• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 20:45
CEST 02:45
KST 09:45
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Code S Season 2 - RO4 & Finals Results (2025)10Code S RO4 & Finals Preview: herO, Rogue, Classic, GuMiho0TL Team Map Contest #5: Presented by Monster Energy4Code S RO8 Preview: herO, Zoun, Bunny, Classic7Code S RO8 Preview: Rogue, GuMiho, Solar, Maru3
Community News
Weekly Cups (June 9-15): herO doubles on GSL week0Firefly suspended by EWC, replaced by Lancer12Classic & herO RO8 Interviews: "I think it’s time to teach [Rogue] a lesson."2Rogue & GuMiho RO8 interviews: "Lifting that trophy would be a testament to all I’ve had to overcome over the years and how far I’ve come on this journey.8Code S RO8 Results + RO4 Bracket (2025 Season 2)14
StarCraft 2
General
Nexon wins bid to develop StarCraft IP content, distribute Overwatch mobile game Rogue EWC 2025 Hype Video! Code S Season 2 - RO4 & Finals Results (2025) Rain's Behind the Scenes Storytime Firefly suspended by EWC, replaced by Lancer
Tourneys
$5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series SOOPer7s Showmatches 2025 SOOP Starcraft Global #22 $3,500 WardiTV European League 2025
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response Simple Questions Simple Answers [G] Darkgrid Layout
Custom Maps
[UMS] Zillion Zerglings
External Content
Mutation # 478 Instant Karma Mutation # 477 Slow and Steady Mutation # 476 Charnel House Mutation # 475 Hard Target
Brood War
General
BW General Discussion ASL20 Preliminary Maps BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Recent recommended BW games FlaSh Witnesses SCV Pull Off the Impossible vs Shu
Tourneys
[BSL20] GosuLeague RO16 - Tue & Wed 20:00+CET [BSL20] ProLeague Bracket Stage - WB Finals & LBR3 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do. [G] How to get started on ladder as a new Z player
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread Path of Exile Beyond All Reason What do you want from future RTS games?
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
Vanilla Mini Mafia TL Mafia Community Thread
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine Russo-Ukrainian War Thread UK Politics Mega-thread Echoes of Revolution and Separation
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
Korean Music Discussion [Manga] One Piece
Sports
NHL Playoffs 2024 2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
A Better Routine For Progame…
TrAiDoS
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Heero Yuy & the Tax…
KrillinFromwales
I was completely wrong ab…
jameswatts
Need Your Help/Advice
Glider
Trip to the Zoo
micronesia
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 32467 users

A Korean fan explains why he hates KeSPA - Page 18

Forum Index > SC2 General
Post a Reply
Prev 1 16 17 18 19 20 26 Next All
Rickilicious
Profile Joined July 2009
United States220 Posts
November 15 2010 04:07 GMT
#341
LOL, all this garbage, people(kespa) need to follow rules, and people(blizzard) need to not be bullies.

just cause a little boy has lunch money, and you are bigger, doesn't mean you should take it... hmm, but i guess that doesn't exclude you from assuming you get tributes for his protection.. hmm.. well it's accurate, but idk if it works..


but all in all, this is why i play minecraft lawl
Doug Righteous
SubPointOA
Profile Joined November 2010
United States183 Posts
November 15 2010 04:09 GMT
#342
On November 14 2010 14:46 LG)Sabbath wrote:
Show nested quote +
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match

isn't this actually a good argument though?

the balls were made to be used as a sport, I doubt blizzard intended having SC ever becoming a popular sport in Korea.
Just stick with the flow to rock the whole globe
Mioraka
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
Canada1353 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 04:19:15
November 15 2010 04:15 GMT
#343
On November 15 2010 12:48 latan wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 11:02 TheRabidDeer wrote:
On November 15 2010 10:51 latan wrote:
On November 15 2010 06:13 Myles wrote:
On November 15 2010 06:07 latan wrote:
IP is stupid anyway, whoever thought it was possible to own ideas (that are made public)?. returning to the sports analogy:

the manufactures of the equipment, wether it be the ball, the shoes or whatever else, do also own IP rights on all that stuff. what would you thik if they suddenly wanted to charge the stadiums owners a fee for selling broadcasting rights to TV stations?.

I don't think it's such a bad analogy, for the correct analogy, let's imagine for a second that there was actually and inventor and developer of the game of football, would it be right for him to try to control the leagues in such a way?.

when you see a game match wether it is sport or esport you aren't there to see the players or team do their thing, i would say that a match should be owned by the players/teams but this is obviously not a consensus and there won't be any consensus on these matters any time soon. IP rights is a shady area, specially in this digital age.


There is a huge difference between sports and video games. A sport consists mostly of rules. To play basketball, baseball, or soccer all you need to enough people and some things to represent goals, bases, ect. You could play any of those sports without any of the proper equipment and get along just fine.

Compare that with Starcraft, which is much more than just a set of rules. It also has art and programming and without those you're no longer playing Starcraft. Even if you're using a volleyball in a basketball game, you're still playing basketball. That is why sports and e-sports are incomparable.


that is a fair point but i don't see how art + programming = i have a right to control whatever it is that you want to do with the software you BOUGHT from me. since when is the profit aspect of software bussiness considered to go beyond sales?

hypothetically one could invent a game, a physicall one, and also invest some time designing it and whatnot. do you have a right to have control over every single tournament after everyone knows how to play it? the most you could do is patent the equipment and have exclusivity and the sales of it. starcrat is the equipment, they have exclusivity on the sale of it. and they already sold it to you. the ball=software analogy seems perfectly accurate with this point of view. because in all fairness blizzard didn't invent any of the fundamentals of the game. the game is something that goes beyond that, blizzard just made some fine equipment to play it.

Blizzard created this specific game. If KeSPA wanted to create a game that plays the same but has different art/sounds and made the game their own, they have free control over it. I dont know the extent of how similar it can be before copyright comes into play, but they can make their own version and be fine.

No matter how you argue it, blizzard owns and controls SC. That is it, no matter what you argue it wont change it, even if it doesnt make sense to you.

EDIT: What I see some people arguing, is that certain moves are the IP of the players. This doesnt make sense, since they are just operating within the game of BW. If I kick a ball, can I claim that the act of kicking the ball is my IP?


Sense is a keyword here, no matter how much you want to dissmiss it, we're discussing in the abstract here and nothing's set in stone. it does matter if it makes sense or not, the law is behind in these situations and things should make sense or otherwise we're all fucked.

it makes absolutely no sense that blizz can expect to control the use i give to the software i bought if i'm not incurring in taking sales away from them. that is the bottom line for me. they shouldn't be allowed to do this. if the law allows them it's because it's a grey area and things aren't well defined legally, not because it's a fair right of them to have.


It's not a grey area. And why you say they want to control you? They are not, they are trying to make a profit, and guess what? That's their freaking job.

If you buy a software, the contract says you can only use it for personal purposes, and you agreed. But you can't use it to earn a profit, if you do, you have to share that profit with the creator of the product.

Which is fairly reasonable to me-- you use something that doesnt belong to you for profit, you pay a share to who it belongs to.

Just like a bank loan, it's a capitalist state, not charity event.

You don't own a software, and thats just how it is. If you dont agree with it, then next time dont click "I AGREE".
Supamang
Profile Joined June 2010
United States2298 Posts
November 15 2010 04:16 GMT
#344
its so difficult to tell where the facts are for this case. i mean, people are saying Kespa has no case against Blizzard and vice versa. People who claim to have backgrounds in law in this thread seem to be split on both sides as well.

however, i cant help but want Blizzard to win this. from what ive heard, Kespa mistreats the progamers, uses dirty tactics to defame Blizzard, SC2, and people they dont like (Nada), and who knows what else. Blizzard is the one who created this genius video game series and theyve shown that they have the resources to throw big tournaments. All Kespa does now is enslave gamers to play Blizzards game. They don't create anything and just want to make claims to profits based on other people's property (blah blah BS soccer analogy doesnt work. If the inventor of soccer was alive and in our current society, I am sure he could make claims to the sports proceeds). Again, I cant help but side with Blizzard.
OpticalShot
Profile Blog Joined October 2009
Canada6330 Posts
November 15 2010 04:22 GMT
#345
Great article + translation, this is a rather correct generalization of the Korean fans' stance from what I've observed in the replies on Fomos and DES.
[TLMS] REBOOT
Pleiades
Profile Joined June 2010
United States472 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 04:30:04
November 15 2010 04:26 GMT
#346
No offense, I stated being an undergrad law student, but it wasn't meant something to be bragged about.

I was confused to why that person stated players should have IP rights from Starcraft, and I told him to clarify on what he was talking about. I understood the concept of IP rights case of the chess player he mentioned, but could not connect it to the analogy he made to Starcraft. So I assumed he may of been confused to what exactly IP rights were and how you go through the process of obtaining them. I am already starting some of my law courses now, but I've yet to fully decide if I want to go into that field.

Then I told him that the players or people using Starcraft are limited to what they can do by the EULA. Yet the moment he patronizes me, I could tell he was trolling me somewhat.

I'll reiterate what I mean more clearly.

EULA are contracts that you make with the company to use their products or parts of it. It limits your use to a license to protect their rights of it. However, not all of them are legally bounded and enforced by law if the current jurisdiction deems it unreasonable through contra proferentem. It is generally stated in common law that EULAs are a legally-binded contract at first though.

EULA does not go into effect until you actually have the intent to use the product or any parts of it. Once you agree or accept the terms, then you consent to using the product and to the EULA. This is why you can resell Starcraft 2 if you have not used the CD Key to a battle.net account. However, once you do use it, your CD key becomes blizzard's property as it is now tied to battle.net. It becomes non-transferable since you cannot sell your battle.net account without possible action by Blizzard.

If you don't agree to the EULA, you can always decline and not install and not use the product. If you don't agree to it either, take it to court or go ask your law makers to change the law.
I love you sarge.... AHHHH
raviy
Profile Joined October 2010
Australia207 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 05:04:06
November 15 2010 05:02 GMT
#347
Er... Let's go back to basic contract law. A contract only incorporates terms agreed upon before, or at formation of the contract. A shop has a SC2 box on the shelf, that's an invitation to treat. Someone takes that to the counter, and makes an offer to the cashier to purchase. Cashier accepts, contract formed. Money handed over, SC2 handed over. Contract executed.

Upon installation, you see the EULA. That is arguably not part of the contract, as the terms have been made known after the contract had been both formed and executed. Further, it's not easy to return a purchased item for full price.

There have been quite a few EULAs that courts have found to not be terms incorporated into the contract, on that exact basis. I'm too busy to dig up examples right now, but I'll post them later.
Vimsey
Profile Joined May 2010
United Kingdom2235 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 05:08:58
November 15 2010 05:07 GMT
#348
On November 15 2010 13:09 SubPointOA wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 14 2010 14:46 LG)Sabbath wrote:
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match

isn't this actually a good argument though?

the balls were made to be used as a sport, I doubt blizzard intended having SC ever becoming a popular sport in Korea.

Soccer clubs pay football associations in order to compete and television rights are negotiated on much the same terms between clubs and football associations and broadcast rights. Comparing soccer ball manufacturers is more like saying I made a map you play on I should control the whole of e-sports.
toadstool
Profile Joined May 2006
Australia421 Posts
November 15 2010 05:07 GMT
#349
On November 15 2010 08:17 TheGreatHegemon wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 06:13 Myles wrote:
On November 15 2010 06:07 latan wrote:
IP is stupid anyway, whoever thought it was possible to own ideas (that are made public)?. returning to the sports analogy:

the manufactures of the equipment, wether it be the ball, the shoes or whatever else, do also own IP rights on all that stuff. what would you thik if they suddenly wanted to charge the stadiums owners a fee for selling broadcasting rights to TV stations?.

I don't think it's such a bad analogy, for the correct analogy, let's imagine for a second that there was actually and inventor and developer of the game of football, would it be right for him to try to control the leagues in such a way?.

when you see a game match wether it is sport or esport you aren't there to see the players or team do their thing, i would say that a match should be owned by the players/teams but this is obviously not a consensus and there won't be any consensus on these matters any time soon. IP rights is a shady area, specially in this digital age.


There is a huge difference between sports and video games. A sport consists mostly of rules. To play basketball, baseball, or soccer all you need to enough people and some things to represent goals, bases, ect. You could play any of those sports without any of the proper equipment and get along just fine.

Compare that with Starcraft, which is much more than just a set of rules. It also has art and programming and without those you're no longer playing Starcraft. Even if you're using a volleyball in a basketball game, you're still playing basketball. That is why sports and e-sports are incomparable.


Starcraft is nothing but a massive set of rules. Anything processed/displayed on a computer is merely being run through the rules/instructions.


Everything is a massive set of rules. The law, how people make money, work, Microsoft.

What the hell are you trying to say? This is how our society is made, through rules and regulations.
NEWB?!
FrostOtter
Profile Joined September 2010
United States537 Posts
November 15 2010 05:10 GMT
#350
So it sounds to me that a better way to look at Blizzard's ownership v. our "rights" is that our use of Starcraft/2/BW is more like renting than purchasing...but without a recurring fee.

Is this accurate?
Vimsey
Profile Joined May 2010
United Kingdom2235 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 05:14:14
November 15 2010 05:12 GMT
#351
On November 15 2010 13:26 Pleiades wrote:
No offense, I stated being an undergrad law student, but it wasn't meant something to be bragged about.

I was confused to why that person stated players should have IP rights from Starcraft, and I told him to clarify on what he was talking about. I understood the concept of IP rights case of the chess player he mentioned, but could not connect it to the analogy he made to Starcraft. So I assumed he may of been confused to what exactly IP rights were and how you go through the process of obtaining them. I am already starting some of my law courses now, but I've yet to fully decide if I want to go into that field.

Then I told him that the players or people using Starcraft are limited to what they can do by the EULA. Yet the moment he patronizes me, I could tell he was trolling me somewhat.

I'll reiterate what I mean more clearly.

EULA are contracts that you make with the company to use their products or parts of it. It limits your use to a license to protect their rights of it. However, not all of them are legally bounded and enforced by law if the current jurisdiction deems it unreasonable through contra proferentem. It is generally stated in common law that EULAs are a legally-binded contract at first though.

EULA does not go into effect until you actually have the intent to use the product or any parts of it. Once you agree or accept the terms, then you consent to using the product and to the EULA. This is why you can resell Starcraft 2 if you have not used the CD Key to a battle.net account. However, once you do use it, your CD key becomes blizzard's property as it is now tied to battle.net. It becomes non-transferable since you cannot sell your battle.net account without possible action by Blizzard.

If you don't agree to the EULA, you can always decline and not install and not use the product. If you don't agree to it either, take it to court or go ask your law makers to change the law.

However most EULA's you cant read/accepted (under consumer rights have to be voluntary not forced) untill you unwrap your purchase at which time you have no option of a refund and in the UK at least we have data protection laws that cant be overridden by a EULA so most EULAs here are about as binding as wet toilet paper.
xBillehx
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States1289 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 05:15:57
November 15 2010 05:13 GMT
#352
On November 15 2010 14:02 raviy wrote:
Er... Let's go back to basic contract law. A contract only incorporates terms agreed upon before, or at formation of the contract. A shop has a SC2 box on the shelf, that's an invitation to treat. Someone takes that to the counter, and makes an offer to the cashier to purchase. Cashier accepts, contract formed. Money handed over, SC2 handed over. Contract executed.

Upon installation, you see the EULA. That is arguably not part of the contract, as the terms have been made known after the contract had been both formed and executed. Further, it's not easy to return a purchased item for full price.

There have been quite a few EULAs that courts have found to not be terms incorporated into the contract, on that exact basis. I'm too busy to dig up examples right now, but I'll post them later.

Which is why, as someone pointed out earlier, theres a little white area on the top of the Starcraft 2 box clear as day that tells you the product is subject to the EULA and even gives you a website to see it before you make the purchase, i.e. before you finish the first "contract."

Edit: Pulled out my BW case and theres an area on the back saying something similar + that it can't be used for commercial use.
Taengoo ♥
Pleiades
Profile Joined June 2010
United States472 Posts
November 15 2010 05:15 GMT
#353
On November 15 2010 14:10 FrostOtter wrote:
So it sounds to me that a better way to look at Blizzard's ownership v. our "rights" is that our use of Starcraft/2/BW is more like renting than purchasing...but without a recurring fee.

Is this accurate?


They give you a license to use the game, but that use is limited by the EULA that you agreed to upon installing the content of the software product. Companies want you to use their products in a certain way based on what they license you to it. Buying their software does not entitle you to use their product on whatever you want to use it as.
I love you sarge.... AHHHH
Vimsey
Profile Joined May 2010
United Kingdom2235 Posts
Last Edited: 2010-11-15 05:19:35
November 15 2010 05:16 GMT
#354
On November 15 2010 14:13 xBillehx wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 14:02 raviy wrote:
Er... Let's go back to basic contract law. A contract only incorporates terms agreed upon before, or at formation of the contract. A shop has a SC2 box on the shelf, that's an invitation to treat. Someone takes that to the counter, and makes an offer to the cashier to purchase. Cashier accepts, contract formed. Money handed over, SC2 handed over. Contract executed.

Upon installation, you see the EULA. That is arguably not part of the contract, as the terms have been made known after the contract had been both formed and executed. Further, it's not easy to return a purchased item for full price.

There have been quite a few EULAs that courts have found to not be terms incorporated into the contract, on that exact basis. I'm too busy to dig up examples right now, but I'll post them later.

Which is why, as someone pointed out earlier, theres a little white area on the top of the Starcraft 2 box clear as day that tells you the product is subject to the EULA and even gives you a website to see it before you make the purchase, i.e. before you finish the first "contract."

Edit: Pulled out my BW case and theres an area on the back saying the exact same thing.

That doesnt fly in the UK it has to be on the product. As again shows the example of how ignorant of international laws most EULA writers are. Also since even with my rudimentary knowledge of data protection laws and consumer rights here I know that the EULA breaks our laws in at least 2 or 3 areas.
Egyptian_Head
Profile Joined October 2010
South Africa508 Posts
November 15 2010 05:16 GMT
#355
On November 15 2010 14:12 Vimsey wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 13:26 Pleiades wrote:
No offense, I stated being an undergrad law student, but it wasn't meant something to be bragged about.

I was confused to why that person stated players should have IP rights from Starcraft, and I told him to clarify on what he was talking about. I understood the concept of IP rights case of the chess player he mentioned, but could not connect it to the analogy he made to Starcraft. So I assumed he may of been confused to what exactly IP rights were and how you go through the process of obtaining them. I am already starting some of my law courses now, but I've yet to fully decide if I want to go into that field.

Then I told him that the players or people using Starcraft are limited to what they can do by the EULA. Yet the moment he patronizes me, I could tell he was trolling me somewhat.

I'll reiterate what I mean more clearly.

EULA are contracts that you make with the company to use their products or parts of it. It limits your use to a license to protect their rights of it. However, not all of them are legally bounded and enforced by law if the current jurisdiction deems it unreasonable through contra proferentem. It is generally stated in common law that EULAs are a legally-binded contract at first though.

EULA does not go into effect until you actually have the intent to use the product or any parts of it. Once you agree or accept the terms, then you consent to using the product and to the EULA. This is why you can resell Starcraft 2 if you have not used the CD Key to a battle.net account. However, once you do use it, your CD key becomes blizzard's property as it is now tied to battle.net. It becomes non-transferable since you cannot sell your battle.net account without possible action by Blizzard.

If you don't agree to the EULA, you can always decline and not install and not use the product. If you don't agree to it either, take it to court or go ask your law makers to change the law.

However most EULA's you cant read/accepted (under consumer rights have to be voluntary not forced) untill you unwrap your purchase at which time you have no option of a refund and in the UK at least we have data protection laws that cant be overridden by a EULA so most EULAs here are about as binding as wet toilet paper.


I don't have thse starcraft box here but I believe that on the out side of the box it states that there is a eula and you must accept it in order to install the software. It also states where the eula can be found before hand. But I don't have the box on me so im just going on bad memory.
latan
Profile Joined July 2010
740 Posts
November 15 2010 05:17 GMT
#356
On November 15 2010 13:15 Mioraka wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 12:48 latan wrote:
On November 15 2010 11:02 TheRabidDeer wrote:
On November 15 2010 10:51 latan wrote:
On November 15 2010 06:13 Myles wrote:
On November 15 2010 06:07 latan wrote:
IP is stupid anyway, whoever thought it was possible to own ideas (that are made public)?. returning to the sports analogy:

the manufactures of the equipment, wether it be the ball, the shoes or whatever else, do also own IP rights on all that stuff. what would you thik if they suddenly wanted to charge the stadiums owners a fee for selling broadcasting rights to TV stations?.

I don't think it's such a bad analogy, for the correct analogy, let's imagine for a second that there was actually and inventor and developer of the game of football, would it be right for him to try to control the leagues in such a way?.

when you see a game match wether it is sport or esport you aren't there to see the players or team do their thing, i would say that a match should be owned by the players/teams but this is obviously not a consensus and there won't be any consensus on these matters any time soon. IP rights is a shady area, specially in this digital age.


There is a huge difference between sports and video games. A sport consists mostly of rules. To play basketball, baseball, or soccer all you need to enough people and some things to represent goals, bases, ect. You could play any of those sports without any of the proper equipment and get along just fine.

Compare that with Starcraft, which is much more than just a set of rules. It also has art and programming and without those you're no longer playing Starcraft. Even if you're using a volleyball in a basketball game, you're still playing basketball. That is why sports and e-sports are incomparable.


that is a fair point but i don't see how art + programming = i have a right to control whatever it is that you want to do with the software you BOUGHT from me. since when is the profit aspect of software bussiness considered to go beyond sales?

hypothetically one could invent a game, a physicall one, and also invest some time designing it and whatnot. do you have a right to have control over every single tournament after everyone knows how to play it? the most you could do is patent the equipment and have exclusivity and the sales of it. starcrat is the equipment, they have exclusivity on the sale of it. and they already sold it to you. the ball=software analogy seems perfectly accurate with this point of view. because in all fairness blizzard didn't invent any of the fundamentals of the game. the game is something that goes beyond that, blizzard just made some fine equipment to play it.

Blizzard created this specific game. If KeSPA wanted to create a game that plays the same but has different art/sounds and made the game their own, they have free control over it. I dont know the extent of how similar it can be before copyright comes into play, but they can make their own version and be fine.

No matter how you argue it, blizzard owns and controls SC. That is it, no matter what you argue it wont change it, even if it doesnt make sense to you.

EDIT: What I see some people arguing, is that certain moves are the IP of the players. This doesnt make sense, since they are just operating within the game of BW. If I kick a ball, can I claim that the act of kicking the ball is my IP?


Sense is a keyword here, no matter how much you want to dissmiss it, we're discussing in the abstract here and nothing's set in stone. it does matter if it makes sense or not, the law is behind in these situations and things should make sense or otherwise we're all fucked.

it makes absolutely no sense that blizz can expect to control the use i give to the software i bought if i'm not incurring in taking sales away from them. that is the bottom line for me. they shouldn't be allowed to do this. if the law allows them it's because it's a grey area and things aren't well defined legally, not because it's a fair right of them to have.


It's not a grey area. And why you say they want to control you? They are not, they are trying to make a profit, and guess what? That's their freaking job.

If you buy a software, the contract says you can only use it for personal purposes, and you agreed. But you can't use it to earn a profit, if you do, you have to share that profit with the creator of the product.

Which is fairly reasonable to me-- you use something that doesnt belong to you for profit, you pay a share to who it belongs to.

Just like a bank loan, it's a capitalist state, not charity event.

You don't own a software, and thats just how it is. If you dont agree with it, then next time dont click "I AGREE".


look i don't want to discuss this anymore and you're clearly being delibertely obtuse so i'll just clarify:

It IS a grey area, no matter how much you want to ignore it, we live in times where IP rights are constantly being reevaluated, and the law is years behind the changes in society that require normativity for this matters.

they are trying to make a profit, yes, thank you captain obvious that's not what we're discussing. they are trying to get hold of all possible opportunities to make a profit by saying that they have control over how you use they piece of software you just bought. it's their jobs, so what? that doesn't mean they can get away with it, it's also the job of BP to try to find loopholes in their laws so they can avoid enviromental legislations isn't it?, I see my job as a person living on this planet and on this society where i don't get to make the rules to comment on them. of course they want to make a profit, but they have absolutely no right to say i can't use it to make a profit as well, as long as it doesn't hurt them in an obvious way.

what exactly is personal purposes?, what if i buy it solely for the purpose of making a profit?, that seems like a personal purpose to me, can you please define personal purposes? or is a software company allowed to define what is and is not personal?, why can't i use the same mindset of a capitalistic state and put my purchase to work? why is it that only big coorparoations have this right in you view? they don't get to say what that they can forbid any activity which allows me from profitting from their software. that's inane. and they don't get to say that either morally or even legally no matter how much EULAS there are between this.

xBillehx
Profile Blog Joined June 2009
United States1289 Posts
November 15 2010 05:17 GMT
#357
On November 15 2010 14:16 Vimsey wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 14:13 xBillehx wrote:
On November 15 2010 14:02 raviy wrote:
Er... Let's go back to basic contract law. A contract only incorporates terms agreed upon before, or at formation of the contract. A shop has a SC2 box on the shelf, that's an invitation to treat. Someone takes that to the counter, and makes an offer to the cashier to purchase. Cashier accepts, contract formed. Money handed over, SC2 handed over. Contract executed.

Upon installation, you see the EULA. That is arguably not part of the contract, as the terms have been made known after the contract had been both formed and executed. Further, it's not easy to return a purchased item for full price.

There have been quite a few EULAs that courts have found to not be terms incorporated into the contract, on that exact basis. I'm too busy to dig up examples right now, but I'll post them later.

Which is why, as someone pointed out earlier, theres a little white area on the top of the Starcraft 2 box clear as day that tells you the product is subject to the EULA and even gives you a website to see it before you make the purchase, i.e. before you finish the first "contract."

Edit: Pulled out my BW case and theres an area on the back saying the exact same thing.

That doesnt fly in the UK it has to be on the product. As again shows the example of how ignorant of international laws most EULA writers are.

Really? I didn't know that there needs to be 2+ pages of text on the boxes of things in the UK. Can you show me an example?
Taengoo ♥
FrostOtter
Profile Joined September 2010
United States537 Posts
November 15 2010 05:18 GMT
#358
The funniest thing about this thread, I think, is the that no one seems to think Blizzard has a legal department.

While that is not to say that Blizzard automatically wins, and I am sure the issue is even further muddied by the internationality of the issue, my guess is that Blizzard's lawyers are not letting the company operate blindly, either.
Pleiades
Profile Joined June 2010
United States472 Posts
November 15 2010 05:21 GMT
#359
On November 15 2010 14:12 Vimsey wrote:
However most EULA's you cant read/accepted (under consumer rights have to be voluntary not forced) untill you unwrap your purchase at which time you have no option of a refund and in the UK at least we have data protection laws that cant be overridden by a EULA so most EULAs here are about as binding as wet toilet paper.


However, most or all software products have texts somewhere on the packaging/cover that states acceptance of the EULA is required to use the product. Most of the time it is in small print so you have to look at the product more carefully before purchasing it.

As I said before, EULA does not go into effect until you intend to use it. (opening and installing the product)
I love you sarge.... AHHHH
Vimsey
Profile Joined May 2010
United Kingdom2235 Posts
November 15 2010 05:21 GMT
#360
On November 15 2010 14:17 xBillehx wrote:
Show nested quote +
On November 15 2010 14:16 Vimsey wrote:
On November 15 2010 14:13 xBillehx wrote:
On November 15 2010 14:02 raviy wrote:
Er... Let's go back to basic contract law. A contract only incorporates terms agreed upon before, or at formation of the contract. A shop has a SC2 box on the shelf, that's an invitation to treat. Someone takes that to the counter, and makes an offer to the cashier to purchase. Cashier accepts, contract formed. Money handed over, SC2 handed over. Contract executed.

Upon installation, you see the EULA. That is arguably not part of the contract, as the terms have been made known after the contract had been both formed and executed. Further, it's not easy to return a purchased item for full price.

There have been quite a few EULAs that courts have found to not be terms incorporated into the contract, on that exact basis. I'm too busy to dig up examples right now, but I'll post them later.

Which is why, as someone pointed out earlier, theres a little white area on the top of the Starcraft 2 box clear as day that tells you the product is subject to the EULA and even gives you a website to see it before you make the purchase, i.e. before you finish the first "contract."

Edit: Pulled out my BW case and theres an area on the back saying the exact same thing.

That doesnt fly in the UK it has to be on the product. As again shows the example of how ignorant of international laws most EULA writers are.

Really? I didn't know that there needs to be 2+ pages of text on the boxes of things in the UK. Can you show me an example?

We have very strong consumer protection laws. If someone wants to make 2+ pages of conditions prior to purchase they have to be made known at the time of purchase not after or they need to refund if the conditions cant be agreed by the consumer.
Prev 1 16 17 18 19 20 26 Next All
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Online Event
00:00
LATAM SC2 League: FINALS
EnkiAlexander 88
Liquipedia
Replay Cast
00:00
2025 GSL S2 - Playoffs
CranKy Ducklings79
Liquipedia
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
PiGStarcraft442
RuFF_SC2 88
StarCraft: Brood War
Artosis 818
MaD[AoV]29
NaDa 20
Icarus 4
Dota 2
capcasts125
NeuroSwarm73
League of Legends
Dendi1175
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1672
Stewie2K1198
taco 283
Super Smash Bros
hungrybox540
AZ_Axe121
Mew2King83
Heroes of the Storm
Khaldor147
Other Games
shahzam960
C9.Mang0788
JimRising 606
ViBE310
Maynarde167
Trikslyr71
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick958
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 18 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• Hupsaiya 98
• RyuSc2 70
• davetesta34
• musti20045 26
• HeavenSC 24
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• intothetv
• Kozan
• sooper7s
• IndyKCrew
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Migwel
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• Ler77
League of Legends
• Doublelift5292
Other Games
• Scarra1168
Upcoming Events
The PondCast
9h 15m
RSL Revival
9h 15m
Harstem vs SHIN
Solar vs Cham
WardiTV Invitational
11h 15m
ByuN vs Reynor
Clem vs MaxPax
OSC
11h 45m
Replay Cast
23h 15m
RSL Revival
1d 9h
Reynor vs Scarlett
ShoWTimE vs Classic
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
1d 14h
SOOP
2 days
Cure vs Zoun
SC Evo League
2 days
Road to EWC
2 days
[ Show More ]
SOOP Global
2 days
Future vs MaNa
Harstem vs Cham
BSL: ProLeague
2 days
Sziky vs JDConan
Cross vs MadiNho
Hawk vs Bonyth
Circuito Brasileiro de…
2 days
Sparkling Tuna Cup
3 days
Road to EWC
3 days
BSL: ProLeague
3 days
UltrA vs TBD
Dewalt vs TBD
Replay Cast
5 days
Online Event
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

Acropolis #3 - GSC
2025 GSL S2
Heroes 10 EU

Ongoing

JPL Season 2
BSL 2v2 Season 3
BSL Season 20
Acropolis #3
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 2
NPSL S3
Rose Open S1
CSL 17: 2025 SUMMER
Copa Latinoamericana 4
RSL Revival: Season 1
Murky Cup #2
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25
BLAST Rivals Spring 2025
MESA Nomadic Masters
CCT Season 2 Global Finals
IEM Melbourne 2025
YaLLa Compass Qatar 2025
PGL Bucharest 2025

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
K-Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
SEL Season 2 Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
HSC XXVII
Championship of Russia 2025
BLAST Open Fall 2025
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.