|
5003 Posts
On December 06 2010 11:15 Selith wrote:Seems KeSPA posted additional information yesterday. This new information includes more detail on the actual KeSPA's income from licensing fee and what they did with it. So here you go: Source is: http://www.playxp.com/sc2/news/view.php?article_id=2416325Show nested quote +KeSPA spoke yesterday (Dec. 5th), that "[KeSPA] finalized broadcasting licensing with IEG as the broadcasting business in 2007, and received 1,700,000,000 won for 3 years of broadcasting. But, 1,500,000,000 won were invested in broadcasting production purposes for OGN and MBCGame over the 3 years, and whatever remained were invested in events and promotions. As a result, profits gained through the leagues are virtually nil. Even before we can fully operate e-sports market comfortably, the "ridiculous licensing fee" requested by Blizzard / Gretech can completely shake down the very roots of e-sports market."
In addition, they said, for the rights of viewers and the growth of e-sport in Korea, KeSPA and broadcasting companies will always actively take part in the negotiations.
KeSPA showed their operating costs and income over the years of 2007, 2008, and 2009 as follows:
* In 2007 *
Profit from broadcasting license: 500,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for OGN: - 250,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for MBC: - 250,000,000 won
* In 2008 *
Profit from broadcasting license: 600,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for OGN: - 250,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for MBC: - 250,000,000 won
* In 2009 *
Profit from broadcasting license: 600,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for OGN: - 250,000,000 won
Broadcasting support for MBC: - 250,000,000 won
* Throughout 2007, 2008, and 2009, total of - 200,000,000 won was spent for marketing and promotion *
** Total tally **
Profit: 1,700,000,000 won
Broadcasting support cost: - 1,500,000,000 won
Marketing and promotion: - 200,000,000 won
Hmm. Korean netizens in general saying the same thing you've heard that they have been: "lol kespa"
added to OP
|
I think this line of reasoning doesnt hold (aka "they need to rip shits up in BW in order to deter similar competition in SC2"). Blizz already have COMPLETE control over SC2 due to their battle.net policy n stuffs. No way anyone can do ANYTHING related to SC2 without their consent, much less compete with them.
As such, i believe their motive is much less... valid.
|
On December 06 2010 14:33 ffreakk wrote:
I think this line of reasoning doesnt hold (aka "they need to rip shits up in BW in order to deter similar competition in SC2"). Blizz already have COMPLETE control over SC2 due to their battle.net policy n stuffs. No way anyone can do ANYTHING related to SC2 without their consent, much less compete with them.
As such, i believe their motive is much less... valid.
Did you ever think about it the other way... Blizzard has to put super ridiculous Battle.net control and can't actually make a LAN client, even for tournaments, because they don't want a KeSPA 2.0? (even if it isn't technically KeSPA) For them a favorable court ruling in a Korean court means they could start trying to expand their plans.
|
|
|
I don't understand the situation too much so I apologize if I make some major mistakes, but there's just some minor concerns I have:
So in the KeSPA licensing income, it says they only make 500,000,000 won per year from licensing rights.
For GOM TV right now, just the winner of each month's GSL wins about 100,000,000 won. So if they keep up similar prizes throughout a year, that will be more than 1,200,000,000 in just prizes given out alone. If broadcasting these games only makes as little as KeSPA says, then wouldn't GOM TV be losing out on shitload of money right now?
Now you might say that KeSPA only reported 500,000,000 of pure profit so that might mean the money is the amount calculated after subtracting the total revenue from the prize money, production fee etc. But then shouldn't the 250,000,000 they claim to have spent on supporting OSL and MSL been taken into account when calculating that profit?
I mean I guess they could have not included in the calculation, but it just seems to me that these numbers are very fishy. It seems that they are manipulating numbers or even falsely reporting numbers to help their public image. I, for one, find it hard to believe they make so little money from the broadcasting of SC.
|
LOL Bots in TL? snatchin our people up?
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something?
|
I believe the proper response when you do not know is to find out, not throw around random numbers and think that they do not make sense.
A few things that i believe you missed out
- GSL prize pool =/= Proleague n Starleague prize pool
- Kespa has more capital source than just the money they charge broadcasting stations.. In fact that money shouldnt be much compared to the amount the sponsors inject into the scene.
- And i honestly dont think that GSL is generating profit. Blizz is pumping the $$$ in because they believe that it would help elevate the sales of SC2, thats why it is still operational. When Blizz's interest leaves, i do not know if GSL will still happens though.
|
On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
LOL Bots in TL? snatchin our people up?
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something?
Blizzard believes that since Starcraft is protected by copyright laws that the broadcast are a direct derivative of their product and is thus eligible for licensing compensation.
What would be interesting is that if Blizzard gets it's way and a game switch occurs, where players will start playing some other game professionally.
|
On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something?
IP stands for Intellectual Property: property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect.
From Blizzard's point of view Kespa is using their property to make money. There's been a lot of comparisons with actual property to make a point for either side. To give an example for both sides using football:
Pro blizzard: Starcraft is like the stadium and kespa is using it and charging spectators to watch.
Pro kespa: Starcraft is like the ball, we don't have to pay the inventer to the ball every time we play or spectate a football match.
There have been better analogies than that last one, since that last one is obviously flawed, but compairing IP to physical property is difficult to begin with. And this conflict is grown to be about much more than mere recognition of blizzard's IP. From my limited and ignorent perspective Blizzard seems to have a stronger case than Kespa, but since I'm not going to be the one deciding that, my opinion wont make any difference.
|
On December 06 2010 19:14 Fangzhou wrote:
I don't understand the situation too much so I apologize if I make some major mistakes, but there's just some minor concerns I have:
So in the KeSPA licensing income, it says they only make 500,000,000 won per year from licensing rights.
For GOM TV right now, just the winner of each month's GSL wins about 100,000,000 won. So if they keep up similar prizes throughout a year, that will be more than 1,200,000,000 in just prizes given out alone. If broadcasting these games only makes as little as KeSPA says, then wouldn't GOM TV be losing out on shitload of money right now?
Now you might say that KeSPA only reported 500,000,000 of pure profit so that might mean the money is the amount calculated after subtracting the total revenue from the prize money, production fee etc. But then shouldn't the 250,000,000 they claim to have spent on supporting OSL and MSL been taken into account when calculating that profit?
I mean I guess they could have not included in the calculation, but it just seems to me that these numbers are very fishy. It seems that they are manipulating numbers or even falsely reporting numbers to help their public image. I, for one, find it hard to believe they make so little money from the broadcasting of SC.
Gomtv does not have TV broadcasting costs. Itdoes not run progaming houses like MBC and OGN does/used to. Neither do they run Courage, Elite Schools League, Dream League, training events etc etc like Kespa does for BW. But most importantly, they do not run a Proleague. Kespa/MBC/OGN clearly have far higher operational costs. If you do not know anything, refrain from wild conspiracy theories.
|
On December 06 2010 23:25 Abraxa wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something? IP stands for Intellectual Property: property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect. From Blizzard's point of view Kespa is using their property to make money. There's been a lot of comparisons with actual property to make a point for either side. To give an example for both sides using football: Pro blizzard: Starcraft is like the stadium and kespa is using it and charging spectators to watch. Pro kespa: Starcraft is like the ball, we don't have to pay the inventer to the ball every time we play or spectate a football match. There have been better analogies than that last one, since that last one is obviously flawed, but compairing IP to physical property is difficult to begin with. And this conflict is grown to be about much more than mere recognition of blizzard's IP. From my limited and ignorent perspective Blizzard seems to have a stronger case than Kespa, but since I'm not going to be the one deciding that, my opinion wont make any difference.
I like those particular analogies, makes it very easy for casuals to understand the whole conflict. Also, about the second one being flawed; isn't KeSPA's case flawed to begin with?
|
Canada11592 Posts
On December 06 2010 23:25 Abraxa wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something? IP stands for Intellectual Property: property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect. From Blizzard's point of view Kespa is using their property to make money. There's been a lot of comparisons with actual property to make a point for either side. To give an example for both sides using football: Pro blizzard: Starcraft is like the stadium and kespa is using it and charging spectators to watch. Pro kespa: Starcraft is like the ball, we don't have to pay the inventer to the ball every time we play or spectate a football match. There have been better analogies than that last one, since that last one is obviously flawed, but compairing IP to physical property is difficult to begin with. And this conflict is grown to be about much more than mere recognition of blizzard's IP. From my limited and ignorent perspective Blizzard seems to have a stronger case than Kespa, but since I'm not going to be the one deciding that, my opinion wont make any difference.
To add to this, intellectual property states that as a creator of IP, you have control over your works derivatives. (Example- Nobody but JK Rowling can write a sequel to the Harry Potter series and she expressly has to sell the rights to make the movie to someone else for a movie to be made. One cannot just make a movie or an unofficial sequel and profit from it.) Furthermore, one cannot profit from ideas within the novel without permission- using characters from a novel or book to advertise products without permission from the author. Companies have this with logos- you can't just slap a Nike sign on a product without it being a Nike product.
I think your pro-Blizzard analogy is terrible because a stadium is not IP in any sense of the word unless perhaps it was a very specific design by an architect. (Or rather an architecture design is probably IP, but the analogy doesn't parallel very well when the analogy implicitly includes the game of whatever is being played. SC2 doesn't just house the game, but is the game. And that game is contains content that in any other context would be considered art- music, graphics, video. All that is IP. The concept of what is a "high templar" belongs to Blizzard.) But I'm really tired of coming up with analogies. It's much more like any other piece of music, movie, book, or created work.
|
Obviously any analogy compairing IP to actual objects will be flawed. The stadium analogy is about the actual stadium btw, not the design or anything. The analogy is that Kespa is using the stadium that is owned by another company to host their tournament and not paying the owners of the stadium for it. But like I said, any analogy will be flawed and laws concerning IP are because of the nature of IP a lot less clear than about actual physical property.
|
|
|
On December 07 2010 01:00 Falling wrote:Show nested quote +On December 06 2010 23:25 Abraxa wrote:On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something? IP stands for Intellectual Property: property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect. From Blizzard's point of view Kespa is using their property to make money. There's been a lot of comparisons with actual property to make a point for either side. To give an example for both sides using football: Pro blizzard: Starcraft is like the stadium and kespa is using it and charging spectators to watch. Pro kespa: Starcraft is like the ball, we don't have to pay the inventer to the ball every time we play or spectate a football match. There have been better analogies than that last one, since that last one is obviously flawed, but compairing IP to physical property is difficult to begin with. And this conflict is grown to be about much more than mere recognition of blizzard's IP. From my limited and ignorent perspective Blizzard seems to have a stronger case than Kespa, but since I'm not going to be the one deciding that, my opinion wont make any difference. To add to this, intellectual property states that as a creator of IP, you have control over your works derivatives. (Example- Nobody but JK Rowling can write a sequel to the Harry Potter series and she expressly has to sell the rights to make the movie to someone else for a movie to be made. One cannot just make a movie or an unofficial sequel and profit from it.) Furthermore, one cannot profit from ideas within the novel without permission- using characters from a novel or book to advertise products without permission from the author. Companies have this with logos- you can't just slap a Nike sign on a product without it being a Nike product. I think your pro-Blizzard analogy is terrible because a stadium is not IP in any sense of the word unless perhaps it was a very specific design by an architect. (Or rather an architecture design is probably IP, but the analogy doesn't parallel very well when the analogy implicitly includes the game of whatever is being played. SC2 doesn't just house the game, but is the game. And that game is contains content that in any other context would be considered art- music, graphics, video. All that is IP. The concept of what is a "high templar" belongs to Blizzard.) But I'm really tired of coming up with analogies. It's much more like any other piece of music, movie, book, or created work.
It seems like as long as blizzard enforces these IP rights there can never be a pro scene equal to what we saw from Kespa though, which is sad. Will blizzard really even profit all that much from licensing ip rights? I understand that blizzard wants to keep control of their product this time around but I don't really see what they stand to gain from it other than minor profits in comparison to sales and WoW. Everyone seems to be shooting down the sport analogies saying that Esports =/= real sports, however, that is the beauty of what Kespa did. They turned sc into a spectator sport with sponsors on live TV and paid professional players. I am not really on either side of the fence as I don't agree with a lot of stuff Kespa does, but I also really hate blizzards direction ever since the release of WoTLK. Kespa is no more money hungry than the current Actiblizzard. It's sad to see one of the greatest gaming companies in the world change so much when a few years back they would've approached the situation completely different. Wc3 had LAN and no IP rights issues only because it was never developed into a pro sport like SC. Even though it may legally be Blizzards right to want a slice of the pie that is korean sc esports, it doesn't seem morally right to suggest they want the growth of esports at the same time. I could be completely wrong about Blizzards motives though, and they could just be trying to help. But what is Blizzard really going to change? GSL is fun to watch but without contracted players and leagues there is no sport. It turns into an event like MLG, which is great, but nothing like a stadium full of people, broadcasted on live TV. MLG and WCG are great for the Esport community but don't really expand to mainstream audiences.
Srry bout the wall of text and my shitty writing xD
|
On December 07 2010 08:25 Synapze wrote:Show nested quote +On December 07 2010 01:00 Falling wrote:On December 06 2010 23:25 Abraxa wrote:On December 06 2010 20:33 Rawenkeke wrote:
I'm so confused about IP rights even tho i've read some of the OP, EXACTLY what is ip rights? Broadcasting rights to sc or something? IP stands for Intellectual Property: property (as an idea, invention, or process) that derives from the work of the mind or intellect. From Blizzard's point of view Kespa is using their property to make money. There's been a lot of comparisons with actual property to make a point for either side. To give an example for both sides using football: Pro blizzard: Starcraft is like the stadium and kespa is using it and charging spectators to watch. Pro kespa: Starcraft is like the ball, we don't have to pay the inventer to the ball every time we play or spectate a football match. There have been better analogies than that last one, since that last one is obviously flawed, but compairing IP to physical property is difficult to begin with. And this conflict is grown to be about much more than mere recognition of blizzard's IP. From my limited and ignorent perspective Blizzard seems to have a stronger case than Kespa, but since I'm not going to be the one deciding that, my opinion wont make any difference. To add to this, intellectual property states that as a creator of IP, you have control over your works derivatives. (Example- Nobody but JK Rowling can write a sequel to the Harry Potter series and she expressly has to sell the rights to make the movie to someone else for a movie to be made. One cannot just make a movie or an unofficial sequel and profit from it.) Furthermore, one cannot profit from ideas within the novel without permission- using characters from a novel or book to advertise products without permission from the author. Companies have this with logos- you can't just slap a Nike sign on a product without it being a Nike product. I think your pro-Blizzard analogy is terrible because a stadium is not IP in any sense of the word unless perhaps it was a very specific design by an architect. (Or rather an architecture design is probably IP, but the analogy doesn't parallel very well when the analogy implicitly includes the game of whatever is being played. SC2 doesn't just house the game, but is the game. And that game is contains content that in any other context would be considered art- music, graphics, video. All that is IP. The concept of what is a "high templar" belongs to Blizzard.) But I'm really tired of coming up with analogies. It's much more like any other piece of music, movie, book, or created work. It seems like as long as blizzard enforces these IP rights there can never be a pro scene equal to what we saw from Kespa though, which is sad. Will blizzard really even profit all that much from licensing ip rights? I understand that blizzard wants to keep control of their product this time around but I don't really see what they stand to gain from it other than minor profits in comparison to sales and WoW. Everyone seems to be shooting down the sport analogies saying that Esports =/= real sports, however, that is the beauty of what Kespa did. They turned sc into a spectator sport with sponsors on live TV and paid professional players. I am not really on either side of the fence as I don't agree with a lot of stuff Kespa does, but I also really hate blizzards direction ever since the release of WoTLK. Kespa is no more money hungry than the current Actiblizzard. It's sad to see one of the greatest gaming companies in the world change so much when a few years back they would've approached the situation completely different. Wc3 had LAN and no IP rights issues only because it was never developed into a pro sport like SC. Even though it may legally be Blizzards right to want a slice of the pie that is korean sc esports, it doesn't seem morally right to suggest they want the growth of esports at the same time. I could be completely wrong about Blizzards motives though, and they could just be trying to help. But what is Blizzard really going to change? GSL is fun to watch but without contracted players and leagues there is no sport. It turns into an event like MLG, which is great, but nothing like a stadium full of people, broadcasted on live TV. MLG and WCG are great for the Esport community but don't really expand to mainstream audiences. Srry bout the wall of text and my shitty writing xD
Wall of text with good logic hats off to you yeah blizzard's is a mere shadow of its former self .
|
Why does everyone on TeamLiquid suddenly seem to support KeSPA, what happened to 6 months ago when everyone loathed them for all the dumb things they've done?
I made an account just to say this.
|
I don't understand
Whatever revenue they generate is supposed to be re-invested for their organization/cause. How is it profit? Nobody owns KeSPA, there aren't shareholders, it's an NPO that represents Korean e-sports.
There seems to be a whole lot of confusion about the relevance of KeSPA's status as a non-profit organization. From a legal perspective this is irrelevant.
To put it simply, any activity which uses someone else's intellectual property that generates revenue must be given permission to do so by the owner of that IP. Whether or not a profit is made isn't important.
As an example, imagine that a charitable non-profit organizaion, lets say the Salvation Army, wants to get extra money to for feeding the homeless this year. Someone has the idea of opening up a Salvation Army movie theater in one of their offices. For a token fee compared to the price of a normal movie ticket, people can sit down and watch recently released DVD's (that the SA buys at retail) of major motion pictures on a projection screen. Legally speaking, does the Salvation Army need the permission of Warner Brothers (or whomever else movies they use) to do this?
Absolutely! While there are no actual profits made, there will be plenty of revenue. It doesn't even matter if the costs for this venture end up higher than the revenue brought in (resulting in a loss), all that matters is that revenue was created using someone else's property.
|
On December 07 2010 19:22 Sixotanaka wrote:
Why does everyone on TeamLiquid suddenly seem to support KeSPA, what happened to 6 months ago when everyone loathed them for all the dumb things they've done?
I made an account just to say this.
When they were wrong, people are against them.
Many think that they agree with Kespa this time, so they (Kespa) get the support.
On the other hand, i dont think that continually bashing someone for an eternity just because they did some wrongs in the past, and without consideration to their current actions/situation is logical, or right, for that matter.
|
Kespa who? Who needs Kespa? I certainly don't. I watch great games on GOMTv and there is enough free streaming of quality matches going on. Some power hungry old game playing Korean group wants to dictate the "scene" is just laughable to me. Get off it. There are pro SC2 teams and leagues formed and playing. The train has already left and it looks like KeSpa is trying to catch a running train at this point. Anyone notice how contrite it sounded, yet how many times did they tell you of "10 years". Move on, SC1 is an old lovable game, but the future is SC2. KeSpa is an idiotic organization.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
