they have the law on their side when it comes to these matters) What's vague is how much you should pay for these rights. What's vague is how much you can charge for those rights fully knowing that like taxes if you charge too much you will stunt growth.
[cite your source] for why it's so cleancut that a video game's developer, who is paid for the purchase of a physical good is 100% definitely absolutely allowed to charge for this? South Korea source, please. NA is a different ballgame.
|
On November 15 2010 14:10 attackfighter wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 13:38 battarro wrote: If you invent a square ball, and I create a game around it that is so popular, much more than your sales of the square ball. Am I entitled to just milk the square ball? Because that is what you are proposing,
your scenario makes no sense, am I making money from "inventing" the ball? are you making money from "creating" your game? and if so, how? your metaphor is insane and detached entirely from reality, so idk whether or not you're morally or legally entitled to "milk" the ball (w/e you think that means)
The scenario is simple. look, You invent a square ball and patent it. It belongs to you. No one before you has created it. You sale it for everyone to play with. Kids love it. Your ball is so well made that it last for years, effectively it never breaks, or loses air. You are successful selling the ball,. you make millions, sellig millions of balls. But after a certain point, where the market is saturated with your product, your sales sharply decline. Everyone who was going to buy it already bought it. Your product is successful, it is awesome, it is just that people don't need to replace their old balls, so they don't buy new products from you. So your revenue slowly declines with time. and in 10 years you can not sell any other square balls, because everyone has one at this point, or your sells are minimal people who lost their ball. Now I come along and create a sport based on the ball, a sport that requires a square ball because the way it bounces. And since everyone already has the ball, they relate to the sport and they love watching people playing it. I create a company broadcasting the games of square ball without giving you any money. Over time my product does not loses its value because people who likes watching them still watch them regardless of the age. In other word, my product does not depreciated, not it saturates the market.
Fast forward 10 year, your company is now broke, because no one buys the square balls, since almost everyone has one, or it is easy to get one the black market a "made in china" counterfeit.
My company is successful and still continues to be successful since people still watch the game. The older people get they still watch the games they like, not necessarily play them. Not to mention i can sell them advertisement over and over and over again to each individual, more so than the initial money you made from the sell of the ball.
If you can not see the analogy and why one company product has a limited shelllife vs the other company product, and how it affect their cash revenue. Then I have nothing more to say.
|
On November 16 2010 04:51 buhhy wrote: Also, developing a game from scratch is not as hard as you make it out to be. Maintaining a successful national esport model for 10 years is far far far harder than developing a 1998 game. Take this from a software engineer. Budgetwise, Kespa and the broadcasting stations have spent much more than Blizzard in developing SCBW. Creating a piece of software is not hard. There are millions of "hello world" versions out there. Creating a good piece of software is hard. Creating a good piece of software that millions of people bought and continue to use to this day is really really hard. Your budget comparison it is not fair, because you are aggregating, aka summing all the instances of the Proleague and OSl and MSL over 10 years. How about this. It is more Expensive to create the game from scratch, than to create any single tournament to this day. Same way, if you were going to keep the developers/ Qa/ everyone who created the game employed, it will cost even more than the budget of all the tournaments running up to date.
|
On November 16 2010 07:59 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 15 2010 14:10 attackfighter wrote:On November 15 2010 13:38 battarro wrote: If you invent a square ball, and I create a game around it that is so popular, much more than your sales of the square ball. Am I entitled to just milk the square ball? Because that is what you are proposing,
your scenario makes no sense, am I making money from "inventing" the ball? are you making money from "creating" your game? and if so, how? your metaphor is insane and detached entirely from reality, so idk whether or not you're morally or legally entitled to "milk" the ball (w/e you think that means) The scenario is simple. look, You invent a square ball and patent it. It belongs to you. No one before you has created it. You sale it for everyone to play with. Kids love it. Your ball is so well made that it last for years, effectively it never breaks, or loses air. You are successful selling the ball,. you make millions, sellig millions of balls. But after a certain point, where the market is saturated with your product, your sales sharply decline. Everyone who was going to buy it already bought it. Your product is successful, it is awesome, it is just that people don't need to replace their old balls, so they don't buy new products from you. So your revenue slowly declines with time. and in 10 years you can not sell any other square balls, because everyone has one at this point, or your sells are minimal people who lost their ball. Now I come along and create a sport based on the ball, a sport that requires a square ball because the way it bounces. And since everyone already has the ball, they relate to the sport and they love watching people playing it. I create a company broadcasting the games of square ball without giving you any money. Over time my product does not loses its value because people who likes watching them still watch them regardless of the age. In other word, my product does not depreciated, not it saturates the market. Fast forward 10 year, your company is now broke, because no one buys the square balls, since almost everyone has one, or it is easy to get one the black market a "made in china" counterfeit. My company is successful and still continues to be successful since people still watch the game. The older people get they still watch the games they like, not necessarily play them. Not to mention i can sell them advertisement over and over and over again to each individual, more so than the initial money you made from the sell of the ball. If you can not see the analogy and why one company product has a limited shelllife vs the other company product, and how it affect their cash revenue. Then I have nothing more to say.
So basically you argue your company should never have to develop a new product? Not to mention conterfeits should be prosecuted, so you would still be the key seller of the square ball. In addition, new people enter markets all the time (People are born, etc). While not as applicable (but still somewhat), old balls will break and new ones will be purchased.
|
Nothing guarantees that the new product will be sucesful. Even with a proven track record.
Time and time again software companies have one hit wonder series, and they can never reproduce the initial magic of earlier versions.
Look at this list and see how many great games manufactures are down the toilet, 3do Might and Magic. Rogue the makers of Quake., Acclaim, tons of games.
The list is huge, and it is not that they made a shitty product, it is that is REALLY REALLY hard to make top selling games. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Defunct_video_game_companies
Look at the list, of how 10 years after, they are dead because the product the made deprecates really fast.
Second back to the analogy version with the balls. New people who enter the market do so in matter that it is not sustainable for the company. This is because it is easy to ask a friend for an old ball, or to get a counterfeit one.
Just look at how many people buy Starcraft1, vs how many people get ti off torrents for a analogy. If blizzard will have to rely on Sc1 sales they would have gone broke long time ago. There is no questions about it.
IP laws exists to protect the creator of anything against this type of commercial derivative work. The crux is one time revenue (sale of box), vs continuum revenue( tv viewership).
Lets assume that GSL is not affiliated with Blizzard. That they bought and modified the game to use Lan. As of now I have paid GSL more money than what i paid for the game, without mentioning the money they get from advertising Sony to me. I can not say morally that that is OK. That a company who did not made the game makes more money from it that the company that made the game in the first place, without giving anything to the creator. There has to be a symbiotic relationship between the two of them. And laws have to exists to protect the creators.
Because if the creators are not protected legally, then we have what we have today. A crappy no LAN support. Because yes, i would bet money that the reason LAN support is not out of the box, is because of the Korean Market and KESPA.
|
So Blizzard is driven to develop new products to sustain itself?
I fail to see a problem here...
|
Tell that to any of the companies i just listed. LOL, make a new product silly.. companies... people will buy it!!!
3do just make a new Might and magic, people will buy it.
|
On November 16 2010 08:37 TheGreatHegemon wrote: So Blizzard is driven to develop new products to sustain itself?
I fail to see a problem here...
In all seriousness. I hope you see how hard this is to be maintained at a developer level. You have to create best seller year after year in order to don't go broke.
What we are looking at is a new business model that works for developers. Not only they create a good product. But thanks to the continuing revenue/ marketting factor it helps eliminate the deprecation factor, or at least add 5 years to their product. Making it a lot more easier to come up with sequels once the time has come.
|
On November 16 2010 08:38 battarro wrote: Tell that to any of the companies i just listed. LOL, make a new product silly.. companies... people will buy it!!!
3do just make a new Might and magic, people will buy it.
This is no different from any other company. If you keep making shitty products, you're going to go defunct, and I still see nothing wrong with this.
|
On November 16 2010 08:41 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 08:37 TheGreatHegemon wrote: So Blizzard is driven to develop new products to sustain itself?
I fail to see a problem here... In all seriousness. I hope you see how hard this is to be maintained at a developer level. You have to create best seller year after year in order to don't go broke. What we are looking at is a new business model that works for developers. Not only they create a good product. But thanks to the continuing revenue/ marketting factor it helps eliminate the deprecation factor, or at least add 5 years to their product. Making it a lot more easier to come up with sequels once the time has come.
It's not like Blizzard is some tiny indie house that has to make or break it on a single game; they're part of the largest video game company in existence right now, IIRC Blizzard-Activision surpassed EA games in size. If they have a bust game, chances are that they would survive. If they keep making crappy games, eventually they would suffer for it.
Continued sales is driven by expanding market share. Leaving the eSports arena open to massive growth encourages more sales of the game. If anything, eSports is the marketing factor that you're talking about.
|
There is nothing wrong with going under if you make a shitty product. What it is wrong is to go under, while another companies thrives on your products.
|
On November 16 2010 10:02 battarro wrote: There is nothing wrong with going under if you make a shitty product. What it is wrong is to go under, while another companies thrives on your products.
If they purchased a copy of your product, then I see nothing wrong with it.
Edit: And I should clarify, not only do I see nothing wrong with it morally, I'm not certain it'd be illegal either, especially since this case has no precedent (which i've found)
|
Anyone arguing for KESPA is arguing against the development of ESports and any games of quality because of the many arguments listed above. The development of video games depends on the ability of the developers to profit from said development; in essence, why would anyone take it upon themselves to make something at their own cost for the world to use for free? And on the opposite end of the spectrum, if developing something is profitable, more people will be encouraged to develop and flesh out that market. More developer profit directly relates to more development; this is intuitive, but generally ignored by moralists, who argue that funds should be generally be divided between this this and that to foster growth, when in fact this often hinders growth.
A few key concepts to think on: . If you feel you are being overcharged for a product, service, or license to use the above, you're free to not purchase it and use it. Nobody pays $5 for a McDouble. . If two companies are profiting from the same service, this is mutually good for business and both companies should invest in the expansion of said business for so long as it shows a profit. . If one company is providing a service and paying an exorbitant licensing fee, and fails to make a profit, then they will not continue to provide the service and pay the fee, resulting in a loss of revenue for the licensing company. . Therefore, it is in the best interest of all involved to foster the development of profitable markets, to sustain all contributors the industry. The players, teams, sponsors, Blizzard, and KESPA all benefit heavily from this. . However, if the company that provides the service chooses simply not to pay the licensing fee, and the licenser has no legal recourse against this, then the licenser no longer has any financial motivation to create and develop future products, and must simply rely on the original revenue stream from sales of the original product. This may still be profitable, but it may just be better to seek other avenues or create a competing service provider of its own, often doing something detrimental to the entire industry. . Therefore it is important to create strict licensing restrictions when creating a licensed product, so that as a developer you maximize your profit, which is GOOD. Profit is GOOD because it enables development, profit for services providers is GOOD because it enables continuation of the service which both the developer and service provider can make revenue from, and all of these things are GOOD for us, the people that enjoy and use the service.
Therefore, developers take great legal pains to develop legal constraints on their product, usually in the form of License Agreements, so they can make more money because that's why they developed the god damn game in the first place; not to be awesome or so that you think that they're cool. And the best part is that greed - that desire to make money - is actually what's driving the action of making the game, of hosting the tournaments, of creating the StarLeagues. Everyone involved should make money off of it because that is their reward for doing this awesome thing for us. Why would you make shoes if people were just like "Hey I need that!" and took them. You wouldn't.
|
On November 16 2010 09:59 TheGreatHegemon wrote: It's not like Blizzard is some tiny indie house that has to make or break it on a single game; they're part of the largest video game company in existence right now, IIRC Blizzard-Activision surpassed EA games in size. If they have a bust game, chances are that they would survive. If they keep making crappy games, eventually they would suffer for it.
Continued sales is driven by expanding market share. Leaving the eSports arena open to massive growth encourages more sales of the game. If anything, eSports is the marketing factor that you're talking about.
So now the size of the maker matter? So small Indi guys deserve protection but big guys dont?
Without a revenue from the advertisement, the continuum branding of the company, the sales of the old product is not enough. Even the best game in the world, after time it reaches a point in where everyone who would be interested in buying it already bought it. While the revenues from the esport continues over a longer period of time
|
Large devs like Blizzard rarely make flops. They play it safe, they advertise like crazy, they don't risk their necks with every game they release. I don't see any reason why Blizzard should be able to stifle an entire industry at a whim. It hurts competition, it costs thousands of people their jobs, and it gives a single bloated entity (Blizzard) more money and power than they need. The government should only intervene in the free market to foster the good parts, like competition, fair play, etc., it shouldn't support laws that allow huge business's like Blizz to walk all over fledgling industry.
|
On November 16 2010 10:16 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 09:59 TheGreatHegemon wrote: It's not like Blizzard is some tiny indie house that has to make or break it on a single game; they're part of the largest video game company in existence right now, IIRC Blizzard-Activision surpassed EA games in size. If they have a bust game, chances are that they would survive. If they keep making crappy games, eventually they would suffer for it.
Continued sales is driven by expanding market share. Leaving the eSports arena open to massive growth encourages more sales of the game. If anything, eSports is the marketing factor that you're talking about. So now the size of the maker matter? So small Indi guys deserve protection but big guys dont? Without a revenue from the advertisement, the continuum branding of the company, the sales of the old product is not enough. Even the best game in the world, after time it reaches a point in where everyone who would be interested in buying it already bought it. While the revenues from the esport continues over a longer period of time
While not the point of the argument, we consistently see variations in protection based on company size. For example, see limitations Microsoft must abide by versus Apple. This is not unusual, and makes a lot of sense.
That being said, most indie houses aren't going to be that small anymore if they pull off a blockbuster that brings it up to massive eSports revenues.
And there's nothing stopping the original company from making revenue from eSports; they just have to do a better job at it than their competitors (or lock out competitors, such as in SC2. If gaming/eSports was a more mature market could even be illegal - IE tying Windows to Internet Explorer).
|
On November 16 2010 10:22 TheGreatHegemon wrote: While not the point of the argument, we consistently see variations in protection based on company size. For example, see limitations Microsoft must abide by versus Apple. This is not unusual, and makes a lot of sense.
And there's nothing stopping the original company from making revenue from eSports; they just have to do a better job at it than their competitors (or lock out competitors, such as in SC2. If gaming/eSports was a more mature market could even be illegal - IE tying Windows to Internet Explorer).
You are comparing apples and oranges. To start, you are comparing Anti trust laws that exists on the USA that prevent the insertion of a free product that performs action B, on another product that perform action C, on detriment of a third party product that it is not free and also performs action B.
That was the heart of the Microsoft vs Netscape anti trust, issue.
Regarding apple, apple is not a small company by any means, even when compared to microsoft. In fact apple stock are worth 10 times more than Microsoft. I'm not sure of any case where different levels of protections were issued based on the size of the plaintiff, specially on IP cases..Feel free to point them out.
|
On November 16 2010 10:40 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 10:22 TheGreatHegemon wrote: While not the point of the argument, we consistently see variations in protection based on company size. For example, see limitations Microsoft must abide by versus Apple. This is not unusual, and makes a lot of sense.
And there's nothing stopping the original company from making revenue from eSports; they just have to do a better job at it than their competitors (or lock out competitors, such as in SC2. If gaming/eSports was a more mature market could even be illegal - IE tying Windows to Internet Explorer).
You are comparing apples and oranges. To start, you are comparing Anti trust laws that exists on the USA that prevent the insertion of a free product that performs action B, on another product that perform action C, on detriment of a third party product that it is not free and also performs action B. That was the heart of the Microsoft vs Netscape anti trust, issue. Regarding apple, apple is not a small company by any means, even when compared to microsoft. In fact apple stock are worth 10 times more than Microsoft. I'm not sure of any case where different levels of protections were issued based on the size of the plaintiff, specially on IP cases..Feel free to point them out.
EU Decision on a browser selection screen for Windows 7 had nothing to do with Microsoft vs Netscape in the US. Apple (IIRC) bundles Safari and isn't required to have a browser selection screen. Microsoft, even after remove dependencies on IE within Windows, still had to provide a browser selection screen.
Apple can lock their OS to a given hardware & Vendor, last I checked there were grumblings in the EU about Windows being preinstalled at all.
|
batarro I think you need to elaborate more on what your arguement is. you've given plenty of hypothetical situation and metaphors and people have debated with you regarding them, however you haven't put forth much of an opinion regarding the matter at hand. from what little I can gather your opinion is that blizzard should not have to compete to be successful in the e-sports market, simply because you think that's the fair way of doing it. please elaborate and drop the microsoft vs apple thing, it's annoying!
|
my hypothetical situations are simple, just replace a "square ball" with starcraft and you have the BW programing at a glance. At where a party created an unique piece of equipment that is the main tool of another party for revenue. The rest are the ramifications from a business perspective.
My point is are simple. Blizzard is entitled to portion of the market established by Kespa, they have a strong saying in controlling what happens with Sc1 and yes, it is their right to kill sc1, in order to push their new product.
|
On November 16 2010 12:32 battarro wrote: my hypothetical situations are simple, just replace a "square ball" with starcraft and you have the BW programing at a glance. At where a party created an unique piece of equipment that is the main tool of another party for revenue. The rest are the ramifications from a business perspective.
My point is are simple. Blizzard is entitled to portion of the market established by Kespa, they have a strong saying in controlling what happens with Sc1 and yes, it is their right to kill sc1, in order to push their new product.
Serious question,
Do car manufacturers get any say whatsoever in who uses their car in what race? Cuz it's basically the same as your "square ball". Someone made the cars, others made the races. I don't think people give royalties to BMW or Ford each time there is a race anywhere in the world. Nor do they have any say whether their car can be used or not in x or y different race.
Was James Naismith (the guy that invented Basketball) receiving royalties for each game of basketball played on TV? It's his creation afterball.
Is the guy that invented the skateboard receiving royalties for each televised game where skateboarding is used?
Might be wrong, but no seems to be the answer to these 3. Why should it be different for blizzard.
Just cuz your created ''something'' does not entitle you to decide everything that happends with said ''something''.
|
because... those 3 are covered by intellectual property rights. these oranges are mighty orange. that apple obviuosly can't be red.
Just cuz your created ''something'' does not entitle you to decide everything that happends with said ''something''.
uhh that's the whole point of copyrights and patents and intellectual property...
|
@ battaro
Your analogy is interesting, but many points are twisted the wrong way.
1/ Blizz isnt broke, and its not like their new "ball" isnt selling. They are actually selling well. 2/ A good part of your old "ball" 's popularity came from this new company that makes a sport out of it. And they are responsible for a huge amount of publicity which, in turn, translated into your sales. 3/ Your new product is related to (i would go as far as to say it live off the fame of) your "square ball" that stopped gaining popularity until this new "sport" came about. So a good part of the sales also benefit from (came from) this popularity brought about by this "sport".
With these 3 in mind, can you really complain? Let alone press them with ridiculous lawsuits and conditions after you are done thriving off their efforts?
|
After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard?
|
Personally I love BW, but 90k USD a season isn't that bad. It's more of an issue of who is gonna pay to respect blizzard's IP rights.
This whole issue pretty much comes down to that, emotional anecdotal stuff aside. The original product was produced by blizzard.
Don't turn this into some silly KESPA is non-profit and blizzard is trying to blah blah. KESPA may be non-profit in name, but they promote their parent companies via advertising. Blizzard may not be inherently good in the situation, but if they hadn't created the game and owned rights to it. There would've been no BW for you guys to watch and fawn over.
Someone had to build the house, for you guys to enjoy it. Whether you think E-Sports could've existed without KESPA is another story.
|
Even though it sucks that it is coming down to court and terms that both sides are not agee'n on. In all reality its blizzards game, they created it with there money, there staff, there equipment, and all other things that go into making a video game. I would think that anyone in the world would feel that if they created or invented something, they would want compensation of the product if it was being used as a broadcasted entity, not only game sales. Blizzard using Gretech as a puppet in korea was only a strategic move on a business stand-point. The broadcasting companies should just agree on terms. Blizzard/Gretech are only charging them to broadcast the game, not take 50:50 of what they make off sponsors. The sponsorship money goes all to the broadcasting company.
|
On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard?
Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms.
|
On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms.
As if they didn't benefit enough from the BW eSports scene without their logo directly paraded around everywhere? And 50:50 ownership is huge. What about shows like Hyungjoon becomes a progamer. Why should Blizzard have any ownership of this at all?
|
On November 16 2010 13:03 Levythenobz wrote: Serious question,
Do car manufacturers get any say whatsoever in who uses their car in what race? Cuz it's basically the same as your "square ball". Someone made the cars, others made the races. I don't think people give royalties to BMW or Ford each time there is a race anywhere in the world. Nor do they have any say whether their car can be used or not in x or y different race.
Was James Naismith (the guy that invented Basketball) receiving royalties for each game of basketball played on TV? It's his creation afterball.
Is the guy that invented the skateboard receiving royalties for each televised game where skateboarding is used?
Might be wrong, but no seems to be the answer to these 3. Why should it be different for blizzard.
Just cuz your created ''something'' does not entitle you to decide everything that happends with said ''something''.
It is different for that case from a legal point of view. First, each car company is a diferent legal entity, each one with a different product. Second, the use of a specif car vs other type of car it is not a requirement for the race to happen, you can have a ford, a toyota, a honda. Third, no car manufacturer holds the patent for a generic car, an internal combustion engine., the entity necessary to run the race. This items are different from BW, or the square ball scenario, on which a single company holds the patent for the product. Also without the product from this single company , the "race" or the "game" can not occur. This point in particular is important in determining if it can be consider a derivative work or not. If the original product can be removed from the new work and what an impact will have on the new work the removal of the original product. If we were to remove all ford cards from a race and replace them with Honda, the race will not suffer any modification on the enjoyment of the viewer. When was the last time on a race you went? "DID you see how that Honda performed?. Did you notice how the curves were handle by the ferrari? The experience of enjoing a race is not dependant of the cars on it.
With broodwar. Everything thing is tied to specific elements of the game. Items that are copyrigthed . "Did you see hte micro on those zerglings, the muta flock, the M&M ball, etc. Everything that we enjoy from the broadcast is tied to specific, non replaceable elements from the broodwar game.
Basketball is not protected by copyrights laws, sadly because the guy who invented did not patented it / copyrighted it. Has he copyrighted/patented it would be a diferent tune..
SkateBoard question: When you buy a skateboard, you dont sign a EULA, something that you do when you buy a computer game. More important, not single company holds the patent/copyright for skateboards
|
As a side note, the people who invented the skateboard, because they did not patent it and copyrighted it, probably died without enjoying the fruits of their invention. Probably it was some surfer dudes in California, and a lot of people got rich thanks to them, just, not them.
|
On November 16 2010 23:45 infinity2k9 wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms. As if they didn't benefit enough from the BW eSports scene without their logo directly paraded around everywhere? And 50:50 ownership is huge. What about shows like Hyungjoon becomes a progamer. Why should Blizzard have any ownership of this at all?
It doesn't matter how much they've benefited from esports; they are still entitled to being CREDITED for making the game. It's really not asking that much to put a little Blizzard logo somewhere in view of the camera. And the terms of this agreement apply specifically to broadcasting of tournaments and things like that. Shows like the one you mentioned would have to go through a different process (or at least be subject to different terms).
Besides, I think you're still misinterpreting what ownership means. It just means that Blizzard would be allowed to use the broadcasting material themselves (for whatever reason) without paying royalties back to the broadcasting stations. It has nothing to do with control over anything, or even money. As the terms clearly state, the broadcasting stations keep 100% of their revenues, and only need to pay the fixed royalty fee.
|
It could be something as simple as Flash kissing the trophy of his OSL Victory with the caption, Starcraft Best game in the world. On a poster for marketing.
Right now Blizzard can not do that, since they do not own any of the broadcasts, or a % on the broadcast.
|
On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms.
We can agree to disagree, but those three things aren't the only things in that agreement. I'd also point out that while it isn't stated in that agreement I think it's very likely that MBCGame and OGN would be asked to change their programming around so that it doesn't compete with SC2 (as that was a big issue in earlier discussions).
You also didn't answer my main question of that post and instead just decided to give your input on the deal Gretech offered. I don't care about discussing the ins and outs of the deal or why I think it's bullshit.
|
what was your main question? why should we care?
Because it sets a legal precedent.
|
Blizzard is clearly working through Gretech in order to avoid the foreign company argument. However, Gretech has hardly done anything for e-sports, whereas those who did all the legwork are getting less than they deserve. I fail to see how Gretech can demand 50:50.
It makes sense that Blizzard would try to protect their image. The betting scandal demonstrated that Kespa can't handle the scene. Yet, they are overcharging the broadcasters and undercutting the length of contract.
Blizzard is cutting off their nose to spite their face as broadcasters won't be able to afford the payments or risk the uncertainty of short-term contracting. Blizzard might not want to kill BW, and they may very well only want control of the scene, fine whatever, but how can they expect it to survive when their demands would ruin the industry?
|
On November 17 2010 06:15 battarro wrote: what was your main question? why should we care?
Because it sets a legal precedent.
Well if you decided to reply him, shouldnt you reply to all his questions rather than dodging the ones that you cant answer (aka hes right, if so at least credit him for being right). Just a side note i target-fired you with some questions/arguments too, you dodged as well .
|
On November 17 2010 03:44 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms. We can agree to disagree, but those three things aren't the only things in that agreement. I'd also point out that while it isn't stated in that agreement I think it's very likely that MBCGame and OGN would be asked to change their programming around so that it doesn't compete with SC2 (as that was a big issue in earlier discussions). You also didn't answer my main question of that post and instead just decided to give your input on the deal Gretech offered. I don't care about discussing the ins and outs of the deal or why I think it's bullshit.
What was your main question? Why should you not be enraged at Blizzard and boycott them? If my response didn't answer that question then maybe you should further explain what you're enraged about, because you kind of just left it out in the open.
You are correct in observing that there are more than three terms on the agreement, but I still fail to see which ones you don't like. Again, maybe some elaboration would clear things up a bit. I'm not trying to be hostile, but I'm starting to wonder if you even know what you're talking about.
|
On November 16 2010 15:41 ffreakk wrote: @ battaro
Your analogy is interesting, but many points are twisted the wrong way.
1/ Blizz isnt broke, and its not like their new "ball" isnt selling. They are actually selling well. 2/ A good part of your old "ball" 's popularity came from this new company that makes a sport out of it. And they are responsible for a huge amount of publicity which, in turn, translated into your sales. 3/ Your new product is related to (i would go as far as to say it live off the fame of) your "square ball" that stopped gaining popularity until this new "sport" came about. So a good part of the sales also benefit from (came from) this popularity brought about by this "sport".
With these 3 in mind, can you really complain? Let alone press them with ridiculous lawsuits and conditions after you are done thriving off their efforts?
The selling of a new ball is irrelevant, Blizzard had the same right to the broodwar scene before the launch of SC2 and after the launch. It is not that when you create a new product you forfeit any rights to an old one.
While is it fortunate and convenient for blizzard that another company laid the ground work for the e-sport community, having doing so does not gives legal right to the company after creating the secondary market. For example if I take someones unused land and without their consent I build an apartment complex, they can come later and get everything i pour money and heart into. Is it fair, no, is it legal, yes, it is.
|
On November 17 2010 06:15 battarro wrote: what was your main question? why should we care?
Because it sets a legal precedent.
Rofl, any gamer who cares about the legal precedent this will set should be siding with KeSPA all the way for the simple fact that eSports can't exist if a developer can just shut down a scene when a new game comes out.
I've talked about the legal precedent this will set before, Blizzard winning sets an awful precedent for any organization that wishes to create a league around a game that lasts for more than a few years. The only way eSports will be taken seriously is if Brood War or some other game is played indefinitely in the same way any other sport works. If it just disappears when a sequel comes out then eSports will always been viewed in a negative light.
On November 17 2010 07:48 Ferago wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 03:44 overt wrote:On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms. We can agree to disagree, but those three things aren't the only things in that agreement. I'd also point out that while it isn't stated in that agreement I think it's very likely that MBCGame and OGN would be asked to change their programming around so that it doesn't compete with SC2 (as that was a big issue in earlier discussions). You also didn't answer my main question of that post and instead just decided to give your input on the deal Gretech offered. I don't care about discussing the ins and outs of the deal or why I think it's bullshit. What was your main question? Why should you not be enraged at Blizzard and boycott them? If my response didn't answer that question then maybe you should further explain what you're enraged about, because you kind of just left it out in the open. You are correct in observing that there are more than three terms on the agreement, but I still fail to see which ones you don't like. Again, maybe some elaboration would clear things up a bit. I'm not trying to be hostile, but I'm starting to wonder if you even know what you're talking about.
I don't care to talk about why I think the terms are bullshit because that's been discussed to death in the past thirteen pages.
My main question was, why as a fan of the Brood War scene should I give a shit about Blizzard or their IP rights? I want to know why people who like Brood War and who want Brood War to continue to be played indefinitely should be supportive of Blizzard over KeSPA. I thought it was made pretty clear in my post but maybe I'm wrong.
|
On November 17 2010 16:44 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 06:15 battarro wrote: what was your main question? why should we care?
Because it sets a legal precedent. Rofl, any gamer who cares about the legal precedent this will set should be siding with KeSPA all the way for the simple fact that eSports can't exist if a developer can just shut down a scene when a new game comes out. I've talked about the legal precedent this will set before, Blizzard winning sets an awful precedent for any organization that wishes to create a league around a game that lasts for more than a few years. The only way eSports will be taken seriously is if Brood War or some other game is played indefinitely in the same way any other sport works. If it just disappears when a sequel comes out then eSports will always been viewed in a negative light. Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 07:48 Ferago wrote:On November 17 2010 03:44 overt wrote:On November 16 2010 21:04 Ferago wrote:On November 16 2010 15:57 overt wrote: After reading a bunch of the replies I can't help but think that at least most of the people on Blizzard's side are people who don't give a shit what happens to Brood War. And frankly, if you don't care about the Brood War scene then why you'd even post on a thread about the Brood War scene is beyond me.
Could I have someone who cares about the Brood War scene and who wants to see Brood War continue explain why they favor Blizzard over KeSPA? Please don't lie or anything, if you're only interested in SC2 and don't really care if Brood War dies or do care if it dies but feel it's Brood Wars, "time," don't reply to me. I will ignore you. I want to hear reasons why, as a fan of Brood War and the pro scene, I should support Blizzard and not boycott every game they make from here on out.
I feel pretty betrayed by Blizzard to be honest. The terms on page one are fucking ridiculous (I'm not going to go into detail). Why can't they just demand that their logo be seen and ask for royalties every year? Even though OGN/MBCGame shouldn't have to pay royalties, I think they'd gladly pay royalties at a reasonable price once a year. So seriously, as someone who likes Brood War and wants the Brood War scene to continue why should I not be enraged at Blizzard? Blizzard isn't asking much beyond a reasonable royalty and the display of their logo. The only other significant item is the 50:50 split of ownership of the broadcasting material, which is normal. All that means is that Blizzard can use that material however they want for promotional purposes, etc., which would be for the benefit of both Blizzard and e-sports. It doesn't mean they're trying to control anything. So I'm not sure what it is that you (or anyone) find to be ridiculous in these terms. We can agree to disagree, but those three things aren't the only things in that agreement. I'd also point out that while it isn't stated in that agreement I think it's very likely that MBCGame and OGN would be asked to change their programming around so that it doesn't compete with SC2 (as that was a big issue in earlier discussions). You also didn't answer my main question of that post and instead just decided to give your input on the deal Gretech offered. I don't care about discussing the ins and outs of the deal or why I think it's bullshit. What was your main question? Why should you not be enraged at Blizzard and boycott them? If my response didn't answer that question then maybe you should further explain what you're enraged about, because you kind of just left it out in the open. You are correct in observing that there are more than three terms on the agreement, but I still fail to see which ones you don't like. Again, maybe some elaboration would clear things up a bit. I'm not trying to be hostile, but I'm starting to wonder if you even know what you're talking about. I don't care to talk about why I think the terms are bullshit because that's been discussed to death in the past thirteen pages. My main question was, why as a fan of the Brood War scene should I give a shit about Blizzard or their IP rights? I want to know why people who like Brood War and who want Brood War to continue to be played indefinitely should be supportive of Blizzard over KeSPA. I thought it was made pretty clear in my post but maybe I'm wrong.
That's a pretty abstract question. No one is asking you to personally give a shit about Blizzard's IP rights, but you'd do yourself well to acknowledge reality in this situation. They have rights, and they're choosing to exercise them in a reasonable manner.
Contrary to popular belief in this thread, the fate of Brood War doesn't depend on this agreement. At all. I can't drill that into your heads any more than I already have. All the broadcasting companies have to do is accept the terms, and continue doing things the same way. If Brood War dies, it will be because SC2 was more popular (whether we like it or not).
|
Except that SC2 is not more popular in Korea. At least not yet, and with players like Flash in it for the long haul I doubt it'll become more popular anytime soon.
The fact that you think if Blizzard wins they'll allow the Brood War scene to continue is kind of hilarious. Sure, they might let it continue or they may just decide to let it die. Anyone who's a fan of Brood War can't honestly side with Blizzard on this issue because there's at least a chance that they'll shut the scene down. I'd say the chance is incredibly high but I'm sure you'd put the chance at extremely low. Either way, there's a chance of it so why would I want Blizzard to win as a fan of the sport?
What rights they have in relation to broadcasting Brood War is up for discussion. I'd say they forfeited those "rights" when they let the scene go on for over a decade, had employees attend, and only seemed to care about it when KeSPA began selling broadcasting rights and only cared enough about it to take it to court when StarCraft 2 was released. It's obvious that their goals here are to further StarCraft 2. Not Brood War, not eSports. What if all the court does is declare that KeSPA can't charge broadcasting fees but that OGN and MBCGame can broadcast Brood War as much as they want? Or what if the court declares that KeSPA, OGN, and MBCGame have done nothing illegal at all? Wouldn't be out of the question at all especially given Blizzard's obvious motives here.
|
On November 17 2010 11:15 battarro wrote:Show nested quote +On November 16 2010 15:41 ffreakk wrote: @ battaro
Your analogy is interesting, but many points are twisted the wrong way.
1/ Blizz isnt broke, and its not like their new "ball" isnt selling. They are actually selling well. 2/ A good part of your old "ball" 's popularity came from this new company that makes a sport out of it. And they are responsible for a huge amount of publicity which, in turn, translated into your sales. 3/ Your new product is related to (i would go as far as to say it live off the fame of) your "square ball" that stopped gaining popularity until this new "sport" came about. So a good part of the sales also benefit from (came from) this popularity brought about by this "sport".
With these 3 in mind, can you really complain? Let alone press them with ridiculous lawsuits and conditions after you are done thriving off their efforts? The selling of a new ball is irrelevant, Blizzard had the same right to the broodwar scene before the launch of SC2 and after the launch. It is not that when you create a new product you forfeit any rights to an old one. While is it fortunate and convenient for blizzard that another company laid the ground work for the e-sport community, having doing so does not gives legal right to the company after creating the secondary market. For example if I take someones unused land and without their consent I build an apartment complex, they can come later and get everything i pour money and heart into. Is it fair, no, is it legal, yes, it is.
While it is true that SC2's sales is irrelevant to the legalities concerning SC1, in your original scenario you painted Blizzard to be going broke after sales of SC:BW go down, since they do not have a new product that sells well, i merely pointed out that.
The remaining points are the same legal stuffs that will only get decided in court, opinions are welcome, but since we are both neither lawyers nor do we possess any significant law knowledge, we will just have to agree to disagree for now.
On an interesting note, your example of unused land is actually against you. If i have thrived off your land for 10 years, and you have never made noise about it, its gone. You cant start claiming stuffs after it flourished because the law (at least for the most parts of the world) would deem that piece of land as mine. I would link a wiki article but i cant remember the exact name. The duration/time it takes for the land to transfer owner varies though. I learnt that in Phillipines it takes a mere 2 years.
PS: Not that e-Sport and land are the same things, so im not saying the same rule will apply. Just was something i wanted to mention.
|
On November 17 2010 17:03 overt wrote: Except that SC2 is not more popular in Korea. At least not yet, and with players like Flash in it for the long haul I doubt it'll become more popular anytime soon.
The fact that you think if Blizzard wins they'll allow the Brood War scene to continue is kind of hilarious. Sure, they might let it continue or they may just decide to let it die. Anyone who's a fan of Brood War can't honestly side with Blizzard on this issue because there's at least a chance that they'll shut the scene down. I'd say the chance is incredibly high but I'm sure you'd put the chance at extremely low. Either way, there's a chance of it so why would I want Blizzard to win as a fan of the sport?
What rights they have in relation to broadcasting Brood War is up for discussion. I'd say they forfeited those "rights" when they let the scene go on for over a decade, had employees attend, and only seemed to care about it when KeSPA began selling broadcasting rights and only cared enough about it to take it to court when StarCraft 2 was released. It's obvious that their goals here are to further StarCraft 2. Not Brood War, not eSports. What if all the court does is declare that KeSPA can't charge broadcasting fees but that OGN and MBCGame can broadcast Brood War as much as they want? Or what if the court declares that KeSPA, OGN, and MBCGame have done nothing illegal at all? Wouldn't be out of the question at all especially given Blizzard's obvious motives here.
I don't know what to tell you. The topic of discussion here is whether these are reasonable terms, not whether "overt" should side with Blizzard over Kespa. You're not making a very compelling argument by making baseless claims and showing a clearly biased opinion.
What is it that makes you think Blizzard would be motivated to shut down the BW scene? They're not stupid; they know that they're not going to increase SC2 sales by pissing off half of their fanbase.
They "forfeited their rights"? Sorry, that's not how it works. Blizzard has the same rights they had 10 years ago, and they're not up for discussion. IP laws are pretty straightforward.
|
If your example is the bastion of democracy and constitutional law that is the Philippines, then you need to get a better one. Land grabs are common in third world countries, where people just rush and forcefully occupy a piece of land, and the owners are SOL. Venezuela has this happened to them recently. It is a mob mentality basically.
Find me an example of any developed country on where you can occupy someone land, use then and then it becomes yours.
|
I mentioned Phillipines since its by coincidence that i heard of its specifics recently. The real law is however much more widespread and present in many more countries than you would think (i was surprised too when i read up on Wiki about it). It is not only present in the third-world countries that you looked down on.
That said it has been a long time so i cant link said wiki article. I would appreciate it if the one who origninally linked it in TL would link it once again, or whoever that know of said law.
|
On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:
I don't know what to tell you. The topic of discussion here is whether these are reasonable terms, not whether "overt" should side with Blizzard over Kespa. You're not making a very compelling argument by making baseless claims and showing a clearly biased opinion.
I'm not sure if you really just weren't getting my point from my first post or if you're intentionally misinterpreting what I was saying. I'm just saying this because I feel like my point was very obvious to those who have been following this issue in recent months. Why should Brood War fans (not just me) be supportive of Blizzard on this issue? I understand why SC2 fans are siding with them but why should those in the Brood War scene be supportive of Blizzard.
This thread isn't just about the terms, sorry. This is just one part of a very long battle between these entities. I'm not trying to make an argument, I thought that was also obvious in my first post on page 13, and please, I think we're both being biased here. I'm not going to try and pretend like I'm not.
On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:What is it that makes you think Blizzard would be motivated to shut down the BW scene? They're not stupid; they know that they're not going to increase SC2 sales by pissing off half of their fanbase.
How anyone could be keeping up with this and not think that Blizzard is trying to destroy the Brood War scene is beyond me. Also, where have you been? Blizzard doesn't give a fuck about pissing off their fans. No LAN support, no chat channels, no cross-region play, fastest selling RTS game of all time. Blizzard knows, as do I, that if they do piss their fans off they'll still sell games. They're probably pretty confident that even if they piss off their Korean fans they'll still have a large majority of them play and watch SC2 anyways and I think most everyone would agree with that. After all, if the Brood War scene goes away StarCraft fans will be forced to watch SC2 or just simply give up on it all together and for most people making a switch to SC2 will be the "better" option.
On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:They "forfeited their rights"? Sorry, that's not how it works. Blizzard has the same rights they had 10 years ago, and they're not up for discussion. IP laws are pretty straightforward.
Assuming they had the right to say who can and who cannot broadcast their game being played is a pretty big assumption to be making in the first place. However, assuming they have these rights any court (whether it was in America, Korea, or where ever) will be very interested in why Blizzard let the scene crop up, continue existing with their knowledge, and didn't do anything about it for years. Even gave it kind of a nod of encouragement by having their own employees attend KeSPA events several times. So yes, I could see how a court in America could throw Blizzard's case out and I can especially see how a court in Korea could throw it out.
IP and copyright law are some of the most vague and ill-enforced laws in existence, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. If it was as straightforward as you're making it seem OGN and MBCGame would have accepted terms a long time ago.
|
At best, it is a straw men argument, (since we are discussing IP laws not real state Laws) but since there is no other precedent for this case, it is hard to compare is it an existing case, where a product was developed far beyond the intents of the original creator, and later the creator wanted to come and claim rights to it.
So everything in the end we have said on this thread ( even me) is a straw men. So all we can do is wait and see. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
|
Overt, I want to ask you one honest question.
Do you think the current litigation with Kespa and Korea over IP rights over games broadcast using the LAN service, had an influence on the "NO LAN" support for SC2? Remember this have been going for years now.
|
On November 18 2010 07:13 battarro wrote: Overt, I want to ask you one honest question.
Do you think the current litigation with Kespa and Korea over IP rights over games broadcast using the LAN service, had an influence on the "NO LAN" support for SC2? Remember this have been going for years now.
No, the most likely reason for no LAN was because of piracy. Brood War was pirated like crazy and people played on LAN through pirated copies. The first time I played Brood War was at a LAN with a pirated copy, so yeah.
Either way, not having LAN was stupid of them but I'm not going to talk about that because I think everyone agrees that no LAN was idiotic of Blizzard. Oh, and if it did have something to do with KeSPA then that's an even dumber reason to not have LAN in the game.
|
Not everyone agrees, that not having LAN was an idiotic reason. People who think it is their right to pirate a game and have it for free, think is idiotic. It is a direct result of piracy. Im sure all blizzard shareholders and developers dont think of it as idiotic. On one hand you acknowledged the high levels of piracy, but at the same time you dismiss this and say they should have the LAN, so it gets pirated faster. Isnt that a dishonest stance? Requesting a feature that makes piracy easier?
|
On November 18 2010 07:02 overt wrote:Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:
I don't know what to tell you. The topic of discussion here is whether these are reasonable terms, not whether "overt" should side with Blizzard over Kespa. You're not making a very compelling argument by making baseless claims and showing a clearly biased opinion. I'm not sure if you really just weren't getting my point from my first post or if you're intentionally misinterpreting what I was saying. I'm just saying this because I feel like my point was very obvious to those who have been following this issue in recent months. Why should Brood War fans (not just me) be supportive of Blizzard on this issue? I understand why SC2 fans are siding with them but why should those in the Brood War scene be supportive of Blizzard. This thread isn't just about the terms, sorry. This is just one part of a very long battle between these entities. I'm not trying to make an argument, I thought that was also obvious in my first post on page 13, and please, I think we're both being biased here. I'm not going to try and pretend like I'm not. Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:What is it that makes you think Blizzard would be motivated to shut down the BW scene? They're not stupid; they know that they're not going to increase SC2 sales by pissing off half of their fanbase. How anyone could be keeping up with this and not think that Blizzard is trying to destroy the Brood War scene is beyond me. Also, where have you been? Blizzard doesn't give a fuck about pissing off their fans. No LAN support, no chat channels, no cross-region play, fastest selling RTS game of all time. Blizzard knows, as do I, that if they do piss their fans off they'll still sell games. They're probably pretty confident that even if they piss off their Korean fans they'll still have a large majority of them play and watch SC2 anyways and I think most everyone would agree with that. After all, if the Brood War scene goes away StarCraft fans will be forced to watch SC2 or just simply give up on it all together and for most people making a switch to SC2 will be the "better" option. Show nested quote +On November 17 2010 17:59 Ferago wrote:They "forfeited their rights"? Sorry, that's not how it works. Blizzard has the same rights they had 10 years ago, and they're not up for discussion. IP laws are pretty straightforward.
Assuming they had the right to say who can and who cannot broadcast their game being played is a pretty big assumption to be making in the first place. However, assuming they have these rights any court (whether it was in America, Korea, or where ever) will be very interested in why Blizzard let the scene crop up, continue existing with their knowledge, and didn't do anything about it for years. Even gave it kind of a nod of encouragement by having their own employees attend KeSPA events several times. So yes, I could see how a court in America could throw Blizzard's case out and I can especially see how a court in Korea could throw it out. IP and copyright law are some of the most vague and ill-enforced laws in existence, so I'm not sure where you're getting that from. If it was as straightforward as you're making it seem OGN and MBCGame would have accepted terms a long time ago.
I understand what you're saying about wanting BW to go on. I do too. But even though you and other BW fans may not stand to benefit from this agreement, you have to understand that this is Blizzard exercising their rights, and (as I've said so many times already) this does not threaten the BW scene.
I agree that Blizzard isn't as concerned as they could be about pissing their fans off, but let's think this through a little bit. The argument that they're trying to shut down BW is based solely on the idea that they want to increase SC2 sales. Even though pissing everyone off may not hurt sales that much, it sure as hell isn't going to help them. Blizzard knows that better than any of us (they have a whole department whose job is to know these things). You keep making vague references to "how this has been going" as to why they are "obviously trying to shut down BW", but you haven't made a concrete argument to support that.
Blizzard let the pro scene go on because for years it was basically harmless, and as has been stated before, they were even benefiting from the free advertisement. They didn't step in until Kespa started charging large fees from the broadcasting companies to broadcast their tournaments. That's when the pro scene officially went commercial, and Blizzard (correctly) felt that it was time to become involved, because a lot of money was wrongly exchanging hands over their game. They had been trying to negotiate for several years before SC2 even came out, and it has only come to this point because Kespa has been completely uncooperative, and unwilling to even acknowledge Blizzard as the makers of Starcraft.
So there, I've laid it out pretty clearly (I hope). You don't have to be happy about it, but those are the facts and Blizzard has their rights. There may be a chance Blizzard will lose, but it will not be because they weren't entitled. It will be because, like you, the courts prioritized entertainment over the rights to intellectual property, which will set a far worse precedent than if Blizzard wins.
|
@Ferago, I don't think it'd be a terrible precedent that developer's aren't allowed to say who can and can't broadcast their game. In fact, I think that's the best possible precedent for the growth of eSports. We can agree to disagree on the rest though.
On November 18 2010 07:56 battarro wrote: Not everyone agrees, that not having LAN was an idiotic reason. People who think it is their right to pirate a game and have it for free, think is idiotic. It is a direct result of piracy. Im sure all blizzard shareholders and developers dont think of it as idiotic. On one hand you acknowledged the high levels of piracy, but at the same time you dismiss this and say they should have the LAN, so it gets pirated faster. Isnt that a dishonest stance? Requesting a feature that makes piracy easier?
DRM features like what Spore had limit piracy too. Doesn't mean they should be implemented. No LAN support hurts SC2. It hurts the pro scene and it hurts casual players too. I'd love to LAN the game with friends without having to worry about each of our computers being connected to the internet as that just isn't possible at a friend's house.
People are still pirating SC2 and will continue to do so. Whether having LAN support increases or decreases piracy is up for each individual to decide, but it certainly wasn't big enough of an issue for them to take LAN out or else every other developer would remove LAN too (and they don't, SC2 is the first major game release that's come out that didn't have LAN).
I'm sure Blizzard's shareholders don't think it's idiotic as they most likely aren't gamers and if they are they're incredibly out of touch with the community. I'm pretty sure if they were honest and weren't afraid of their community a lot of the devs would tell you that they wish they could have LAN support in SC2. Why wouldn't they want a feature in their game that makes it better?
Oh and LAN doesn't make piracy any easier nor do I think it makes piracy any more common. I was just trying to explain why I think Blizzard didn't have LAN in the game, because they jumped on the, "omg piracy," train and decided to harm those who pay for the game because of a minority that pirates their game. But honestly, we don't need to get into LAN as that's been discussed extensively on these forums for months now.
|
On November 17 2010 16:44 overt wrote: Rofl, any gamer who cares about the legal precedent this will set should be siding with KeSPA all the way for the simple fact that eSports can't exist if a developer can just shut down a scene when a new game comes out.
I've talked about the legal precedent this will set before, Blizzard winning sets an awful precedent for any organization that wishes to create a league around a game that lasts for more than a few years. The only way eSports will be taken seriously is if Brood War or some other game is played indefinitely in the same way any other sport works. If it just disappears when a sequel comes out then eSports will always been viewed in a negative light.
You do realize that Korea is a civil law system, where legal precedent has little to no meaning, right? The concept of legal precedent does not exist in the overwhelming majority of countries. Also, the effect that a Korean court decision has on foreign courts when facing the same question will also be little to none. Different countries have dissimilar IP law and different contract law. A foreign court (such as one in the USA) is going to do whatever it wants (e.g., the Supreme Court of America basically gave the middle finger to an International Court decision that tried to direct future legal action in the US, based on its interpretation of international treaties), and is not going to care about what some lowly Korean civil court had to say about it under a completely different legal system.
On November 17 2010 23:10 battarro wrote: Find me an example of any developed country on where you can occupy someone land, use then and then it becomes yours. The United States of America. Great Britain. Australia. Canada. Any individual who possesses another's land, uses it, demarcates the land as his own, excludes others from use of the land, and continually possesses the land for a certain amount of time (depends on the state) will be given rightful title to the land to the exclusion of the original owner. Here's a basic overview of the common law principles behind it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adverse_possession
Non-common law countries such as Italy and France have analogous laws derived from Roman tradition.
|
|
|
|