| Forum Index > Community News and Headlines |
|
ThePurist
Canada686 Posts
On December 03 2010 20:09 Gautz wrote: nope, (((in this case) positive)!) revenue in comparison to total outlay = profit. 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. I'm sure the Ministry of Culture audits them to check their numbers. | ||
|
Teddyman
Finland362 Posts
Paul Sams, nice guy that buys free lunches for progamers ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/iBzY6.jpg) M. Bison, incarnation of evil in a candidate for the worst video game film of all time ![[image loading]](http://imgur.com/biE83.jpg) | ||
|
Firereaver
India1701 Posts
On December 03 2010 22:38 Teddyman wrote: I think I have found undisputable proof that Blizzard is evil. Take a look at these two photos. Paul Sams, nice guy that buys free lunches for progamers M. Bison, incarnation of evil in a candidate for the worst video game film of all time On a diff. note!! What a pic of BoxeR and his GF!! She looks and laughs a lot like Yoona(SNSD)!! | ||
|
RiceMuncher
Australia138 Posts
On December 03 2010 19:53 Minzy wrote: So KeSPA is a nonprofit organization that is allowed to make a profit. ok. NPO (non-profit organisations) means that they don't aim to get rich. They are allowed to make profits to sustain their organisation. | ||
|
cerebralz
United States443 Posts
If Kespa was seriously trying to get moving past the whole thing, they could have not charged OGN and MBC to begin with, and when asked, they could have just gone through the process of licensing like normal people. If they had pre-emptively approached Blizzard about new terms, I have no doubt the broadcasting fee would have lessened if not totally evaporated. The communal property issue is simple. In every sporting event, the IP rights belong at least on paper, to the league, not the players, and not the teams, and not the cable company. At the end of every game i watch, there's always a "this televised broadcast is the property of the NFL(insert organization), and may not be rebroadcast without expressed written consent..." yada yada yada. Here, substitute league for the creators of the game. It is hardly enforced, just paper deterrent to companies who would like to illegally profit from the content on a large scale. As for the interests of the players, you only have to look to every BW pro who switched over to SC2. Per Spunky's interview on giantbomb, "kespa is like communism, SC2 is like America." I don't think you have to go further than that. I believe Kespa could have gotten a sweetheart deal for both BW and SC2 if they came to the table in the right way. Their arrogance prompted these series of actions and now they have to pay because the time frame for that deal is over. I hope everything gets worked out, but I don't see Blizzard backing down anytime soon. | ||
|
NeoLearner
Belgium1847 Posts
Especially this: KeSPA and the 10 Progame teams all want the negotiations to be resolved quickly. KeSPA has put together a negotiation team and met around 10 times now and continued to advance the negotiations. Through negotiations and by narrowing the difference in opinions, there was a complete agreement with the exception of 2~3 articles, and in reality negotiations were very close to being settled. However, in this past November 25th, Blizzard and Gretech has suddenly announced that if KeSPA does not agree to Blizzard and Gretech's original demands regarding the ownership of derivative works , then negotiations regarding license fees will be impossible. One thing I learned is that a difficult negotiation, especially one with were 2 sides have a history, should be kept OUT of the media. They negotiate behind closed doors, getting closer and closer to at least SOME compromise, right up the the point someone makes a statement in the press and the shit hits the fan again. For the record, Belgian elections were about 6 months ago, 2 sides have been negotiating since then and every time someone makes a statement in the press, they have to start aaaaaaall over again. | ||
|
Furycrab
Canada456 Posts
Most of this is just repeating stuff we have already read adding: and the 10 progame teams. I think they have 1 or 2 legitimate points but seeing the history and their previous actions, are not unreasonable. Namely: Being Audited, and no contract security (1 yr contract)... However when you consider that they claim to be "Non-Profit" and refuse to give realistic figures to things like : How much revenue are you generating, how much is being reinvested, and how much is tied into things like executive salaries... It's understandable that Blizzard wants to know how big your cookie jar is.. so they can establish fees that are reasonable yet won't kill eSports. /shrug | ||
|
Captain Peabody
United States3128 Posts
| ||
|
Jayson X
Switzerland2431 Posts
On December 03 2010 19:25 Holgerius wrote: That was a pretty good response by Kespa.  Yeah I'm acctualy kinda surprised. Funny that this "scandal" is the only BW related thing for me anymore. I wan't a serious courtroom drama. "Our arguments are invalid? BITCH, YOUR LIFE IS INVALID" | ||
|
gslavik
United States72 Posts
Think of any athletic sport. Is there any corporation that wants their IP acknowledged? KeSPA spent 10 years making a pie and Blizzard only now wants a piece of it. Did Blizzard do anything for eSports? On another note, have you heard of idSoftware, Valve, or Epic demand license fees from CPL/CAL? (There were many other games played in CPL/CAL) Why didn't Blizzard demand fees from MLG and WCG? Why is a corporation that sells copies of a game allowed to decide on all rules of said game thereby influencing any type of tournament play? NBA and FIBA have different rules and court specifications. Likewise for MLS, FIFA, UEFA. Tournament/League organizers should be setting game rules (like requiring a factory for research or how much damage a certain unit does or takes to build and etc), not a corporation which does not have a vested interest in the tournament/league. Blizzard, double standard much? When SC2 came out, the layman knew two things: 1. it's a sequel 2. it's a career in South Korea (told by those that play games and know) I don't think SC2 sales would have been at the same level if KeSPA had not been around for the last 10 years (by KeSPA, I mean the South Korean eSports scene). If broadcasting SC2 games is considered a derivative work, then why aren't all the streamers on TL pay Blizzard a licensing fee for transmitting their IP? Sean Plott (aka Day[9]), receives over ten thousand views for his daily show 5 days a week. Imagine if Blizzard decided to charge him 1 dollar for each viewer as a license fee. 10,000 * 5 * 52 = 2,600,000USD per year. Hint: Sean, consider charging your viewers 1USD per daily.  Why are we even talking about IP? How can you have intellectual property? If you have an idea and you let it out, it's not your own anymore, it is now in public domain. You are still the author, but you can't just come in and restrict someone from implementing it. If you draw something, you produce an artwork. Are games art? Artwork is not intellectual property. Artwork is a product, how you sell it, reproduce it, etc. is up to you. A wise man once said: Tape backups are for wimps, real men put their code on a public ftp server and let the world mirror it. Sincerely, BearJewSlava.584 | ||
|
Tobberoth
Sweden6375 Posts
On December 03 2010 22:53 Firereaver wrote: + Show Spoiler + On December 03 2010 22:38 Teddyman wrote: I think I have found undisputable proof that Blizzard is evil. Take a look at these two photos. Paul Sams, nice guy that buys free lunches for progamers M. Bison, incarnation of evil in a candidate for the worst video game film of all time On a diff. note!! What a pic of BoxeR and his GF!! She looks and laughs a lot like Yoona(SNSD)!! How the crap can you compare BoxeRs aunt of a girlfriend to Yoona? Boxer could do so much better, just look at Storks girlfriend. | ||
Hot_Bid
Braavos36390 Posts
On December 04 2010 00:14 gslavik wrote: This is why video games cannot be any type of sport. Sport should only require the purchase of equipment and in case of many sports, you can improvise or do away with some equipment complete. For example, in the 1950 FIFA World Cup, India (having received their freedom from UK 2 years prior) was absent, because FIFA would not allow the Indian Soccer team to play without shoes. In some tropical countries, kids use coconuts instead of balls to play football (sorry, soccer) because they cannot afford to buy a ball. Buying a copy of SC2 cannot considered an equipment purchase (my argument here is that the computer system is the equipment). Think of any athletic sport. Is there any corporation that wants their IP acknowledged? KeSPA spent 10 years making a pie and Blizzard only now wants a piece of it. Did Blizzard do anything for eSports? You can't compare ESPORTS to regular sports. There's no point in trying to box it into a classification because what's going on right now is unprecedented. On another note, have you heard of idSoftware, Valve, or Epic demand license fees from CPL/CAL? (There were many other games played in CPL/CAL) Why didn't Blizzard demand fees from MLG and WCG? They didn't because they weren't prepared for the scene's development like Blizzard is now. I really doubt the Blizzard-MLG involves 0 licensing fees. Just because the details are not public does not mean they have no agreement. Why is a corporation that sells copies of a game allowed to decide on all rules of said game thereby influencing any type of tournament play? NBA and FIBA have different rules and court specifications. Likewise for MLS, FIFA, UEFA. Tournament/League organizers should be setting game rules (like requiring a factory for research or how much damage a certain unit does or takes to build and etc), not a corporation which does not have a vested interest in the tournament/league. Blizzard, double standard much? There's no "double standard" because again, ESPORTS != sports. When SC2 came out, the layman knew two things: 1. it's a sequel 2. it's a career in South Korea (told by those that play games and know) I don't think SC2 sales would have been at the same level if KeSPA had not been around for the last 10 years (by KeSPA, I mean the South Korean eSports scene). If broadcasting SC2 games is considered a derivative work, then why aren't all the streamers on TL pay Blizzard a licensing fee for transmitting their IP? Sean Plott (aka Day[9]), receives over ten thousand views for his daily show 5 days a week. Imagine if Blizzard decided to charge him 1 dollar for each viewer as a license fee. 10,000 * 5 * 52 = 2,600,000USD per year. Hint: Sean, consider charging your viewers 1USD per daily. This is just a ridiculous argument. IP rights start and end somewhere, and even if they encompassed Day9 dailies or streamers, Blizzard has the right to decide where and how they want to enforce those. If they feel that tournament / team organizational bodies like KeSPA or broadcast channels like OGN need to pay licensing fees but an individual caster does not, that's their right. What you're saying is they either need to charge all or charge none, and that shouldn't be the case at all. The streamers and casters may very well be creating derivative works, but Blizzard is simply choosing not to enforce their IP rights over those right now. Why are we even talking about IP? How can you have intellectual property? If you have an idea and you let it out, it's not your own anymore, it is now in public domain. You are still the author, but you can't just come in and restrict someone from implementing it. If you draw something, you produce an artwork. Are games art? Artwork is not intellectual property. Artwork is a product, how you sell it, reproduce it, etc. is up to you. There are lot of well-accepted reasons why IP exists and the benefits it brings. I doubt anyone feels it's reasonable to just counter Blizzard's assertion of their rights in SC2 with "why have IP rights at all?" That's nonsense. | ||
DivinO
United States4796 Posts
| ||
|
shiftY803
200 Posts
Why are we even talking about IP? How can you have intellectual property? If you have an idea and you let it out, it's not your own anymore, it is now in public domain. You are still the author, but you can't just come in and restrict someone from implementing it. If you draw something, you produce an artwork. Are games art? Artwork is not intellectual property. Artwork is a product, how you sell it, reproduce it, etc. is up to you. I'm quoting this again, because I can't believe somebody actually said this. Oh man, so good. Thank you TL.net for your inadvertant comedy. Makes my work day so much better. The one post I really agree with in this thread was that they shouldn't have made all this public. I feel like KESPA obviously wants "the public" on their side, hoping it would sway Blizzard or something. I feel like this would have gone alot better if it all was behind closed doors. C'est la vie. | ||
|
Enervate
United States1769 Posts
| ||
|
shiftY803
200 Posts
| ||
|
Neo7
United States922 Posts
| ||
|
Furycrab
Canada456 Posts
On December 04 2010 00:14 gslavik wrote: This is why video games cannot be any type of sport. Sport should only require the purchase of equipment and in case of many sports, you can improvise or do away with some equipment complete. For example, in the 1950 FIFA World Cup, India (having received their freedom from UK 2 years prior) was absent, because FIFA would not allow the Indian Soccer team to play without shoes. In some tropical countries, kids use coconuts instead of balls to play football (sorry, soccer) because they cannot afford to buy a ball. Buying a copy of SC2 cannot considered an equipment purchase (my argument here is that the computer system is the equipment). Think of any athletic sport. Is there any corporation that wants their IP acknowledged? KeSPA spent 10 years making a pie and Blizzard only now wants a piece of it. Did Blizzard do anything for eSports? On another note, have you heard of idSoftware, Valve, or Epic demand license fees from CPL/CAL? (There were many other games played in CPL/CAL) Why didn't Blizzard demand fees from MLG and WCG? Why is a corporation that sells copies of a game allowed to decide on all rules of said game thereby influencing any type of tournament play? NBA and FIBA have different rules and court specifications. Likewise for MLS, FIFA, UEFA. Tournament/League organizers should be setting game rules (like requiring a factory for research or how much damage a certain unit does or takes to build and etc), not a corporation which does not have a vested interest in the tournament/league. Blizzard, double standard much? When SC2 came out, the layman knew two things: 1. it's a sequel 2. it's a career in South Korea (told by those that play games and know) I don't think SC2 sales would have been at the same level if KeSPA had not been around for the last 10 years (by KeSPA, I mean the South Korean eSports scene). If broadcasting SC2 games is considered a derivative work, then why aren't all the streamers on TL pay Blizzard a licensing fee for transmitting their IP? Sean Plott (aka Day[9]), receives over ten thousand views for his daily show 5 days a week. Imagine if Blizzard decided to charge him 1 dollar for each viewer as a license fee. 10,000 * 5 * 52 = 2,600,000USD per year. Hint: Sean, consider charging your viewers 1USD per daily. Why are we even talking about IP? How can you have intellectual property? If you have an idea and you let it out, it's not your own anymore, it is now in public domain. You are still the author, but you can't just come in and restrict someone from implementing it. If you draw something, you produce an artwork. Are games art? Artwork is not intellectual property. Artwork is a product, how you sell it, reproduce it, etc. is up to you. A wise man once said: Tape backups are for wimps, real men put their code on a public ftp server and let the world mirror it. Sincerely, BearJewSlava.584 Ok Mr BearJewSlava, gonna keep this short 1) The lawsuit, the negotiations, heck everything is about Starcraft: Broodwar. More specifically about how 1 entity decided that they didn't need to have the rights to the product they were delivering. Not SC2. Not 2000. Not WCG. Not MLG. Not whatever. 2) IP rights are exactly what they say they are: Rights. You can choose to enforce them, you can choose to ignore em, you can sell em, you can trade em. You don't have to sell em to anyone if that's what you want... Nor do you have to agree to any price. 3) Why didn't Blizzard demand fees from MLG and WCG? You work for MLG or WCG? MLG spent over 2 years negotiating with Blizzard for the rights to have Starcraft 2 on the procircuit. (Source: SoTG episode 22 interview with one of the organizers) If you are wrong about that one, I think you are also wrong about WCG. 4) You might not agree with IP, but IP go hand in hand with the creative process. Without it there's no reason to create any high production value game if someone is just gonna stomp on your rights to make money with it after. The laws may change someday, but it's not KeSPA job to change the law, just because it's slowing them down, or because it's inconvenient or unpopular. | ||
|
VManOfMana
United States764 Posts
1. KeSPA's stance KeSPA's stance has not changed, nor they are softening up. It has been stated repeatedly that KeSPA has no problem regarding Blizzard's IP—it's about the licensing terms. Derivative work IP, control, and Blizzard power to audit have been in debate even before Gretech got the Starcraft IP license. 2. NaDa Blown out of proportion. Translators in this thread already explained what happened. And really, the accusations follow no logic. Why only NaDa? Boxer, July, and several other peogamers switched before NaDa. If you can't come out with a better answer than "because KeSPA are jerks", don't bother. If you make an accusation, back it up. 3. Profit Already responded multiple times. Unless there is evidence KeSPA breaks te rules of non-profit organizations, the argument is moot. Non-profits also need revenue to work; and non-profits aré not exclusively dependant on grants. 4. Blizzard does has the right to get compensated for their IP. However, licensing parties should also be able to challenge terms, especially if they are anticompetitive. IP law is not black and white, all or nothing, and this is a good opportunity to interpret it so that Blizzard gets compensated while KeSPA (and whatever licensor) keep the rights of derivative works (this is a good thing). As KeSPA is the first organization that managed to make a real eSport organization, this case is what will set precedence for future rulings. So this will affect not only KeSPA, but also Gretech and whoever wants to make any professional environment in the future. In a way, Gretech wins long-term if KeSPA wins, especially if in the future they want to branch out or go independent from Blizzard. I am not saying Blizzard should not get compensated. Ideally, I think it should be a share of the revenue proportional to the total revenue. I don't even think Gretech could pay their own license fees per tournament if they had to. | ||
|
wswordsmen
United States987 Posts
But seriously, does Gretech really expect to get more money out of fighting Kespa than they could get out of a percentage deal? | ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 League of Legends Counter-Strike Super Smash Bros Heroes of the Storm Other Games |
|
Sparkling Tuna Cup
RSL Revival
ByuN vs SHIN
Maru vs Krystianer
WardiTV Team League
Patches Events
BSL
GSL
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
OSC
WardiTV Team League
[ Show More ] |
|
|
EPT
