|
On December 12 2010 09:37 iamho wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this has basically turned into BW fans supporting kespa and sc2 fans supporting blizzard? Pretty clear-cut case of sc2 fans caring more about blizzard making a few bucks than letting bw survive.
Thats just a knee-jerk reaction to the situation. SC2 fans don't want broodwar to die. I would imagine that most would love BW to thrive as we all want e-sports in general to do well.
Now, obviously there are clear IP rights violations with BW broadcasting and anyone who argues against that is not arguing rationally. The real debate is whether the terms set by Blizzard will put such constraints on BW pro leagues that it would kill the whole industry. I'm not going to argue for or against this point, I'm just trying to put it in context.
When you ask a SC2 fan what he thinks about the IP rights debate, he looks at what he has and can't see why BW fans would be so upset with that system. I would say that most SC2 fans have been happy with the GSL and gomtv.
I just don't think sc2 fans want blizzard to stomp on broodwar. Posts like yours just show how emotional people get over something like this and just morph everything into "my side" vs "your side".
|
On December 12 2010 10:28 Bijan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 09:37 iamho wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this has basically turned into BW fans supporting kespa and sc2 fans supporting blizzard? Pretty clear-cut case of sc2 fans caring more about blizzard making a few bucks than letting bw survive. Thats just a knee-jerk reaction to the situation. SC2 fans don't want broodwar to die. I would imagine that most would love BW to thrive as we all want e-sports in general to do well. Now, obviously there are clear IP rights violations with BW broadcasting and anyone who argues against that is not arguing rationally. The real debate is whether the terms set by Blizzard will put such constraints on BW pro leagues that it would kill the whole industry. I'm not going to argue for or against this point, I'm just trying to put it in context. When you ask a SC2 fan what he thinks about the IP rights debate, he looks at what he has and can't see why BW fans would be so upset with that system. I would say that most SC2 fans have been happy with the GSL and gomtv. I just don't think sc2 fans want blizzard to stomp on broodwar. Posts like yours just show how emotional people get over something like this and just morph everything into "my side" vs "your side".
While kespa did break IP rights, the breaking point in the negotiation i believe was the ownership of maps and replays and such. Blizzard wanted then because they created the game, kespa said it belonged to kespa and/or players because it was their work.
|
On December 12 2010 09:37 iamho wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this has basically turned into BW fans supporting kespa and sc2 fans supporting blizzard? Pretty clear-cut case of sc2 fans caring more about blizzard making a few bucks than letting bw survive.
As Bijan said, that's a knee-jerk reaction. If you say that SC2 fans care more about Blizzard making a few bucks, one could posit the reverse: that Broodwar fans just want their game to continue on no matter whose rights gets violated. (That's not necessarily the case. Just because you're pro-BW doesn't necessarily mean you're pro-KeSPA and vice versa.)
Ironically, if you look at history, Blizzard's demands similar to KeSPA's three years ago.
- With the start of the 2007 seaon, KeSPA claims the rights of Proleague, then auctions it off.
- Arguing that they created and made Proleague, OGN and MBC refuse to recognize KeSPA's rights, and refuses to participate in the auction: IEG buys the rights.
- OGN/MBC meet with KeSPA officials, but neither agrees to the deals the other proposes. Time goes by but neither is willing to give in.
- With the future of Proleague being jeopardized, Proteams get involved, threatening MBC/OGN that they will not send their players to the individual starleagues if they do not accept the deals by KeSPA.
- OGN/MBC continue to fight back, and with the deadline coming up, KeSPA and IEG turn to other methods of broadcasting.
- Fans are furious, mainly at KeSPA... KeSPA/IEG have the support of proteams, while OGN/MBC have the support of the fans.
- If OGN/MBC continue to refuse, Proleague would open with completely new casters and commentators, making it different and less people would watch. Meanwhile proteams would not send playser to OSL or MSL, ruining OGN/MBC... and ultimately destroying progaming as we know it.
Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=50641#1
(Disclaimer: I'm not saying Blizzard and KeSPA's claims are identical. Also note that fans are reading this from a perspective of 3 years later, so when OGN says "OGN stated “OGN and MBC Game has conceded too many things in order to prevent ruin no matter what. In a situation where there is neither justice nor benefit, we have made strenuous efforts to prevent the e-sports industry, which we had cultivated so far, from collapsing. There was no way to accept a proposition that completely ignored a company’s intrinsic reasons for existing.”" [source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=1718118］ and they somehow managed to survive paying KeSPA's fees 3 years later, well...)
Also, legally and ethically speaking, things aren't as clear-cut as some people make it out to be. And there's a lot of biased conclusions that people jump to. I clarified some of them in this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=174061#1
|
Well there goes a lot of money. x.x
|
On December 12 2010 01:00 mustaju wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 00:49 BLinD-RawR wrote:On December 11 2010 23:56 DayJP wrote:
is there like a TL pool to see "who's side" the community is? Absolutely against the idea....lets not try to split the community. It's funny that people actually want this. As if an unclear issue would be somehow resolved once a bunch of badly informed people start voting it. Some people also like flamewars, I guess.
thats the problem with democracy ..
|
On December 12 2010 11:07 charlesatan wrote:Show nested quote +On December 12 2010 09:37 iamho wrote:
Has anyone noticed that this has basically turned into BW fans supporting kespa and sc2 fans supporting blizzard? Pretty clear-cut case of sc2 fans caring more about blizzard making a few bucks than letting bw survive. As Bijan said, that's a knee-jerk reaction. If you say that SC2 fans care more about Blizzard making a few bucks, one could posit the reverse: that Broodwar fans just want their game to continue on no matter whose rights gets violated. (That's not necessarily the case. Just because you're pro-BW doesn't necessarily mean you're pro-KeSPA and vice versa.) Ironically, if you look at history, Blizzard's demands similar to KeSPA's three years ago. Show nested quote +- With the start of the 2007 seaon, KeSPA claims the rights of Proleague, then auctions it off.
- Arguing that they created and made Proleague, OGN and MBC refuse to recognize KeSPA's rights, and refuses to participate in the auction: IEG buys the rights.
- OGN/MBC meet with KeSPA officials, but neither agrees to the deals the other proposes. Time goes by but neither is willing to give in.
- With the future of Proleague being jeopardized, Proteams get involved, threatening MBC/OGN that they will not send their players to the individual starleagues if they do not accept the deals by KeSPA.
- OGN/MBC continue to fight back, and with the deadline coming up, KeSPA and IEG turn to other methods of broadcasting.
- Fans are furious, mainly at KeSPA... KeSPA/IEG have the support of proteams, while OGN/MBC have the support of the fans.
- If OGN/MBC continue to refuse, Proleague would open with completely new casters and commentators, making it different and less people would watch. Meanwhile proteams would not send playser to OSL or MSL, ruining OGN/MBC... and ultimately destroying progaming as we know it. Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=50641#1(Disclaimer: I'm not saying Blizzard and KeSPA's claims are identical. Also note that fans are reading this from a perspective of 3 years later, so when OGN says "OGN stated “OGN and MBC Game has conceded too many things in order to prevent ruin no matter what. In a situation where there is neither justice nor benefit, we have made strenuous efforts to prevent the e-sports industry, which we had cultivated so far, from collapsing. There was no way to accept a proposition that completely ignored a company’s intrinsic reasons for existing.”" [source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewpost.php?post_id=1718118］ and they somehow managed to survive paying KeSPA's fees 3 years later, well...) Also, legally and ethically speaking, things aren't as clear-cut as some people make it out to be. And there's a lot of biased conclusions that people jump to. I clarified some of them in this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=174061#1
Regarding your second quote, if you read further down the thread you would realise that it is a very biased and lop-sided summary of one person. As it was said before, same events can be viewed in different lights, so you should try to see it from a different perspective than simply that of your own.
|
MBC are stalling for time imho.
|
On December 12 2010 21:52 ffreakk wrote:
Regarding your second quote, if you read further down the thread you would realise that it is a very biased and lop-sided summary of one person. As it was said before, same events can be viewed in different lights, so you should try to see it from a different perspective than simply that of your own.
Yes but it doesn't change the fact that a) KeSPA was charging OGN/MBC for Broodwar Broadcast rights and b) OGN/MBC didn't want to pay at first. (Source: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=50909#1)
The only relevant bias in that summary might be the part "Fans are furious, mainly at KeSPA... KeSPA/IEG have the support of proteams, while OGN/MBC have the support of the fans." but obviously some fans were angry at KeSPA at the time (only their numbers/percentages is a point of contention for the bias).
P.S. And if you read the thread that I'd link to, you'd see that I did a balanced job of summarizing each side's points.
|
MBC is somewhat irretating to me...is it ok to buy a movie from a dvd store and then broadcast it because you own the movie? its the same with the game imo. you cant just broadcast. you have at least to buy the game. on the other hand are all boradcasters with livestreams voilating blizzards rights? no...its more like mbc was giving out licences for money so others may broadcast and thats the problem isnt it....?
|
On December 13 2010 03:31 CuirassEU wrote:
MBC is somewhat irretating to me...is it ok to buy a movie from a dvd store and then broadcast it because you own the movie? its the same with the game imo. you cant just broadcast. you have at least to buy the game. on the other hand are all boradcasters with livestreams voilating blizzards rights? no...its more like mbc was giving out licences for money so others may broadcast and thats the problem isnt it....?
No its not the same. The movie analogy falls apart in the fact that MBC/OGN are not taking footage straight out of the box as Blizzard produced it.
There is a lot of creative work involved in the production of Proleague and Starleagues. Commentators, camera work and direction, the starleagues, group ceremonies, the crowd, the stage, the custom maps, the players themselves.
OGN/MBC/KeSPA never disregarded Blizzard's IP of the in-box game, but they are not willing to accept Blizzard's "universal" definition of their IP rights. My problem with the pro-Blizzard argument is that it dismisses how important the non-Blizzard creative work is. And IMO, it needs to be recognized as its own for the sake of eSports's development. Afterall, competitive scenes have always started by the players themselves, not from the benevolence of Blizzard or any game's creator.
|
My problem with the pro-Blizzard argument is that it dismisses how important the non-Blizzard creative work is.
This. Most arguments coming off from Blizz's fans goes like "Blizzard made the game so its natural they want a slice of the cake". Truthfully, they didnt want a slice of the cake, they insist on having the WHOLE cake -.-
@ charlesatan
After reading ur summary again, i agree that it is actually mostly factual and not as biased or lop-sided as i thought it to be. I apologize 
|
"we wish take this opportunity to know just how far the IP rights reach in regards to broadcasting content creation through a game" Nice idea, let's see how far it can go. I also think it might be over protected, BLZ should not have the right to charge them. Well, it is hard to draw a clear line on this issue, so let it to the court.
|
On December 13 2010 08:09 winners32 wrote:
BLZ should not have the right to charge them.
If GSN took Day9's vods and broadcast them on their TV channel don't you think they should owe Day9 compensation? And shouldn't Day9 be able to deny them from broadcasting his vods all together?
|
On December 13 2010 09:21 JayDee_ wrote:
If GSN took Day9's vods and broadcast them on their TV channel don't you think they should owe Day9 compensation? And shouldn't Day9 be able to deny them from broadcasting his vods all together?
Bad analogy because taking Day9's videos and airing them on their station is directly copying content.
What the stations (and Day9) are doing is that they assemble their own production (i.e. players, commentators, tournaments, etc.) that centers around Blizzard's work. Whether this is infringing on Blizzard's IP or not is the point of contention. I'm not siding with KeSPA/OGN/MBC, but this is the perspective their supporters are taking. It's not simply airing Broodwar on TV, but airing Broodwar with their players, set-up, hosts, etc. (Again, I clarified some these points in http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=174061#1 because I'm tired of reading these false analogies and conclusions)
|
On December 13 2010 09:21 JayDee_ wrote:Show nested quote +On December 13 2010 08:09 winners32 wrote:
BLZ should not have the right to charge them. If GSN took Day9's vods and broadcast them on their TV channel don't you think they should owe Day9 compensation? And shouldn't Day9 be able to deny them from broadcasting his vods all together?
Horrible analogy.
Day9 does exactly the same as OGN/MBC do: a derivative work. In fact, I should remind you that early Day9 Daylies are analysis of Proleague/Starleague matches.
So a proper analogy would be: Day9 : OGN/MBC :: OGN/MBC : Blizzard
As in: Day9's creative work is derivative to OGN/MBC's* as OGN/MBC's creative work is derivative to Blizzard's.
* or GOM or whoever produced the VODs
In a pro-Blizzard logic, what Day9 creates, just like any derivative work related to Starcraft, is property of Blizzard.
Under a pro-OGN/MBC logic, Sean Plott owns the creative work product of his analysis and commentary, OGN/MBC own the creative work product of Proleague/Starleagues, and Blizzard owns the creative work shipped in the Starcraft box.
Which is more fair to you? Which do you think will result in a healthier scene?
|
On December 13 2010 13:09 VManOfMana wrote:So a proper analogy would be: Day9 : OGN/MBC :: OGN/MBC : Blizzard
As in: Day9's creative work is derivative to OGN/MBC's as OGN/MBC's creative work is derivative to Blizzard's.
In a pro-Blizzard logic, what Day9 creates, just like any derivative work related to Starcraft, is property of Blizzard.
Under a pro-OGN/MBC logic, Sean Plott owns the creative work product of his analysis and commentary, OGN/MBC own the creative work product of Proleague/Starleagues, and Blizzard owns the creative work shipped in the Starcraft box.
Which is more fair to you? Which do you think will result in a healthier scene?
I just want to clarify that under a pro-Blizzard logic, Sean Plott still owns the creative work product of his analysis and the same goes for OGN/MBC (i.e. Blizzard can't suddenly air their shows or sell the rights to it, as is, without their permission).
However, should a third party include Broodwar in their broadcast, and it's for profit (this automatically excludes Day9's shows since he's not charging money for it), then Blizzard is asking that they be paid a fee. (Lots of their negotiations involve how much the split will be, from 50/50 to 100/0 or 0/100.) [Edit: Although at one point in time, according to KeSPA, Blizzard did claim 100% ownership of all broadcasted videos.]
Also noting again that Blizzard only started charging when KeSPA sold the broadcast rights and not before (nor are they asking for retroactive [pre-2007] compensation).
|
Once this case gets going in Earnest I think that Blizzard will win, thus having the right to allow other companies like GomTV to broadcast esports. Blizzard would not have sent MBC a warning unless they were in violation of their IP rights. It will be interesting to see how this plays out, perhaps MBC will cave when defeat seems imminent they will probably try to opt out for a mediation.
This is all just conjecture on my part.
|
Russian Federation4405 Posts
My opinion:
Blizzard = Flash (powerful and strong)
MBC = Effort (because they made effort lol, on the e-sports i mean)
you all know who was the favorite and who won in the end ^_^
all IMHO
|
On December 13 2010 17:12 _Quasar_ wrote:
My opinion:
Blizzard = Flash (powerful and strong)
MBC = Effort (because they made effort lol, on the e-sports i mean)
you all know who was the favorite and who won in the end ^_^
all IMHO
EFFORT Nom Noms Flash enough said
|
[B] "While we can accept mediation, we wish take this opportunity to know just how far the IP rights reach in regards to broadcasting content creation through a game."
In terms of Australian law this is the issue as I see it (i'm a just-graduated law student who has completed copyright, so I'm not an expert):
*note that we are here talking ONLY about the computer game itself, not of all the other things that go into making that game (artwork, trademarks, etc)
- Why Australian law might be an accurate representation of Korean Law: WIPO - An organisation tasked with ensuring the consistency of IP law across the world has created many treaties that seek to do just that. Korea and Australia are members and thus their respective copyright laws are similar.
- What is a computer game under copyright law? A Cinematograph film. It does not have its own category. <- stupid i know, but it has stuck. I think because one of the first cases involving a game featured virtua cop, which if any of you have played it seemed more like a movie because it was on "rails" (i.e. like time crisis and house of the dead).
- What is a cinematograph film? It is classed as subject matter other than a work (works, such as drawings, receive greater protections than non-works)
- The basis of all copyright claims: Whether the defendant, through their actions, has exercised one of the exclusive rights vested in the owner of the copyright - in this case to broadcast the game to the public.
- The D must have taken(broadcast in this case) a substantial part of the game.
- The issue likely to be litigated, the one that the above quote mentions: In my opinion, it is whether the broadcast of a match of startcraft constitutes a substantial part of the game. Questions the court may ask are whether the matches constitute an essential part of the game, or an important ingredient.
-It could be argued that broadcasting a game would never involve a substantial taking as games are by their nature interactive, and a movie of a couple of strangers playing the game could never be characterised as the game's essential part.
- Things that muddy the water (aside from the fact that i am a legal noob):
1. Starcraft I & II are meant for e-sports - they are meant to be watched, which might mean they need to be treated differently.
2. Games are classed as cinematograph films - noone would argue that broadcasting a whole episode of LOST without a license would be breaching the law, so why should whole matches of starcraft be treated differently?
3. And this is just something to think about - would the law treat this case differently if what was at issue was the broadcast of the single player portion of the game (i.e. the storyline), and not one of the hundreds of thousands of 1v1 matches that get played around the world every day?
If anyone familiar with Korean law wants to fix this up please do.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
