|
On December 02 2010 14:26 zenMaster wrote:
"5% of overall profit of all of Blizzard products over the recent 3 years." That is the way I see this propaganda.
Well obviously a 10 year old game doesn't sell that well any more, and 5% overall profit is fucking amazing considering the market size compared to the rest of the world.
Anybody with simple logic can see through this bullshit.
In a lot of similar topics I've seen a few people calling Sams a bullshitter and what not, but I have yet to see someone bring facts or numbers in order to back up their accusations and to disprove what he says.
I call your post bullshit, because what you wrote looks like propaganda to me. See what I did? That kind of discussion is bringing us nowhere.
|
This is going to be an unprecedented court case. Never before has an IP rights lawsuit looked so blurry. I believe the eSports scene surrounding BW will make things difficult for Blizzard to push for the 50% ownership that they want.
|
5003 Posts
On December 02 2010 14:29 Selith wrote:
Updated with the link provided by Milkis. Thanks!
Thanks for translating :D
|
Canada8033 Posts
Nothing particularly new here. He basically just restated that Blizzard wants to protect their IP rights, which we already knew. Guess we'll still have to wait for the results of the court case.
He stressed, "A little of broadcasting fee and acknowledging IP rights is the basis needed to provide high quality shows for the fans and e-sports players."
Huh? I can understand wanting to control how your own game is used, but how on earth does this relate to providing "high quality shows"? Haven't we been getting proleague and starleagues for years without this stuff? Or am I just interpreting this sentence wrongly?
|
On December 02 2010 14:44 Spazer wrote:Nothing particularly new here. He basically just restated that Blizzard wants to protect their IP rights, which we already knew. Guess we'll still have to wait for the results of the court case. Show nested quote +He stressed, "A little of broadcasting fee and acknowledging IP rights is the basis needed to provide high quality shows for the fans and e-sports players." Huh? I can understand wanting to control how your own game is used, but how on earth does this relate to providing "high quality shows"? Haven't we been getting proleague and starleagues for years without this stuff? Or am I just interpreting this sentence wrongly?
I think this is related to a likely injunction. Afaik they are still undecided about what to do regarding the "illegal BW leagues" issue.
edit nevermind I did not read the interview.
|
United States7481 Posts
"- You have said reverently in regards to rights of the players . But SC 2 leagues seem to have less of the rights for the players than SC 1."
i don't know how they can say this? can anyone provide an explanation?
|
United States238 Posts
On December 02 2010 14:53 Antoine wrote:
"- You have said reverently in regards to rights of the players . But SC 2 leagues seem to have less of the rights for the players than SC 1."
i don't know how they can say this? can anyone provide an explanation?
Probably because how some people think progamers under Blizzard would have no rights at all compared to KeSPA.
|
Canada8033 Posts
On December 02 2010 14:53 Antoine wrote:
"- You have said reverently in regards to rights of the players . But SC 2 leagues seem to have less of the rights for the players than SC 1."
i don't know how they can say this? can anyone provide an explanation?
Maybe they're talking about sponsorship or something? I dunno, it's really hard to say. I always thought SC2 players had more freedom just because of the lack of kespa...
Dunno why he mentioned the match fixing scandal in his response though. Like blizzard could've prevented that if they were involved. -_-
|
i didnt even know NaDa got banned from the "SC:BW Hall of Fame",,,
Sad move
|
Estonia4504 Posts
The way my mind works, freedom is only one right. While all SC2 replays belong partly to Blizzard, no matter what, all Progamer replays currently belong to the gamers themselves (if I understand the KeSPA system correctly), thus the DVD-s of Boxers best game moments and such. The only freedom they lose is strictly related to their work and not participating in other tournaments is only logical. After all, they are still competing.
EDIT:"We can also see what can happen when Blizzard does not participate as a partner in e-sports that makes use of Blizzard games. I've seen the match fixing scandal, and I've also seen how Lee Yun-Yeol (NaDa) had his record and his achievements completely nullified just because he chose to play a game he wanted to play. This is obviously not fair. So, that is why we are trying hard to protect our IP rights. We want to grow e-sports and progamers through right methods."
I find such accusations to be unrelated to Blizzards participation or accidental, and the statement both provocative and offensive.
|
It's definitely obvious that any monetary gain from pursuing this line of action for Activision Blizzard will make up a small percentage of their overall revenue. Heck, EVERYTHING compared to WoW and Modern Warfare is peanuts when compared to those two behemoths.
The big question is ownership of content produced by a computer program. A significant amount of people here seem to think that all possible outputs of a program (say, the visual and audio output) belongs to the original creator of the program. So no matter what players do in their games, even if they do something creative or original, Activision Blizzard owns the video the game outputs, the replay, and the like. But I don't think this line of thinking works - because I could then create a program that sequentially outputs every possible image of some arbitrary width and height. Does that mean that all possible images become my property? Seems absurd to me.
On December 02 2010 15:02 Spazer wrote:
Dunno why he mentioned the match fixing scandal in his response though. Like blizzard could've prevented that if they were involved. -_-
You don't know why? It's obvious - it's another thing they keep mentioning over and over again to try to make Kespa look worse. Their executives have mentioned it often even in other interviews - with game "media" and such.
|
On December 02 2010 15:02 Spazer wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 14:53 Antoine wrote:
"- You have said reverently in regards to rights of the players . But SC 2 leagues seem to have less of the rights for the players than SC 1."
i don't know how they can say this? can anyone provide an explanation? Maybe they're talking about sponsorship or something? I dunno, it's really hard to say. I always thought SC2 players had more freedom just because of the lack of kespa... Dunno why he mentioned the match fixing scandal in his response though. Like blizzard could've prevented that if they were involved. -_-
I struggled to read the rest of the trans with an open mind when i got to the point where they inferred that match fixing would never have happened if they were in charge. =="
|
Reading the comments on the Fomos board, it seems like Blizzard hiring 'Kim & Chang' lawyer group is THE deciding factor of this whole thing. They're saying that Blizzard already had an upper hand, and them hiring the best lawyer group in the country just basically ended this whole thing.
|
United States4053 Posts
On December 02 2010 15:27 CanucksJC wrote:
Reading the comments on the Fomos board, it seems like Blizzard hiring 'Kim & Chang' lawyer group is THE deciding factor of this whole thing. They're saying that Blizzard already had an upper hand, and them hiring the best lawyer group in the country just basically ended this whole thing.
Legal advantages will likely pale in comparison to emotional advantages, which the broadcasting companies (but not KeSPA) command ;O
|
"A little of broadcasting fee and acknowledging IP rights is the basis needed to provide high quality shows for the fans and e-sports players."
They're saying the broadcast fee is in place not as a money-making tool, but as a way to ensure that a potential broadcasting company has the capital and real desire to broadcast SC and run leagues in a high-quality fashion.
That is, if I set my broadcasting fee too low or don't have one, then any TV station, even the crummiest ones who have no real desire to do anything real with the game besides fill up free space, can get their noses in the game and produce poor-quality programming at will, thus, in Blizzard's eyes, diminishing the value of the IP in customers' eyes. However, if I set my broadcasting fee to ten trillion won, then obviously only a company that really, really wants to broadcast SC and has the necessary capital to produce a high-quality show is going to be able to do so. If I set it in the middle, then I can ensure quality without cutting everyone off. This seems to be Blizzard's approach to things.
Basically, I am satisfied by Sams remarks, as they make a great deal of sense and go a long way towards soothing my fears about the situation. However, a priority on both sides should be to provide fun and entertainment for the fans and keep the things they love going on, rather than just money or IP rights.
If it comes to war, I think I'd have to end up on Blizzard's side. I agree with what Sams said about Kespa's approach to pro-gamers and their unethical practices, which did most definitely contribute to things like the match-fixing scandals; and I like GOM's approach to players much, much more than Kespa's.
All I really want, though, is to see both sides come to an agreement and both scenes co-exist side by side. If that happens, then I will be happy. If it doesn't, then ultimately, whoever wins I lose.
|
On December 02 2010 14:44 Spazer wrote:Show nested quote +He stressed, "A little of broadcasting fee and acknowledging IP rights is the basis needed to provide high quality shows for the fans and e-sports players." Huh? I can understand wanting to control how your own game is used, but how on earth does this relate to providing "high quality shows"? Haven't we been getting proleague and starleagues for years without this stuff? Or am I just interpreting this sentence wrongly?
The quote is from the article itself, hence it might not be immediately apparent the context of Sams answer. If you look at the translated interview below, here's the relevant part:
It is said Blizzard wants at least 700,000,000 won from the Korean market. Is that true?
The licensing fee is there to say that if they wish to use our content, they need to be capable of producing high quality content. When problems relating to intellectual rights is dealt with, the fee can be adjusted as needed.
Basically, the licensing fee is a barrier to entry. Whoever plans to broadcast the games needs to prove that they have the financial capability to produce such shows. It's not necessarily Kespa-specific (i.e. whether MBCGame is unable to produce good shows), but rather a general rule for Blizzard's terms when it comes to broadcasting their shows (in the event that another broadcaster wants to air Blizzard's games). The issue at hand though is the acknowledging of IP rights, which is the second of Blizzard's conditions. I don't think there's any doubt that MBCGame and OnGameNet can produce quality shows, but rather that they're not recognizing Blizzard's IP Rights.
To restate, Sam is saying that Blizzard wants its IP rights acknowledged and is suing on principle. That's the reason for the fee (which is less than what Kespa was charging for their broadcasting rights), why contest license fees (not to be confused w/ broadcasting fees) are just 1 won per year (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6950901), or that profits from broadcasting fees will be donated to charity (http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=6614875).
|
I like how he mentions the match fixing scandal, as if doubting the integrity of KeSPA's tournaments. As if they could do better, not after that 22 page thread about GSL bracket rigging that was closed recently (not due to the statement itself, but rather the way the discussions went).
Find it hard to believe that Korea is only 5% of their profits? Is WoW not popular there? Then again that's probably why they had SC2 come free with a WoW subscription.
Gonna cite G20 as well, having Flash in the promotional video, speaks volumes about how passionate Korean culture is about BW. I sincerely hope that it will pull them through this difficult situation.
I'd really like to believe what Pauls Sams has to say, but the arrogance of Blizzard nowadays... I cannot bring myself to empathize with their cause.
In short, BW fighting!
|
On December 02 2010 15:27 CanucksJC wrote:
Reading the comments on the Fomos board, it seems like Blizzard hiring 'Kim & Chang' lawyer group is THE deciding factor of this whole thing. They're saying that Blizzard already had an upper hand, and them hiring the best lawyer group in the country just basically ended this whole thing.
Having good lawyers don't mean that much as it would in other countries, due to the corrupt nature of korea. You have no idea how much power they (Kespa) have. Of all the wrong things they have done, they have not been scrutinized for any of those by the korean media (afaik).
|
Every company has a right to protect its IP. No one should be an exception to this rule. Whether we like it or not, that's the law in every country that's a member of the G20 and WTO. Frankly, even if Blizz asked for $1 billion that's their right. Of course doing that would be dumb as shit and would make sure that its game would never be an important part of eSports, but it's still their right to do so.
Completely ignoring a company's IP rights and using a product you DON'T own to make PROFIT without permission is absolutely WRONG, arrogant, and disappointing. If it were me running Blizzard I would be just as pissed that someone else was making money off my product without even recognizing the fact that it's my product. The way I see it Kespa is being goddamn ridiculous here. The idea that they did so much for BW is irrelevant, you know why? Because they have been compensated for that with profits that were untaxed by Blizzard for almost a decade. Kespa, it's time to let go of your kung fu grip on BW (a product you don't own) and pay the token fee.
|
On December 02 2010 15:54 ace246 wrote:Show nested quote +On December 02 2010 15:27 CanucksJC wrote:
Reading the comments on the Fomos board, it seems like Blizzard hiring 'Kim & Chang' lawyer group is THE deciding factor of this whole thing. They're saying that Blizzard already had an upper hand, and them hiring the best lawyer group in the country just basically ended this whole thing. Having good lawyers don't mean that much as it would in other countries, due to the corrupt nature of korea. You have no idea how much power they (Kespa) have. Of all the wrong things they have done, they have not been scrutinized for any of those by the korean media (afaik).
I highly doubt KeSPA still has the 'power' they once had back in the day, even if they did at all. Contrary to what you think, Korean netizens are of the opinion that this is all but over, no other lawyer group can challenge Kim & Chang at this very moment. Apparently they are something special, and if every netizens knows about them, then it must be true to some extent.
[edit] To put it into SC terms, it's like sending Flash out in the ace match against estro, and yes i'm very aware that estro disbanded. They're not fucking around.
I'm just stating what I've been reading, I haven't been in Korea for 2 years so I don't know the full story.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
