Just something I've discovered while browsing the web. Since I'm Korean myself it didn't take me too long to translate this.
The attachment is the screenshot of a forum post in the KeSPA website. This was written (as you can see on the top of the image) was 9th Nov 2010.
So Here goes ============================================================== F***ing KeSPA, despite some views of patriotism they've shown... 1. KeSPA was born 2. Blizzard didn't care about it 3. Found out KeSPA was collecting profit (ticket fee) from offline audience for the OnGameNet Finals match. 4. Blizzard asked KeSPA to stop 5. KeSPA starts an agreement with OGN and MBC to make them pay KeSPA to broadcast SC matches. 6. Blizzard angry. Rawr > 7. GomTV, the only organisation to contact Blizzard directly to ask permission to broadcast 'internet streams' of SC matches. (OGN and MBCgame are cable TV. Original MBC channel itself is a public channel) 8. Blizzard agrees and receives '1 Dollar' to give permission to GomTV. (assuming its a gesture as to show OGN and MBCgame) 9. GomTV opens a league called 'GomTV Classic' 10. At around Season 4 of GomTV Classic, KeSPA calls them and tells them to pay up for broadcasting SC. 11. GomTV tells them we have permission from Blizzard and should step off (bitch). 12. KeSPA commands players to not enter GomTV leagues. (Players had contracts with KeSPA) 13. GomTV Classic fails miserably. 14. Blizzard is more angry. 15. Blizzard, to honor their products and protect its copyright and ownership (legal stuff), steps up to the middle of the conflict. 16. Blizzard and KeSPA goes into negotiation. 17. KeSPA goes 'e-sports is also sports', 'do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match', 'SC is a public property and is accessible by anyone' etc bullcrap 18. Blizzard boss Michael Morheim comes to Korea for the promotion of SC2 and also to have a meeting with the current SC progamers. 19. KeSPA contacts all Korean SC teams and threaten them to not meet up with Michael. 20. Michael Morheim was sent back without any gain. 21. Blizzard tries to negotiate but KeSPA still bullcrapping about 'please understand e-sports' 22. Blizzard and KeSPA came to a result of the negotiation. 23. Blizzard gives rights to GomTV to broadcast any Blizzard games (SC, SC2, WoW, W3). At the same time allowed SC leagues to be broadcasted under KeSPA until August. If they do not follow this conduct, Blizzard will officially show legal action. 24. KeSPA tries to appeal and goes aggressive. 25. Since OGN and MBCgame don't want to lose its broadcasting rights, they try to negotiate with GomTV 26. OGN and MBCgame understands they're still going to be paying money to contract the rights to broadcast leagues anyway, only difference is the receipient. 27. KeSPA's only weapon is the contracted players and teams. 28. After SC2 released, KeSPA did not allow SC players to touch the game. 29. Therefore most SC2 gamers are older (near 1st generation) gamers, new faces or players without tied contracts. 30. Suddenly GomTV announces GSL (SC2 open) 31. The scale of the prize money is off the charts and is the highest in the history of e-sports. 32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2.
(lists of SC2 hating articles and funny part is the reporter/journalist is the same dude) *Blizzard, 'Pressuring' Korea with its 'SC2' release up coming. *[GAME] - Dissapointing reviews of SC2's early stages *Blizzard says 'We must Destroy SC1 for SC2 to live! *'Warning' SC2, Your computer may break down. *'SC2 fried my graphic cards' - Internet Cafe bosses and gamers uproar *Where has the fame of SC2 gone? After 4 weeks of sales... (they compared to food getting cold) *NaDa Lee, Yun-Yeol moving to SC2. Once an honored gamer, now a prize money hunter. *SC2's popularity down the sink. How Deep?
(2 comments below this post) - There is an article dissing NaDa, titled 'He once was an honorable player, now he is a money hunter' The reporter has openly made an article which he can easily be sued for. I am surprised how far these journalists can go for petty money received by such a big oragnisation. Don't they have shame?
- Desperate act of some poor reporter ==============================================================
Words inside brackets are mostly my opinions or comments. I did not do a direct translation, since I am not a professional translator. I only tried to translate how the original poster felt.
============================================================== Thread Title: 50+ reasons why KeSPA is getting flamed.
1) League broadcasting rights conflict
1. A team league organized by MBCgame and Proleague by OGN was forced to unite and taken off of ownership, in order to abolish their private broadcasting rights. (KeSPA butted in between MBC and OGN's efforts to organize the league) 2. Originally created by OGN and OGN+MBCgame united Proleague sponsorship was forcefully taken by KeSPA. 3. For 3 years, requested the Broadcasting Stations to pay 1.7billion Won, with their broadcasting 'rights' which... Blizzard has the copyright of the product (SC). This sparked up another issue when the recent negotiations happened. 4. KeSPA gave some company called IBsports (they have a sub company called IEG). Which would cause KeSPA to wash their hands and could have pushed all the blames to them. 5. Once they boycotted one of the MBCgame Survivor series. 6. KeSPA tries to open their own league called 'KeSPA Cup' but it ended being a small scale than a local internet cafe competition. 7. Forced a cut down in scale for leagues that were 'Player based' and raised in scale for 'Team based' to enlarge their profits through sponsorship. (Sponsoring a team would be more benefitial since they risk less if a team has many good players) 8. League was broadcasted 5 days a week, causing its value per match less anticipated and its excitement to drop.
2) Rules and Policy issues 9. DQ for typing 'PP' instead of 'PPP'. They changed this rule after its first incident. 10. Typed 'a' and got DQ. Later this made the fans re-read their rules and found a backdoor where it quoted 'KeSPA referees "COULD" give the player a DQ' which sparked 'That means they can do whatever they feel like in those situations'. 11. Only able to type GG or gg. If typed WW (which is ㅈㅈ in Korean chat) or any variaties were to be DQed. 12. Accidentally pressing ESC while countdown happening (5,4,3,2,1 for SC) made them leave the game which lead to a DQ. 13. The gameplay which when the Worker-Squeeze-thru-minerals-and-buildings is CLEARLY a bug, was allowed because of this reason. "That is not specified in our rules". Since then, Pro gamers used this as method as a 'strategy' and even maps which require these gameplay appeared. (Funny how SlayerS_BoxeR's allied mine was banned but this.) 14. When the first NATE MSL finals had a problem of a 'Blackout', KeSPA lied about 'we have a replay' even though they did not and made their own decision 15. KeSPA had applied 'bonus points' for players rankings, which were different depending on if they were from OGN or MBC, making another conflict issue between the two. 16. Website database error or so called 'glitch' had made NaDa's (Lee, Yun-Yeol) records to show different to its facts. 17. Because KeSPA did not have a stable record of the players, they had to use OGN and MBCgame's records and made it look like theirs. There even was a broker who were selling player data. (Win Loss ratio and private practice replays) 18. KeSPA did not have a guideline for their sponsors agreements (payments) and requested 2billion won. Sponsors started to back away. 19. If players were drafted and if they declined KeSPA's decision, they had a rule to 'Not allowing in any pro teams for 3 years' so they had to go to a team even if they didn't want to. 20. There was a FA (Free Agent) rule applied in 2009 and whatever the team calls the highest bid for a player, the player wassent to that team. Because not all teams had the similar financial ability, since there were no 'against' rules, the richest team could always bid the highest and get all the best players they wanted. Therefore this FA rule failed. 21. Then they changed the rules into 'Choose your opponent'. This made the tournament less interesting because the viewers could now 'calculate' and predict matches even before the results of any matches came through. Fans started saying 'This could lead to a rigged/fixed matches... which eventually happened... So they changed it to 'Blind Entry' rule where they picked opponents but not publicizing it. 22. Proleague 08-09 post season was participated in '2' days due to financial reasons (whered all the sponsor money go?) and resulted in the lowest audience in history of Proleague.
3) Attitude towards other games. 23. Although KeSPA was made because of Starcraft, their organisation was meant to be for 'ALL' progamers, despite what games they were. Even though Korea had the good players for many other games (W3, Counter-Strike etc) they sought that games other than SC wouldn't make profit, therefore near-ignored support for other games. 24. They completely ignored the league support for Kart-Rider (Game by NCsoft, Famous racing game amongst Asian gamers.) All the contracted players were left to take care of themselves (contracted for nothing pretty much) 25. They hand picked their own players for 'KeSPA league but was never ongoing and the support was hardly seen. 26. Even major game categories were narrowed down to Korean specific games (Sudden Attack, Kart-Rider, Special Force etc) They say they insisted those games as an official e-sports category but never had the department to support them in the first place. 27. Especially for 'Special Force', a game which never had its popularity beyond Korea (obviously not even close to Starcraft), they started devoting its prize money to this game and resulted in the 'Proleague 2 days finals tournament'. (Read 22) 28. Already applying the 5 days per week matches for SC, for an association which should be promoting and supporting 'Games' in general as a sport, mainly focused on SC only and damaged the balance of e-sports, making it 'Starcraft-Sports'. It is suspected how they are named Esports Player Association if they are not doing what they are named after.
4) Fixed Matches issue 29. When the issue sparked, they were as if seeking for justice but they mostly tried to stay out of it (trying to avoid any legal issues) 30. When Progamer Mr. Park, announced his retirement from gaming, KeSPA tried to ignore him and avoided any involvement. 31. When Progamer Mr. Won announced his retirement, They did not even notify this officially and even tried to hide it to be published. 32. They never officially said 'Banned' within their system and they are still in the 'Retired' Status therefore fans were saying 'That is ironic since if they wanted to come back to the Progamer scene, by law they don't have any restrictions to do so' 33. They did not come up with any resolutions or plans to prevent this 'fixed matches' happening in the future.
5) Blizzard and Gretech issue. 34. KeSPA boycotted players entering GomTV classic (Season 4) They are trying to conceal the fact that they've done them on purpose. 35. Ordered the current progamers to enter the Beta phase of SC2 36. Tried to play a game (ironically) involving the media and destroyed the NDA 37. Even though Blizzard holds the copyright for SC, KeSPA says SC is a public property and its accessible by everyone, and saying they've promoted the game. Clearly 'carrying the war into the enemy´s camp'. 38. Players like NaDa and SlayerS_BoxeR were treated as 'traitors' for leaving SC contracts 39. In their public hearing, when they were trying to appeal, they involved progamer names such as Jaedong who is innocent. Bringing in un-notified 3rd party into their conflict. 40. While this public hearing was taken place, they tried to make all other games involving progaming to be public property, just like what they did to SC. 41. Progaming teams and Progamers received threats from KeSPA if they contact anyone from Blizzard or affiliate with them in any possibility, they will give them a hard time. 42. In Germany, when NaDa was invited for a show match, someone re-streamed this though a Korean Live-Streaming website (called AFRIKA), KeSPA called the managers and made him GG in the middle of a game and end the game immediately. 43. As soon as NaDa moved to the SC2 scene, KeSPA had 'Deleted' NaDa's database. Later they re-uploaded it due to the fan's anger and they replied back as a 'Glitch' in the system. 44. As per Blizzard, the negotiation went as KeSPA's attitude was ignoring the fact that Blizzard had the copyrights even though they've CREATED the game. 45. OGN was going to broadcast the SC2 Open as a joint broadcast but was soon denied which lead to suspision that a certain organisation ordered them to cancel it. 46. The Negotiations have not came to a decision yet they've started the 10-11 Proleague, technically illegal. 47. Illegally given approval for MBCgame's Bigfile MSL, Kyung-Nam STX cup and PDPOP MSL. 48. KeSPA said they will pay 300million Won per year when they've requested 1.7billion won per 3 years to the broadcasters, (Read point 3). This is obviously out of logic and an unfair business. (I'd just say Greedy) 49. While negotiating they are continuously spitting out new suggestions and delaying its completion 50. 'SC2 to be handles by KeSPA' was the main topic of KeSPA's opinions in the negotiation period.
51. Complete ignorance towards the viewers and fans and only focusing on their own profit. Typical bully style.
OP of this post wanted to stay quiet but as the situation had gotten this far, he was trying to emphasize the wrong doings of KeSPA's thoughts of 'Even though we made many mistakes, there HAS TO BE an association'. OP Clearly hates this idea and also he had made replies for Gretech's selfish doing as well. But it had came down to his decision that KeSPA is the root of all evil in this case and is positive that this is the case. An organisation trying to earn profits without communicating with its fans or community is always the wrong way to go and should not even be negotiated. Basically saying 'They are not worth it'.
OP Also wishes to see great matches between players and thus providing the entertainment purely for the fans and supporters. Happy Ending is always good. ======================================================================
Please do not hesitate to PM me if u have questions on anything posted here. -Pizzapie
EDIT: I reckon the title should have been "KeSPA hating Korean summarizes situation" or something similar lol. I'm posting as if all Koreans hate KeSPA.
On November 14 2010 14:26 Pizzapie wrote:32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2..
O.O? To what extent, and what examples other than the bit involving Nada that you mentioned?
I'll actually list the article titles as shown in the bottom section of the screenshot. They're some online news website article, typically done by the same jouranlist over and over hating SC2.
EDIT4: I am not a KeSPA hater or a Blizzard worshipper. I am just a fan of gaming and its communities. Non of these points were created or originated from me.
I think he was just generalizing. He most likely doesn't think ALL korean SC fans hate KeSPA, but was surprised by the post because he didn't know this animosity existed? Perhaps. Still a very interesting insight into e-sports and the politics if it's indeed true.
is that really how the timeline goes? i'm pretty new to the scene but i've heard most of that in bits of pieces and i've been holding my tongue since i don't know which side if either is the source of the problem... though at this point i'm pretty sure both parties are being selfish.
Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
Not in this situation, I don't think. That would be analogous to asking pay the keyboard/mouse/monitor manufacturers every time they touched their equipment for a game. Starcraft is the game itself, created by Blizzard, which would be more like paying the entrance fee to a football match held in a stadium.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
Whats the purpose of this thread to show korea hates kespa and loves Sc2 now ???? Whatever your underlying purpose this single post does not show that it actually has the support of all sc fan from korea probably a one sided fan's ranting but not the total sc fans.
Right now, on every article on fomos, there's flame wars going on between scbw fans and sc2 fans.
Also, it's the nature of Koreans. We're known to be furious keyboard warriors and like to participate in discussions that may lead to people killing each other or themselves. We love to rip on others that we don't agree with. Obviously, scbw fans are not happy with the release of sc2. Their popular opinion is that sc2 will die and all the success is so far is credited to SlayerSBoxeR and NaDa, while the sc2 fans like to make fun of scbw by calling them illegal gamers. Pretty funny to observe actually.
No, it's an extremely crappy argument. If they want to use soccer balls, which is a fundamental tool used to play the game, then they should say, "Should we pay licensing fees to Intel to use Intel computers to play Starcraft?" Computers are an essential tool used to play Starcraft just as soccer balls are an essential tool to play soccer. Their analogy is totally illogical. You can't say that Starcraft is a tool to create Starcraft matches just like you can't say soccer is a tool to create soccer matches. It doesn't work.
well tbh I didn't really know anything about the whole GOM tv classic and what not as I wasn't around bw back then but to me it makes perfect sense to sue them lol.
that pretty much sums up kespa. i rememeber the gom thing. its so dumb to ban players from playing in it. it was way more money than the msl and osl. seriously they restrict so much that these players can do.
The entire GOM Tv Classic issue along with Kespa's terrible rules(pausing in game, etc.) pretty much makes them a joke.
And yes, Korea is a very nationalistic country, and strongly believe they are the best race(first hand experience). Funniest example is when my parents who care nothing about ice skating went ape shit over Yuna Kim.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
Same here. Koreans are very prideful and most of my friends who were born in Korea tend to like Korean things over American compared to American born Koreans (most of the time, but not always).
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
no it would be more like not paying the company that made an exclusive ball, pitch, stadium, goal posts, everything in the stadium, without which there would be no such thing as football..
here are some events that would be a great addition to the list of KeSPA LOLdecisions
1. After Blizzard announced their exclusive partner(gomTV), KeSPA goes wild and breaks NDA from negotitations. 2. KeSPA denied and challenged Blizzard to show proof and they showed proof of the NDA signed from the previous president of KeSPA.
1. Nada vs TLO showmatched happened(I forget where) and due to laggy Bnet connections, Nada was unable to play.
2. It was later proven KeSPA pulled the plug because they didn't want the match to be re-streamed to Korea. KeSPA blamed it on Bnet's connectivity while management of the match said it was because of KeSPA...
1. Soon after Nada left WeMadeFox pro gaming team, KeSPA removed Nada's record in the KeSPA ranks. Due to an enormous amount of fan outcries, KeSPA explained it was a system glitch and re-inserted Nada's record. Nada was the only person affected by the 'glitch.'
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
There have been a few very well written discussions on this topic, but to sum up, most sports in the world nowadays are in the public domain and can't be applied as an analogy to esports when it comes to IP rights. Moreover, IP rights in related to digital stuff like software and games are completely different from IP rights in any other fields as well.
It may look like there's a similarity between esports and sports but if you read enough into digital IP rights you will find out that the difference is huge.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
Same here. Koreans are very prideful and most of my friends who were born in Korea tend to like Korean things over American compared to American born Koreans (most of the time, but not always).
I should have said it better. Koreans hate anything related to their government (which I have no idea if KeSPA is, but it seems like it), and perusing Korean communities (both SC-related and non-SC related), I seem to notice that Koreans hold a lot more against KeSPA for the pp incident, the power outage incident, etc. than TLers and other foreigners do.
In Koreans' eyes, KeSPA is nothing more than an anachronistic organization made up of senile fools who have no idea as to what they're doing - whether that opinion is correct or not is up to the individual's decision.
On November 14 2010 15:13 Lokian wrote: 1. Soon after Nada left WeMadeFox pro gaming team, KeSPA removed Nada's record in the KeSPA ranks. Due to an enormous amount of fan outcries, KeSPA explained it was a system glitch and re-inserted Nada's record. Nada was the only person affected by the 'glitch.'
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
No, it is not a good comparison.
A soccer ball is a tool used to play the game. It is not the game itself.
A keyboard is a tool used to play Starcraft. It is not Starcraft.
A better comparison would be, if somebody could be identified as the single man or business that invented Soccer, and had a patent on Soccer, would FIFA have to get permission from that person/organization to host a tournament.
And they probably would.
Edit: Man, I should have read the second page before jumping on the bandwagon of saying the same thing as everybody to this dude.
On November 14 2010 15:13 Lokian wrote: I thought this was posted before.
here are some events that would be a great addition to the list of KeSPA LOLdecisions
1. After Blizzard announced their exclusive partner(gomTV), KeSPA goes wild and breaks NDA from negotitations. 2. KeSPA denied and challenged Blizzard to show proof and they showed proof of the NDA signed from the previous president of KeSPA.
1. Nada vs TLO showmatched happened(I forget where) and due to laggy Bnet connections, Nada was unable to play.
2. It was later proven KeSPA pulled the plug because they didn't want the match to be re-streamed to Korea. KeSPA blamed it on Bnet's connectivity while management of the match said it was because of KeSPA...
1. Soon after Nada left WeMadeFox pro gaming team, KeSPA removed Nada's record in the KeSPA ranks. Due to an enormous amount of fan outcries, KeSPA explained it was a system glitch and re-inserted Nada's record. Nada was the only person affected by the 'glitch.'
Oh god these are all awful, especially the last one. Any more? It's so entertaining in the worst ways
On November 14 2010 14:53 Sawamura wrote: Whats the purpose of this thread to show korea hates kespa and loves Sc2 now ???? Whatever your underlying purpose this single post does not show that it actually has the support of all sc fan from korea probably a one sided fan's ranting but not the total sc fans.
I'm personally not a SC:BW hater, nor a SC2 fanboy. I am a fan of justice though. And yes I do play both games cuz them games are awesome!!!
And yes, Korea is a very nationalistic country, and strongly believe they are the best race(first hand experience). Funniest example is when my parents who care nothing about ice skating went ape shit over Yuna Kim.
It is a very nationalistic place indeed, but I don't see how cheering for an olympic gold-medalist who is representing the country qualifies as an example of Koreans believing that they are the "best race." There is no more sense of racial/ethnic superiority over there compared to just about anywhere else.
As far as I can tell, neither Blizzard/Gom nor KeSPA is well liked in Korea, but it does seem to be true that there is a bigger hatred toward KeSPA, at least among the people who post in the forums.
The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Foreigner community does seem much more sympathetic to Kespa. Most Koreans want them gone and let the broadcasting companies free from shackle like they once were.
On November 14 2010 15:31 scion wrote: Foreigner community does seem much more sympathetic to Kespa. Most Koreans want them gone and let the broadcasting companies free from shackle like they once were.
This was one of the reasons why I posted this. Gave me this sudden URGE to translate. I personally have seen this post WAYYYYYYYYYY before the date shown in the OP. I saw may replies under the TL headlines of 'Blizz vs KeSPA' and many seemed to flicked the fingers to Blizz but what I saw in the Korean scene, was totally opposite.
On November 14 2010 15:31 scion wrote: Foreigner community does seem much more sympathetic to Kespa. Most Koreans want them gone and let the broadcasting companies free from shackle like they once were.
I think this might indicate a disparity between what the Koreans know and what we know. The sudden Kespa hate is somewhat odd, seeing as the broadcasting companies are apparently the ones being sued (with Kespa just ranting on the side)
I renamed the thread in light of the content in the OP. OP, if you quick think of something not misleading but more eloquent, let me know and I'll change it again.
On November 14 2010 15:30 CanucksJC wrote: The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Yup, he's pretty much garbage.
Kim, Jin Wook reporter is the KeSPA planted reporter.
How can Kespa consider starcraft public property? I just don't get it. It's a creation that was made with the purpose to sell and make money. That's what copyrights are for... sigh
On November 14 2010 15:30 CanucksJC wrote: The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Yup, he's pretty much garbage.
Wowowowow is this for real? :o I cannot believe a person who wrote all that crap could be considered a journalist :o
On November 14 2010 15:30 CanucksJC wrote: The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Yup, he's pretty much garbage.
Actually, SC2 did fry some people's cards in beta when there was no limit to FPS rate.
But it only affected people that over clocked their cards because normally those cards would shut down after getting to a certain temperature.
"How can Kespa consider starcraft public property? I just don't get it. It's a creation that was made with the purpose to sell and make money. That's what copyrights are for... sigh"
Because you also have to consider what KeSPA did to change public understanding of Starcraft. Their organization completely changed one of Blizzard's products that, like most other strategy games from the 90s, would have been swept under the rug by now. Their investment into the product is worth something too, isn't it? So since KeSPA has helped Blizzard indirectly, it would seem rude of Blizzard to stomp in their face about IP rights. I think it's because of KeSPA that I can still go to Wal-Mart and find Starcraft sitting on a shelf for $15. Also, remember that KeSPA is a not-for-profit organization solely dedicated to eSports. To say that KeSPA is a threat to Starcraft is totally off-base, but to say that KeSPA is a threat to international copyright is most likely accurate.
On November 14 2010 15:44 Zerksys wrote: How can Kespa consider starcraft public property? I just don't get it. It's a creation that was made with the purpose to sell and make money. That's what copyrights are for... sigh
On November 14 2010 15:50 Fiel wrote: Because you also have to consider what KeSPA did to change public understanding of Starcraft. Their organization completely changed one of Blizzard's products that, like most other strategy games from the 90s, would have been swept under the rug by now. Their investment into the product is worth something too, isn't it? So since KeSPA has helped Blizzard indirectly, it would seem rude of Blizzard to stomp in their face about IP rights. I think it's because of KeSPA that I can still go to Wal-Mart and find Starcraft sitting on a shelf for $15.
Kespa considers the product of esports as a whole to be outside Blizzard's control. Obviously the game itself is made and sold by Blizzard, but the individual games played in Kespa tournaments; played by the professional players, casted by the professional commentators, on maps made by the professional map-makers, broadcasted by the tv networks—that's what Kespa argues that Blizzard has nothing to do with.
On November 14 2010 15:30 CanucksJC wrote: The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Yup, he's pretty much garbage.
Actually, SC2 did fry some people's cards in beta when there was no limit to FPS rate.
But it only affected people that over clocked their cards because normally those cards would shut down after getting to a certain temperature.
When trying to promote a game, hardcore nerds and people who rely on gaming computers to make a living are probably the two groups of people you least want to ruin the computers of.
I want to ask, if KeSpa contract allow their contracted players to play SC2.
Is it, many will switch?
For me, I will switch because I prefer playing a new game than an old game keke. If I cannot switch, I will admire those. I mean envy those who play SC2.
SC1 and SC2 is like difference between PSP and Gameboy color. It is more than 10 years difference.
On November 14 2010 15:50 Fiel wrote: "How can Kespa consider starcraft public property? I just don't get it. It's a creation that was made with the purpose to sell and make money. That's what copyrights are for... sigh"
Because you also have to consider what KeSPA did to change public understanding of Starcraft. Their organization completely changed one of Blizzard's products that, like most other strategy games from the 90s, would have been swept under the rug by now. Their investment into the product is worth something too, isn't it? So since KeSPA has helped Blizzard indirectly, it would seem rude of Blizzard to stomp in their face about IP rights. I think it's because of KeSPA that I can still go to Wal-Mart and find Starcraft sitting on a shelf for $15.
huh, ive heard all this crap about GOM, mostly being charged for viewing privileges, and now theres this. gives a lot of perspective i think. in the end i think blizz is in the right. using the soccer ball analogy, buy a soccer ball so you can play soccer, buy a COPY of sc, scbw, or sc2 to play that version of the game. you dont own the rights to the game, you have purchased the privilege to play the game
I'm really not here to take sides in this debate. While I love SC1, as long as I can still watch matches on Youtube I'll be happy. Whatever outcome causes that end result, I'm all for it.
You take what I say too literally. The sentence beforehand I was talking about public perception. That is what they changed.
I'll be kinda pissed if and when I won't be able to see PL anymore. So I can understand the anger. Star2 is cool and has it's moments it's just pretty much mass 1 base push play mostly though which makes it boring as fuck to watch for an extended period of time. I'm hopeful Star2 will improve in time it just won't replace the old game.
On November 14 2010 15:50 Fiel wrote: Because you also have to consider what KeSPA did to change public understanding of Starcraft. Their organization completely changed one of Blizzard's products that, like most other strategy games from the 90s, would have been swept under the rug by now. Their investment into the product is worth something too, isn't it? So since KeSPA has helped Blizzard indirectly, it would seem rude of Blizzard to stomp in their face about IP rights. I think it's because of KeSPA that I can still go to Wal-Mart and find Starcraft sitting on a shelf for $15. Also, remember that KeSPA is a not-for-profit organization solely dedicated to eSports. To say that KeSPA is a threat to Starcraft is totally off-base, but to say that KeSPA is a threat to international copyright is most likely accurate.
I know that KeSPA has contributed massive effort to make starcraft what it is, but quite honestly (from my knowledge, please correct me if I'm wrong) they did not inform blizzard of their actions and nor did blizzard care at first. When you're entering into a business venture based upon promoting someone else's product, you better be damn sure that the person holding the copyright supports you. As I saw it no effort was made on their part to contact blizzard and draw up some form of legal agreement.
I'm not saying that KeSPA is a threat to starcraft quite the contrary. KeSPA has been the best thing that starcraft has encountered. It is what happened after the negotiations failed that makes me see KeSPA as a bad company. Paying journalists to write scathing comments about starcraft 2 and not allowing their players to participate in the tournaments (players who btw entered into progamming because of their love for real time strategy) and banning their players from touching the game was a bit out of line.
Thank you for the great write up! was looking for a complete back story to this ongoing debate, and after reading this feel like KeSPA is really out of line with the way they are handling their relationship with blizzard, players, and the fans of BOTH our beloved starcrafts we have now. BOTH of which are undeniably intellectual property of Blizzard, and I hope any attempt by KeSPA to make monetary gains from this gets shut down by korean/international courts.
that reporter should be thrown in jail for slander for the WeRRa comments IMO.
I believe Blizz wants to see the continued success/growth of BOTH games and I hope they do whatever is necessary to make this a reality. They have shown they are more than willing to be accommodating as long as organizations don't STEAL from them.
On November 14 2010 16:00 Baarn wrote: I'll be kinda pissed if and when I won't be able to see PL anymore. So I can understand the anger. Star2 is cool and has it's moments it's just pretty much mass 1 base push play mostly though which makes it boring as fuck to watch for an extended period of time. I'm hopeful Star2 will improve in time it just won't replace the old game.
It already has? I thought the whole 'OMG SC2 is just 1base all-ins every game' phase was over... like 5-6 months ago.
Wait, so he hates Kespa for standing up against Blizzard? That's exactly why everyone that supports Kespa supports Kespa.
Blizzard totally denies the player's role in the esports product. They try to steal away the IP rights of the progamers by EULA's and big corporate lawyer muscle. Kespa takes money from the broadcasters and gives it to the players. That's exactly how it ought to be.
And while I think BLizzard can play a role in SC2, they just play no role in SC BW. Blizzard didn't balance Starcraft. Blizzard did nothing. Remeber how often we had to rage on the bnet forums because some new patch made the game unplayable for everyone? How they had Testie pick the non-Korean Blizzcon invites? How they played on non-observer maps because they didn't know observer maps even existed? The list goes on. Blizzard has never been a friend of Starcraft esports. And now they try to set a new IP law precedent that will make esports nonviable as a professional industry.
On November 14 2010 16:00 Baarn wrote: I'll be kinda pissed if and when I won't be able to see PL anymore. So I can understand the anger. Star2 is cool and has it's moments it's just pretty much mass 1 base push play mostly though which makes it boring as fuck to watch for an extended period of time. I'm hopeful Star2 will improve in time it just won't replace the old game.
It already has? I thought the whole 'OMG SC2 is just 1base all-ins every game' phase was over... like 5-6 months ago.
Oh the 2 out of 10 games you see on stream must be the ones you are referring to.
On November 14 2010 16:12 Gonodactylus wrote: Wait, so he hates Kespa for standing up against Blizzard? That's exactly why everyone that supports Kespa supports Kespa.
Blizzard totally denies the player's role in the esports product. They try to steal away the IP rights of the progamers by EULA's and big corporate lawyer muscle. Kespa takes money from the broadcasters and gives it to the players. That's exactly how it ought to be.
And while I think BLizzard can play a role in SC2, they just play no role in SC BW. Blizzard didn't balance Starcraft. Blizzard did nothing. Remeber how often we had to rage on the bnet forums because some new patch made the game unplayable for everyone? How they had Testie pick the non-Korean Blizzcon invites? How they played on non-observer maps because they didn't know observer maps even existed? The list goes on. Blizzard has never been a friend of Starcraft esports. And now they try to set a new IP law precedent that will make esports nonviable as a professional industry.
1. There's no "IP rights" of the progamers.
2. If KeSPA gets their way, they will push a law that would completely destroy any and every possible games from becoming e-sports in South Korea.
IP rights always exist. Once you create new IP the creator has inherent rights to this new IP. Progamers create new IP.
You really think Kespa will play only Starcraft BW and Sudden Strike or whatever they play until the end of time. That's stupid. Maybe it will scare away companies that want total control over their esports like Blizzard does. But Blizzard is the only one so far that takes this extreme stance. Also, it's silly to say a law protecting the IP rights of players would destroy esports by scaring away developers. That's so extreme and backwards. Not to mention disrespectful to everyone that has put so much hard work into the Korean scene to make it professional. Not to mention such a law isn't even an issue right now, asaik.
Also, didn't SuperDanialMan say basically the same thing about Werra? That it wouldn't ever happen in a real professional setting or a proleage/BW team?
On November 14 2010 16:06 Zyban wrote: Thank you for the great write up! was looking for a complete back story to this ongoing debate, and after reading this feel like KeSPA is really out of line with the way they are handling their relationship with blizzard, players, and the fans of BOTH our beloved starcrafts we have now. BOTH of which are undeniably intellectual property of Blizzard, and I hope any attempt by KeSPA to make monetary gains from this gets shut down by korean/international courts.
that reporter should be thrown in jail for slander for the WeRRa comments IMO.
I believe Blizz wants to see the continued success/growth of BOTH games and I hope they do whatever is necessary to make this a reality. They have shown they are more than willing to be accommodating as long as organizations don't STEAL from them.
While this topic does provide some background information on the issue at hand, it does not provide all of it. There are two sides to each story. Of course this is the starcraft 2 section and it seems this side more biased towards Blizzard. The other side which is obviously the brood war section seems to be biased some towards kespa.
Let me clear something up from my limited knowledge. Kespa is nonprofit and any money it does make is reinvested into the pro scene. They, as much as I have read, barely meet the amount of money the put in yearly. Kespa has done some wrong doing, but I believe Blizzard has done so as well.
If you want to form an opinion for either side I believe you should see some of the topics on the bw side. There are arguments for both sides in those forums as well.
There are plenty more but those are a few. Please before posting any statements, look over at least some of these threads and as many more as you can find.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
Err don't think so mate. Koreans are one of the MOST patriotic people I have ever met. They love and support everything to do with their country.
I suggest people read up to what chess player Evgeny Sveshnikov has said about IP rights. It's the closest thing to the Kespa vs Blizzard debate anyone can find. But in the chess world the chess players had no one that would support this and chess players never went on strike for their rights.
On November 14 2010 16:26 GooKer wrote: http://pgr21.com/?b=6&n=43542 this is better writing i think. "51 reasons i hate Kespa"
Anyone willing to translate this too? I do love to read/hear what the Korean's think since they're more connected to the situation in Korea than we are, so thanks to Pizzapie for translating.
On November 14 2010 16:22 graphene wrote: it makes sense that kespa would do something like this, after all sc2 is threatening their money their income right?
Yeah it makes sense, but the problem is do they really have the right to? They were using a Blizzard product from the beginning without consent from blizzard, which wasn't a problem for a long time. But when Blizzard did step in and open the door, Kespa slammed it shut and barred their players from going over. They're right now reacting to a problem that they aggravated.
Ooh and far as pausing and DQing goes. In MLG you can pick random and pause the game when you get the wrong race so the game gets restarted. How unfair is that? I would definitely 'accidentally' pick random a final and get an edge that way. Then you need to be DQed for pausing but they don't enforce. And when they do enforce my opponents gets to force me to not build one type of unit? Rofl
Kespa and their strict rules any day. Let stupid people be DQed, like Backho. If you can't follow the rules, you can't have a competition with actual integrity. But yeah, in MLG it doesn't really matter because you can hear the commentators anyway so there's already no integrity.
Gonodactylus you seem very knowledgeable about IP rights and all that kind of legal stuff. But do you have any info or source in order to back up your claims? You made a lot of assumptions and speculations so I don't know if I should listen to you...
On November 14 2010 16:26 GooKer wrote: http://pgr21.com/?b=6&n=43542 this is better writing i think. "51 reasons i hate Kespa"
Anyone willing to translate this too? I do love to read/hear what the Korean's think since they're more connected to the situation in Korea than we are, so thanks to Pizzapie for translating.
On November 14 2010 16:12 Gonodactylus wrote: Wait, so he hates Kespa for standing up against Blizzard? That's exactly why everyone that supports Kespa supports Kespa.
Blizzard totally denies the player's role in the esports product. They try to steal away the IP rights of the progamers by EULA's and big corporate lawyer muscle. Kespa takes money from the broadcasters and gives it to the players. That's exactly how it ought to be.
And while I think BLizzard can play a role in SC2, they just play no role in SC BW. Blizzard didn't balance Starcraft. Blizzard did nothing. Remeber how often we had to rage on the bnet forums because some new patch made the game unplayable for everyone? How they had Testie pick the non-Korean Blizzcon invites? How they played on non-observer maps because they didn't know observer maps even existed? The list goes on. Blizzard has never been a friend of Starcraft esports. And now they try to set a new IP law precedent that will make esports nonviable as a professional industry.
1. There's no "IP rights" of the progamers.
2. If KeSPA gets their way, they will push a law that would completely destroy any and every possible games from becoming e-sports in South Korea.
In any business law the corporations always win over the people. That's because the corporations rigged the laws. If you want to know how that happen you can read Morton Horwitz's The Transformation of American law, which explains how corporations wrote the laws we have now.
Small corporations sometimes beat big ones so in that sense it's not all about money. The moral idea behind IP laws is that if you make new IP material you have copyright rights over that. Now whatever a moral idea behind a law says, if Flash sues Blizzard he will always lose no matter what.
Not sure about Kespa vs Blizzard at all. But an American esports player who gets their moral IP right laws violated will never ever win against Blizzard. Korea right now is an exception. If Kespa gets crushed players will not have any rights over the esports material they produce. That's just bad.
People need to understand this isn't just about Blizzard greed vs Kespa greed. Naturally most people here are SC2 people and they will support Blizzard no matter what because Kespa will never ever play a role in SC2. But Blizzard claims IP rights are shared 50-50 between the broadcasters and Blizzard. Kespa claims its 33-33-33 where the players as represented by Kespa also have their IP rights. Now kespa may support all this for their own greed but that doesn't matter. In the end this will create precedent and shape the future of esports. Do players have IP rights that are protected and respected or do they not have them?
On November 14 2010 16:26 Gonodactylus wrote: I suggest people read up to what chess player Evgeny Sveshnikov has said about IP rights. It's the closest thing to the Kespa vs Blizzard debate anyone can find. But in the chess world the chess players had no one that would support this and chess players never went on strike for their rights.
Please clarify how does a chess player's gamescore/strategy relates to Blizzard's IP of Starcraft is being used by KeSPA.
I do understand that Evgeny Sveshnikov wants some sort of compensation for his ideas, thoughts, and strategies, but it is not the same as KeSPA or the players that are using Starcraft for E-Sports.
No one has property rights of chess, but the tournament organizers have the rights to what the players produce of within it. If Evgeny Sveshnikov doesn't agree to the terms of the tournament, then he shouldn't play in it.
Blizzard has IP rights to Starcraft, because they created, copyrighted, and trademarked it. Blizzard produced their product.
On November 14 2010 16:44 Gonodactylus wrote: In any business law the corporations always win over the people. That's because the corporations rigged the laws. If you want to know how that happen you can read Morton Horwitz's The Transformation of American law, which explains how corporations wrote the laws we have now.
Small corporations sometimes beat big ones so in that sense it's not all about money. The moral idea behind IP laws is that if you make new IP material you have copyright rights over that. Now whatever a moral idea behind a law says, if Flash sues Blizzard he will always lose no matter what.
Not sure about Kespa vs Blizzard at all. But an American esports player who gets their moral IP right laws violated will never ever win against Blizzard. Korea right now is an exception. If Kespa gets crushed players will not have any rights over the esports material they produce. That's just bad.
Do you even know what IP rights are.... and I am an undergrad law student BTW.
On November 14 2010 16:32 DaRkFrosT wrote: Blizzard has every right to sue Kespa, if the list in the OP is correct.
Kespa = greedy as shit =/
The list is so pro blizzard its sickening, I mean, sure KeSPA done alot of shit (DQ of Ruby fx) but I dont get why blizz doesnt treat the SCBW like free advertisement.
You could make a thread which disposed KeSPA as the good guy and Blizzard as the villian and then people would agree on that in the thread.
Sigh, netizens easily manipulated even though I guess all anti kespa would come here to show off their hate...
On November 14 2010 16:37 Gonodactylus wrote: Ooh and far as pausing and DQing goes. In MLG you can pick random and pause the game when you get the wrong race so the game gets restarted. How unfair is that? I would definitely 'accidentally' pick random a final and get an edge that way. Then you need to be DQed for pausing but they don't enforce. And when they do enforce my opponents gets to force me to not build one type of unit? Rofl
Kespa and their strict rules any day. Let stupid people be DQed, like Backho. If you can't follow the rules, you can't have a competition with actual integrity. But yeah, in MLG it doesn't really matter because you can hear the commentators anyway so there's already no integrity.
If youre referring to the TLO game thats not what happened at all, please dont comment out of ignorance
On November 14 2010 16:26 Gonodactylus wrote: I suggest people read up to what chess player Evgeny Sveshnikov has said about IP rights. It's the closest thing to the Kespa vs Blizzard debate anyone can find. But in the chess world the chess players had no one that would support this and chess players never went on strike for their rights.
except in this situation blizzard owns the intellectual property of "chess". Kespa vs players would be a more accurate comparison, but SC players are under contract to play so its not even accurate at all. The argument with chess was the players never recieved compensation from the parties gaining monetary advantage from their PERSONAL intellectual property (IE, their game records which they were forced to hand over).
About the "football players do not have to pay the ball manufacturer (Adidas, etc) to play the game.
No they don't.
However, every team in any official league in Europe has to pay money to their national football association, and every national association has to pay money to UEFA to be able to play.
Same with national level, every nations association pays money to FIFA to be able to play official matches. I'll bet it's the same in the US with the armored handball you guys call football, the teams have to pay money to the NFL, NBA or whatever to be able to participate. If you do not pay, you can't play.
Blizzard in this analogy is not Adidas, the ball manufacturer, but UEFA, FIFA, NBA, NFL (pick your poison) - the association / company that owns the intellectual rights to the game in the region (which in this case is world wide).
It seems perfectly simple to anyone except KeSPA.....
On November 14 2010 16:47 Pleiades wrote: Blizzard has IP rights to Starcraft, because they created, copyrighted, and trademarked it. Blizzard produced their product.
Unless you want to argue Blizard foresaw every move Flash/Jaedong could make and put them in the game deliberately, players create new IP. Players have intellects and they create stuff. How much more simple has someone with a PhD in IP has to put it to this undergrad? (lol)
Thing is, US has juries and juries are very easy to be tricked as is evident from a WoW case where the jury was so confused they made a wrong technical interpretation because Blizz lawyers tricked them into that. Blizz lawyers will probably be able to make the jury decide on that every move was already put in the game by Blizzard and that players just activate them. But that is false.
Can't believed you actually want to argue that SC players don't deserve IP rights. Just because SC is copyrighted software and chess isn't are different issues. Players make moves in both games which are products of their intellects which contains special SC/chess playing skills which people want to watch.
On November 14 2010 16:52 Sozeles wrote: However, every team in any official league in Europe has to pay money to their national football association, and every national association has to pay money to UEFA to be able to play.
Players get huge huge salaries because the UEFA gets huge huge amounts of money from Champions League, etc. If some third party can just get the rights without having to pay the players/teams, how fair is that? That's what Blizzard proposes. Blizzard wants to cut out the teams/players and share the IP rights 50/50 with the broadcasters, who only contribute commentary and other minor stuff.
On November 14 2010 16:26 GooKer wrote: http://pgr21.com/?b=6&n=43542 this is better writing i think. "51 reasons i hate Kespa"
Anyone willing to translate this too? I do love to read/hear what the Korean's think since they're more connected to the situation in Korea than we are, so thanks to Pizzapie for translating.
hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm Shoud I?
I would be ever so grateful. :D You could add it to the OP in a spoiler or something since it's kind of long anyway. It's totally up to you though, all translations are usually welcome around here.
On November 14 2010 16:47 Pleiades wrote: Blizzard has IP rights to Starcraft, because they created, copyrighted, and trademarked it. Blizzard produced their product.
Unless you want to argue Blizard foresaw every move Flash/Jaedong could make and put them in the game deliberately, players create new IP. Players have intellects and they create stuff. How much more simple has someone with a PhD in IP has to put it to this undergrad? (lol)
Thing is, US has juries and juries are very easy to be tricked as is evident from a WoW case where the jury was so confused they made a wrong technical interpretation because Blizz lawyers tricked them into that. Blizz lawyers will probably be able to make the jury decide on that every move was already put in the game by Blizzard and that players just activate them. But that is false.
Can't believed you actually want to argue that SC players don't deserve IP rights. Just because SC is copyrighted software and chess isn't are different issues. Players make moves in both games which are products of their intellects which contains special SC/chess playing skills which people want to watch.
your argument is not a legal one. starcraft and starcraft 2 (and all videogames really) are licensed to the end-user. you do not truly BUY the game. you "license" the game for personal use. this is made explicit in every single end-user agreement you will ever see for professional proprietary non open source software.
On November 14 2010 16:26 Gonodactylus wrote: I suggest people read up to what chess player Evgeny Sveshnikov has said about IP rights. It's the closest thing to the Kespa vs Blizzard debate anyone can find. But in the chess world the chess players had no one that would support this and chess players never went on strike for their rights.
Kespa isn't any better in that regard. The progamers in the Kespa team houses don't earn anything for their own future. They don't have any rights to their own games, so they would not get any interest from any profits, just like chess players. After their progaming stint, they will sit on the street without education and all their work over the years will not have counted towards whatever unemployment insurance there is in S.Korea. I think, they are used as freelance workers or self employed or something along those lines, because otherwise it would not even be legal to have children work for however many hours they are required to.
On November 14 2010 16:50 Antoine wrote: If youre referring to the TLO game thats not what happened at all, please dont comment out of ignorance
Huk picked random and got lucky to get protoss. TLO picked the wrong race and immediately illegally paused. This means you can pick random and pause if you get the wrong race. If you get the correct race you can play normally without your opponent knowing your race.
Great post. I had no idea what all this Kespa / Blizzard stuff was actually about but thats a really well written summary. Blizzard is in the right, they didnt manufacture the ball, they created the game and deserve a piece. If the piece they want is to big, then the sport will never make it. Blizzard acts responsibly and is trying to do whats in the best interest of the sport.
On November 14 2010 16:47 Pleiades wrote: Blizzard has IP rights to Starcraft, because they created, copyrighted, and trademarked it. Blizzard produced their product.
Unless you want to argue Blizard foresaw every move Flash/Jaedong could make and put them in the game deliberately, players create new IP. Players have intellects and they create stuff. How much more simple has someone with a PhD in IP has to put it to this undergrad? (lol)
Thing is, US has juries and juries are very easy to be tricked as is evident from a WoW case where the jury was so confused they made a wrong technical interpretation because Blizz lawyers tricked them into that. Blizz lawyers will probably be able to make the jury decide on that every move was already put in the game by Blizzard and that players just activate them. But that is false.
Can't believed you actually want to argue that SC players don't deserve IP rights. Just because SC is copyrighted software and chess isn't are different issues. Players make moves in both games which are products of their intellects which contains special SC/chess playing skills which people want to watch.
How is build order IP? Can you trademark it? Can you sue someone if they spread their marines like you do? And doesn't the software license agreement cover this if it is IP?
On November 14 2010 16:59 lao wrote: your argument is not a legal one. starcraft and starcraft 2 (and all videogames really) are licensed to the end-user. you do not truly BUY the game. you "license" the game for personal use. this is made explicit in every single end-user agreement you will ever see for professional proprietary non open source software.
end of discussion.
This doesn't even matter. You create new intellectual property. Blizzard has to claim rights over this through their EULA, which they do. If you were right they wouldn't even have to claim this in their EULA.
Also, I think licensing and EULA's are illegal under law. You buy a physical disc but you get tricked once you open the box and have to agree to something you never knew about when you made the purchase. But again, corporations win always vs normal people because the laws are rigged, so yeah it doesn't matter. End of discussion.
Unless you want to argue Blizard foresaw every move Flash/Jaedong could make and put them in the game deliberately, players create new IP. Players have intellects and they create stuff. How much more simple has someone with a PhD in IP has to put it to this undergrad? (lol)
Thing is, US has juries and juries are very easy to be tricked as is evident from a WoW case where the jury was so confused they made a wrong technical interpretation because Blizz lawyers tricked them into that. Blizz lawyers will probably be able to make the jury decide on that every move was already put in the game by Blizzard and that players just activate them. But that is false.
Can't believed you actually want to argue that SC players don't deserve IP rights. Just because SC is copyrighted software and chess isn't are different issues. Players make moves in both games which are products of their intellects which contains special SC/chess playing skills which people want to watch.
Your arguement makes no sense whatsoever.
My best guess to what you are trying to say and argue for is that players in Starcraft have no rights to what strategies they use within the game they play in. That they don't have rights to their own replays or whatever.
Starcraft is Blizzard's IP period. They created the game engine, characters, plot, art, design, and whatever else that's in the product. Players that play Starcraft do not have IP rights to Starcraft.
I highly doubt you have a "PhD in IP" because you don't even know what intellectual property is.
Players get huge huge salaries because the UEFA gets huge huge amounts of money from Champions League, etc. If some third party can just get the rights without having to pay the players/teams, how fair is that? That's what Blizzard proposes. Blizzard wants to cut out the teams/players and share the IP rights 50/50 with the broadcasters, who only contribute commentary and other minor stuff.
I'm not saying Blizzards terms are fair, or going into those details. The fact that Blizzard has different policies from UEFA is irrelevant.
On a side note though: How is organizing events, hiring commentators (both Korean and foreign), film and sound crews, servers for online broadcast (with the know-how and bandwidth requirements that requires), same for VODs, arranging the payment systems, handing the economy around the events, probably arranging catering, seating for audiences, a pro venue, security, advertising "other minor stuff"?
I'd guess that Gom probably puts at least the same man hours into their events as the players (that are qualified) put into practicing for it, and definately has more money on the line should the event be a flop.
On November 14 2010 17:02 Fraidnot wrote: How is build order IP? Can you trademark it? Can you sue someone if they spread their marines like you do? And doesn't the software license agreement cover this if it is IP?
Yes, SC2 EULA does cover this because this doesn't naturally belong to Blizzard. Blizzard didn't invent all BOs in SC2. They even admit players come up with new stuff. So how can third parties, Blizzard and broadcasters, make money off intellectual property that isn't theirs?
On November 14 2010 17:02 Pleiades wrote: Starcraft is Blizzard's IP period. They created the game engine, characters, plot, art, design, and whatever else that's in the product. Players that play Starcraft do not have IP rights to Starcraft.
I highly doubt you have a "PhD in IP" because you don't even know what intellectual property is.
Yet Blizzard already admits players do things they didn't conceive off. So this is clearly new IP not created by Blizzard. And it's worth money.
On November 14 2010 16:59 lao wrote: your argument is not a legal one. starcraft and starcraft 2 (and all videogames really) are licensed to the end-user. you do not truly BUY the game. you "license" the game for personal use. this is made explicit in every single end-user agreement you will ever see for professional proprietary non open source software.
end of discussion.
This doesn't even matter. You create new intellectual property. Blizzard has to claim rights over this through their EULA, which they do. If you were right they wouldn't even have to claim this in their EULA.
Also, I think licensing and EULA's are illegal under law. You buy a physical disc but you get tricked once you open the box and have to agree to something you never knew about when you made the purchase. But again, corporations win always vs normal people because the laws are rigged, so yeah it doesn't matter. End of discussion.
So what it's fair to Blizzard for you to just burn a million copies and sell those copies for $5 on the street?
This doesn't even matter. You create new intellectual property. Blizzard has to claim rights over this through their EULA, which they do. If you were right they wouldn't even have to claim this in their EULA.
Also, I think licensing and EULA's are illegal under law. You buy a physical disc but you get tricked once you open the box and have to agree to something you never knew about when you made the purchase. But again, corporations win always vs normal people because the laws are rigged, so yeah it doesn't matter. End of discussion.
Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
On November 14 2010 17:06 Fraidnot wrote: So what it's fair to Blizzard for you to just burn a million copies and sell those copies for $5 on the street?
That's not an EULA issue. That's not why EULA's were created. The laws countries have in place already cover that. No need for Blizzard to create a special contract with their customers for this.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in court.
If there's a contract, and someone asks you to sign it, and you just sign it without reading it, would you be going into a contract? If yes, then you went into a contract with Blizzard when you agreed to the EULA without reading it. If not, anyone can breach contracts by saying "Oh, I signed without reading, it doesn't count."
On November 14 2010 17:02 Fraidnot wrote: How is build order IP? Can you trademark it? Can you sue someone if they spread their marines like you do? And doesn't the software license agreement cover this if it is IP?
Yes, SC2 EULA does cover this because this doesn't naturally belong to Blizzard. Blizzard didn't invent all BOs in SC2. They even admit players come up with new stuff. So how can third parties, Blizzard and broadcasters, make money off intellectual property that isn't theirs?
Maybe because you're using blizzard's IP to create your IP? Even then it's not like any of these things goes beyond what the game is capable of, it's not like dario sits down and creates some combination that goes outside the boundaries of the game state engine. I don't think just because blizzard didn't map out each and ever state that the game can be in, that you can call finding a combination that hasn't been done before is suddenly yours since it's still in the constraints of what really is just a state engine.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in court.
LOL, now I know you're definitely not a "PhD in IP."
Never sign what you don't read. EULA are contracts between the consumer and the producer. When you agreed to it to install the game, you electronically signed the contract.
On November 14 2010 17:16 WeeKeong wrote: If there's a contract, and someone asks you to sign it, and you just sign it without reading it, would you be going into a contract? If yes, then you went into a contract with Blizzard when you agreed to the EULA without reading it. If not, anyone can breach contracts by saying "Oh, I signed without reading, it doesn't count."
Yeah it does. There's plenty of cases in which this was found to be correct. EULA can only remind the customer of things that are already true in law.
EULAs are not valid contracts because one party has no say in the content, one party bought a product before being presented without even knowing there were going to be additional demands made on him. I made a contact with the shop I bought SC2 from, not with Blizzard.
EULAs are liability disclaimers, protecting companies from being sued by customers. Nothing more. You can't strip people of their law-given rights through EULAs. Not even in the US.
On November 14 2010 16:31 xBillehx wrote: Anyone willing to translate this too? I do love to read/hear what the Korean's think since they're more connected to the situation in Korea than we are, so thanks to Pizzapie for translating.
1) Individual League Broadcasting Rights Controversy
1. Artificial merging of MBCGame's team league and OGN's individual leagues
2. Steals the power to open individual leagues, which is made and operated jointly by OGN and MBCGame
3. Talks about rights to broadcasting without permission from Blizzard, who holds IP rights to the game, demands 1.7 billion won for 3 years from the broadcasters. This is the starting point of the IP rights controversy
4. Gave rights to broadcasting to a company that had nothing to do with e-sports, IBSports (parent company: IEG), then runs away with the money (Giving up operating estro)
5. MBCGame Survivor prelim boycott issue
6. KeSPACup, operated by KeSPA, becomes worse than random PC bang leagues
7. Artificially reduces individual leagues (revolving around individual players), while greatly increasing the size of Proleague (revolving around teams), in order to help with advertisement for the companies instead of for the fans
8. 5 days a week play, causing reduced interest in the matches
2) Various operation and rules controversy
9. DQ because a player typed "PP" instead of "PPP" to pause the game. (Later changed)
10. DQ because a player typed "a" in the chat. Controversy risen from the rule that said "-Can- give DQ", which can also mean "-Not- give DQ"
11. DQ for any other variation of "GG" / "gg", such as "WW", "지읒이읒", "zizi yO", "지지요".
12. Giving DQ for leaving the game during countdown due to control miss
13. Ignoring the issue of bug play using SCV (which was clear that the bug play happend) because "there was no rule for that"
14. During the infamous NATE MSL power outage, lied about having a replay when there wasn't
15. KeSPA gave different ranking point adjustment for MSL and StarLeague, causing controversy
16. Due to the "data errors" in KeSPA homepage, controversies happened regarding things like NaDa's win records
17. Due to no accurate data collection, relies on the broadcasting companies to do the data collection. Corporations that sell e-sports related data appears
18. When there was no clear plans for the KeSPA's member corporations, KeSPA demands 2 billion won from the member corporations
19. A player who has been selected by a team, if he declines, he would be barred from entering any progame teams for 3 years. As a result, all would-be progamers become like slaves by forcing to join any team regardless of their stance, once selected
20. Due to the FA policy in 2009, players cannot select what team they would like to join, since the policy forces them to join whichever team offers highest $. This ignores how long the contract would be, just how big of the money total is offered. This FA policy died later
21. Entry pre-announcement caused games to be boring even before they start, reducing popularity of proleague, and could potentially cause match fixing... which does end up happening. Finally, they return to old blinded entry list policy
22. Forcing 2 days of matches in Proleague 08-09 post season results in the infamy for having the least amount of audience ever
3) Attitude towards other games
23. While KeSPA is made because of StarCraft, support for other games are virtually nil. Especially, zero support for WarCraft 3, a game that's only behind StarCraft in terms of popularity
24. Ignoring Kart Rider leagues, causing it to stop for over a year
25. While various players have been selected through KeSPA cup, they did not create any leagues or any other needed support
26. Even the officially registered games such as Special Force and Kart Rider have no employees that manage them at KeSPA
27. Games that had no popularity as e-sports such as Special Force would end up having low viewership count, then infamy at the finals due to that
28. The "Proleague 5 days a week" is the worst system ever, as KeSPA, who should be focusing on even development of e-sports in general, caused StarCraft's pie way too big for other games to join e-sports scene
4) Match fixing controversy
29. They talked the talk during the start of this controversy, but didn't walk the walk during police investigation
30. Ignored rules of going through sanction commission during the process of retiring progamer Mr. Park.
31. Did not even announce progamer Mr. Won's retirement at all, causing concealment controversy
32. Those that had part in match fixing, if they weren't removed via expulsion, they are, by rules, allowed back in after 3 years if they so wish
33. No other way to prevent potential match fixing recurring except through removing entry pre-announcement
5) IP Rights Controversy with Blizzard-Gretech
34. There was a boycott of GOM Classic (sponsored by Gretech), there are suspicions that KeSPA either allowed it or even directed it themselves in secrecy
35. Ordered progamer teams to not participate in StarCraft 2 beta
36. In regards to negotiation with Blizzard about IP rights, KeSPA manipulated journalism then violated NDA
37. Blizzard clearly owns IP rights to StarCraft. Despite that, KeSPA talks about "public property" and even said how "[we] helped with making additional profits for Blizzard"
38. Even great oldbies such as NaDa and BoxeR were declared as the betrayers just because they switched to StarCraft 2
39. Talking nonsense about "effort of e-sports personnel" while using Jaedong as a sacrificial lamb during public hearing
40. KeSPA is trying hard to pass a law that would grant KeSPA a full, unlimited, total IP rights ownership to any and all games that would participate in e-sports
41. Threatening progamers, teams, and related personnel that "something undesirable" may happen should they contact Blizzard or participate in tournaments that Blizzard runs
42. Forced NaDa's StarCraft 2 match, taking place in Germany as an event, to end by calling him while match is still underway
43. The moment NaDa announces his switch to StarCraft 2, KeSPA deleted NaDa's records from the homepage
44. Blizzard said KeSPA's attitude was that they refuse to acknowledge any IP rights whatsoever during negotiation
45. OGN mysteriously canceled StarCraft 2 open broadcasting, there are suspicions that KeSPA had a hand in it
46. Forcing Proleague 10-11 season illegally while the negotiations hasn't ended yet
47. Authorizing MBCGame's forcing of BigFile MSL, Kyong-nam STX cup, and PDPop MSL, which are all illegal
48. Tells Gretech that KeSPA will pay 300 million won per year, which would include rights to open and operate proleague AND individual leagues. This is not fair considering how they took 1.7 billion won from IEG for 3 years
49. Tries to stall the talks by continually changing negotiation terms during negotiation talks
50. Trying to make KeSPA as the lead and operator of StarCraft 2 e-sports in negotiation
51. Ignoring the opinion of fans, KeSPA shows that their actions only focus on their own profits and using force to see it through
* For more information, take a look at '한국E스포츠협회', '프로리그 중계권 사태', '스타크래프트 승부조작스캔들', '스타크래프트 저작권 분쟁' from AngelHalo wiki (Editor's note: I use AngelHalo wiki a lot, and they have very in-depth details on those articles)
I described this as "50+a reasons" because I thought that 50 might not be all of the reason. I wanted to just shut up, not put up any reply, and stay quiet, but I wanted to state "It's already too late" to the opinions of "KeSPA must exist, even after all the faults". I don't see Gretech and Blizzard as the absolute right, and I've already criticized some of Gretech's actions through previous writings and replies. But, it is for certain that KeSPA is an absolute evil. They only care about the logic of the corporations and profits all the while ignoring the fans. My thought is that this doesn't even deserve any criticism, and only solution is complete dissolution of KeSPA.
Anyway, I want this situation to end in a happy note for e-sports fan, and I really hope for the day when we can watch progamers and their awesome plays in whatever games they may play -- whether it be StarCraft 1 or 2.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard.
You are possibly the most genuine idiot I've seen in my life. Not the troll-type idiot, but just the pure, genuine essence of idiocy leaks out of your mind.
You agree to Blizzard's EULA and have the permission to tie your bnet account to that game. Agreeing with the EULA means that you've entered into a contract with Blizzard. Just because you didn't read jack before playing the game does not equate to you not agreeing with Blizzard's contract.
Yeah it does. There's plenty of cases in which this was found to be correct. EULA can only remind the customer of things that are already true in law.
EULAs are not valid contracts because one party has no say in the content, one party bought a product before being presented without even knowing there were going to be additional demands made on him. I made a contact with the shop I bought SC2 from, not with Blizzard.
EULAs are liability disclaimers, protecting companies from being sued by customers. Nothing more. You can't strip people of their law-given rights through EULAs. Not even in the US.
You just contradicted yourself. EULA is the contract to use the product. You can buy the physical product, but you can't use the game until you agree to the EULA. And yes, the EULA is to protect the company.
You don't have to use the product if you don't agree to the EULA, even if you bought the game. A copy of the game will always be yours to have if you bought it, but to use it is not. That is why it is intellectual property and not just property.
Why would I read and agree to a wall of text I wouldn't be able to understand without my IP law PhD no matter how smart I am when I know it has no legal significance outside of the US?
And yes, you said it was a contract. You were wrong on that, mr.undergrad. Look, I am both morally and legally correct as long as I am speaking outside of the US. And when in the US I am still morally right. You can argue any day about how US law is enforced. But that doesn't mean it makes sense that you go into contract and buy a product and then when you get home you are suddenly surprised by a wall of gibberish you have to click 'agree' to fight to use the product you already paid for. Not to mention a 'contract' which you have had no say in whatsoever in terms of what it contains.
So just have your cat accidentally jump enter key if you are in the US... No really, it makes no sense and hold up in court very rarely even in the US. Maybe you still have to do the classes that cover all the famous cases. Remember the Second Life one?
Ooh and don't lie to me about you reading and studying every EULA. Even people that wrote the EULA for Blizzard don't read the EULA of stuff they install themselves.
Thank you very much Selith! A few of those I didn't know at all. One that stood out to me was this:
19. A player who has been selected by a team, if he declines, he would be barred from entering any progame teams for 3 years. As a result, all would-be progamers become like slaves by forcing to join any team regardless of their stance, once selected
This really sucks. I hope this has/will be changed very soon.
Also, I'm going to assume this is the law that was talked about earlier in the thread:
40. KeSPA is trying hard to pass a law that would grant KeSPA a full, unlimited, total IP rights ownership to any and all games that would participate in e-sports
That it's a load of crock itself. I pray this law will never come to exist.
I truly appreciate the effort to translate as I find what the Korean citizens know/think to be very interesting. Many thanks again! <3
Yet Blizzard already admits players do things they didn't conceive off. So this is clearly new IP not created by Blizzard. And it's worth money.
I also doubt you are an undergrad.
Okay then I have to make this argument. In football, coaches and sometimes player design plays to run (Things like the Wildcat and "Wild Horses" formations/plays). The NFL did not make these plays, but gets money from people watching them. The coaches/players don't actually get money from creating these plays. They get money for doing their "job" which is either training/coaching a team or playing the game itself. It's not like they get alittle bit of extra cash when they invent a new play or someone else uses it.
On November 14 2010 17:37 Atlas_550 wrote: Okay then I have to make this argument. In football, coaches and sometimes player design plays to run (Things like the Wildcat and "Wild Horses" formations/plays). The NFL did not make these plays, but gets money from people watching them. The coaches/players don't actually get money from creating these plays. They get money for doing their "job" which is either training/coaching a team or playing the game itself. It's not like they get alittle bit of extra cash when they invent a new play or someone else uses it.
If anyone can broadcast NFL without having to pay money which will eventually end up with the players/teams, then how will they get paid for their 'job'.
What you think is not there yet is how it already works.
On November 14 2010 17:36 Gonodactylus wrote: Why would I read and agree to a wall of text I wouldn't be able to understand without my IP law PhD no matter how smart I am when I know it has no legal significance outside of the US?
And yes, you said it was a contract. You were wrong on that, mr.undergrad. Look, I am both morally and legally correct as long as I am speaking outside of the US. And when in the US I am still morally right. You can argue any day about how US law is enforced. But that doesn't mean it makes sense that you go into contract and buy a product and then when you get home you are suddenly surprised by a wall of gibberish you have to click 'agree' to fight to use the product you already paid for. Not to mention a 'contract' which you have had no say in whatsoever in terms of what it contains.
So just have your cat accidentally jump enter key if you are in the US... No really, it makes no sense and hold up in court very rarely even in the US. Maybe you still have to do the classes that cover all the famous cases. Remember the Second Life one?
Ooh and don't lie to me about you reading and studying every EULA. Even people that wrote the EULA for Blizzard don't read the EULA of stuff they install themselves.
I said earlier that EULA are not legally bound, so why the hell are you arguing about that. They are a contract though, to protect the company and/or developer from what you can do or use with their product.
To dummy it down for you, if agreeing to the EULA and installing the content of the product is like agreeing to enter a porn site. If you don't agree to the terms and conditions, you can always leave. There is a reason to both EULA and porn sites do this, so that it protects whatever company that made them from the consumer/user that agreed upon it.
The physical/digital copy you bought of the game, that is your property. How you use it is agreed upon the EULA. Blizzard owns the IP rights of the game, and states what you can do with the game by the EULA/ToS.
Anyways, I'm done explaining things to you. If you keep arguing, seems like your ego is stronger than your argument, and I have derailed this thread long enough.
On November 14 2010 17:36 Gonodactylus wrote: And yes, you said it was a contract. You were wrong on that, mr.undergrad. Look, I am both morally and legally correct as long as I am speaking outside of the US. And when in the US I am still morally right. You can argue any day about how US law is enforced. But that doesn't mean it makes sense that you go into contract and buy a product and then when you get home you are suddenly surprised by a wall of gibberish you have to click 'agree' to fight to use the product you already paid for. Not to mention a 'contract' which you have had no say in whatsoever in terms of what it contains.
First of all, morality has no place in this argument as it has nothing at all to do with how established laws can be enforced.
Second, both parties involved with a contract do not have to take part in the creation of it. Pretty much Blizzard can make a contract that you must agree with to play their game, and if you don't like it, tough luck.
Thirdly, and admittedly off topic, you're making undergrad seem a bit more prestigious than it is, haha. (No offense to the undergrad law dude. I'm headed to law school myself in about a year)
On November 14 2010 17:17 Highways wrote: An eye opening article.
Always had a feeling that this whole debacle was kespa's fault.
I agree about the "eye opening" part for sure. I wonder how much of what was said is true. I know Blizzard is easy to blame because of Activision, I do honestly believe that they have too much influence over Blizzard in an effort to squeeze out every cent. So saying that Blizzard is screwing KeSPA isn't all that much of a stretch for people to get to. However, its really interesting to hear that KeSPA might be just as much/if not more to blame for the whole situation. I had no idea GOM went to Blizzard for permission to do the Intel Classic tournaments, I did know KeSPA didn't allow the progamers to continue attending it however.
Anyways, a very interesting read.
Man, my posts aren't very eloquent today. Sorry about that.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
Here, let me quote Wikipedia to sort this out;
"A software license agreement is a contract between the "licensor" and purchaser of the right to use software. The license may define ways under which the copy can be used, in addition to the automatic rights of the buyer including the first sale doctrine and 17 U.S.C. § 117 (freedom to use, archive, re-sale, and backup).
Many form contracts are only contained in digital form, and only presented to a user as a click-through where the user must "accept". As the user may not see the agreement until after he or she has already purchased the software, these documents may be contracts of adhesion. These documents often call themselves end-user licensing agreements (EULAs)."
So you might argue in THEORY that the EULA could be a "contract of adhesion", it's not likely to hold up in practice, and I'm not aware of any case in either the US or Europe for that matter where someone successfully fought a proper EULA. You chose clicked the "accept" button. You chose to use the product even after the EULA was presented to you. If the EULA was hidden or not presented to you before install, yes, you could argue that you didn't enter a legally binding contract as you had not been made aware of the terms, but as it's impossible to install the game or make a Bnet account without viewing the EULA and accepting it, you're most certainly in an legally binding agreement with Blizzard.
Also, keep in mind that the Korean EULA is different from the US/EU EULA. It don't see how you could possible argue that it's not legally binding because it's American law when the EULA you're accepting is written using local or regional law?
Great OP that states facts mainly instead of all personal opinions, which lately even in this forum have been flooded by endless amount of mis-informed/un-informed stances unfortunately...
Kespa needs to die for the sake of E-Sports development, not just for Starcraft:Brood War or Starcraft 2 but for the gaming industry as a whole, yes a central governing body is needed when the industry starts to mature, but it will not be Kespa, not a corporate puppet body, but one that is formed by the passionate members of the gaming community, pro-gamers, coaches, managers etc...
The fact that you have to click 'agree' already shows it's not a fair contract, if it were one, because you do not have the possibility to disagree and still install..
Now I can also start to point out that a software license contract is not the same as an EULA. But when you go so far as calling all those EULA's that failed in court 'not proper', then what is there still to argue?
On November 14 2010 17:49 ribeye wrote: Thirdly, and admittedly off topic, you're making undergrad seem a bit more prestigious than it is, haha. (No offense to the undergrad law dude. I'm headed to law school myself in about a year)
He's bragging about being an undergrad, not me. BTW, you missed the point of one side having no say as to what is in the contract. A contract is supposed to be something between two equal parties that both parties want and can agree upon. An EULA is not that.
As for morality, laws are supposed to be moral. If they aren't, they are wrong laws even if they win in court. Now mr.undergrad did not read Transformation of American Law. Did you?
On November 14 2010 18:06 Gonodactylus wrote: The fact that you have to click 'agree' already shows it's not a fair contract, if it were one, because you do not have the possibility to disagree and still install..
Now I can also start to point out that a software license contract is not the same as an EULA. But when you go so far as calling all those EULA's that failed in court 'not proper', then what is there still to argue?
If you disagree with the contract to use the software, why would you be able to install it? You are disagreeing. Thats like saying you order some food at a restaurant, they tell you how much it costs, you disagree then eat the food anyway expecting to not have to pay. Do you have any amount common sense?
PS: I can read the EULA without a law degree and understand it just fine. I highly doubt you have a PhD in it.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
I totally agree with you. I was born in Seoul but moved when I was 2. And ANY kind of event/person/palce related to korea my parents would make sure i know it was korean-related. They are incredibly nationalistic and especially proud of international recognition.
Some of my friends call it "small country syndome" lol. But it's likely the centuries of being invaded and defending that caused koreans to be so proud (maybe contributes to flash muta dense?!@?!?!)
You can claim to be able to understand EULA's without a law degree but no one will believe that. Show some humility. Without knowing all the cases and how it was interpreted in court, you don't understand it and you won't know you don't understand it.
You mixing up two things show exactly the problem. If you disagree to the contract you also disagree to wanting to use it. So you are forced into agreeing even if you don't. That's extortion. What if you do want to use the software but don't want to agree to the EULA? What do you do then? You click 'agree' anyway.
Agreeing or disagreeing to a contract should be about only that; the contract. Yet you already bought the software you bought and already went into contract about that with someone else. Why do you need to go into an unfair contract with a third party that took no part in the transaction of the software box?
On November 14 2010 18:12 Gonodactylus wrote: You can claim to be able to understand EULA's without a law degree but no one will believe that. Show some humility. Without knowing all the cases and how it was interpreted in court, you don't understand it and you won't know you don't understand it.
You mixing up two things show exactly the problem. If you disagree to the contract you also disagree to wanting to use it. So you are forced into agreeing even if you don't. That's extortion. What if you do want to use the software but don't want to agree to the EULA? What do you do then? You agree.
I dont want to pay you to eat this food, but I want to eat the food.
What do you do? You pay.
Also, I understand the EULA just fine. I may not understand the legal possibilities of it, but I understand what they are claiming they can do and what I can do with their product. It is in fairly plain english.
Gonodactylus, do you attempt to use a credit card without agreeing to their terms?
Using their software is not a right, it's a choice. If you choose to use their software, you must choose to agree to their terms of use. If not, than you are not allowed to use their software. You're arguing this as if it's everybody's right to play this game. It's not.
If I go into contract with a credit company, I go into contract with a credit company. I don't suddenly also have a contract with Blizzard that I can't understand and didn't agree to.
On November 14 2010 16:31 xBillehx wrote: Anyone willing to translate this too? I do love to read/hear what the Korean's think since they're more connected to the situation in Korea than we are, so thanks to Pizzapie for translating.
1) Individual League Broadcasting Rights Controversy
1. Artificial merging of MBCGame's team league and OGN's individual leagues
2. Steals the power to open individual leagues, which is made and operated jointly by OGN and MBCGame
3. Talks about rights to broadcasting without permission from Blizzard, who holds IP rights to the game, demands 1.7 billion won for 3 years from the broadcasters. This is the starting point of the IP rights controversy
4. Gave rights to broadcasting to a company that had nothing to do with e-sports, IBSports (parent company: IEG), then runs away with the money (Giving up operating estro)
5. MBCGame Survivor prelim boycott issue
6. KeSPACup, operated by KeSPA, becomes worse than random PC bang leagues
7. Artificially reduces individual leagues (revolving around individual players), while greatly increasing the size of Proleague (revolving around teams), in order to help with advertisement for the companies instead of for the fans
8. 5 days a week play, causing reduced interest in the matches
2) Various operation and rules controversy
9. DQ because a player typed "PP" instead of "PPP" to pause the game. (Later changed)
10. DQ because a player typed "a" in the chat. Controversy risen from the rule that said "-Can- give DQ", which can also mean "-Not- give DQ"
11. DQ for any other variation of "GG" / "gg", such as "WW", "지읒이읒", "zizi yO", "지지요".
12. Giving DQ for leaving the game during countdown due to control miss
13. Ignoring the issue of bug play using SCV (which was clear that the bug play happend) because "there was no rule for that"
14. During the infamous NATE MSL power outage, lied about having a replay when there wasn't
15. KeSPA gave different ranking point adjustment for MSL and StarLeague, causing controversy
16. Due to the "data errors" in KeSPA homepage, controversies happened regarding things like NaDa's win records
17. Due to no accurate data collection, relies on the broadcasting companies to do the data collection. Corporations that sell e-sports related data appears
18. When there was no clear plans for the KeSPA's member corporations, KeSPA demands 2 billion won from the member corporations
19. A player who has been selected by a team, if he declines, he would be barred from entering any progame teams for 3 years. As a result, all would-be progamers become like slaves by forcing to join any team regardless of their stance, once selected
20. Due to the FA policy in 2009, players cannot select what team they would like to join, since the policy forces them to join whichever team offers highest $. This ignores how long the contract would be, just how big of the money total is offered. This FA policy died later
21. Entry pre-announcement caused games to be boring even before they start, reducing popularity of proleague, and could potentially cause match fixing... which does end up happening. Finally, they return to old blinded entry list policy
22. Forcing 2 days of matches in Proleague 08-09 post season results in the infamy for having the least amount of audience ever
3) Attitude towards other games
23. While KeSPA is made because of StarCraft, support for other games are virtually nil. Especially, zero support for WarCraft 3, a game that's only behind StarCraft in terms of popularity
24. Ignoring Kart Rider leagues, causing it to stop for over a year
25. While various players have been selected through KeSPA cup, they did not create any leagues or any other needed support
26. Even the officially registered games such as Special Force and Kart Rider have no employees that manage them at KeSPA
27. Games that had no popularity as e-sports such as Special Force would end up having low viewership count, then infamy at the finals due to that
28. The "Proleague 5 days a week" is the worst system ever, as KeSPA, who should be focusing on even development of e-sports in general, caused StarCraft's pie way too big for other games to join e-sports scene
4) Match fixing controversy
29. They talked the talk during the start of this controversy, but didn't walk the walk during police investigation
30. Ignored rules of going through sanction commission during the process of retiring progamer Mr. Park.
31. Did not even announce progamer Mr. Won's retirement at all, causing concealment controversy
32. Those that had part in match fixing, if they weren't removed via expulsion, they are, by rules, allowed back in after 3 years if they so wish
33. No other way to prevent potential match fixing recurring except through removing entry pre-announcement
5) IP Rights Controversy with Blizzard-Gretech
34. There was a boycott of GOM Classic (sponsored by Gretech), there are suspicions that KeSPA either allowed it or even directed it themselves in secrecy
35. Ordered progamer teams to not participate in StarCraft 2 beta
36. In regards to negotiation with Blizzard about IP rights, KeSPA manipulated journalism then violated NDA
37. Blizzard clearly owns IP rights to StarCraft. Despite that, KeSPA talks about "public property" and even said how "[we] helped with making additional profits for Blizzard"
38. Even great oldbies such as NaDa and BoxeR were declared as the betrayers just because they switched to StarCraft 2
39. Talking nonsense about "effort of e-sports personnel" while using Jaedong as a sacrificial lamb during public hearing
40. KeSPA is trying hard to pass a law that would grant KeSPA a full, unlimited, total IP rights ownership to any and all games that would participate in e-sports
41. Threatening progamers, teams, and related personnel that "something undesirable" may happen should they contact Blizzard or participate in tournaments that Blizzard runs
42. Forced NaDa's StarCraft 2 match, taking place in Germany as an event, to end by calling him while match is still underway
43. The moment NaDa announces his switch to StarCraft 2, KeSPA deleted NaDa's records from the homepage
44. Blizzard said KeSPA's attitude was that they refuse to acknowledge any IP rights whatsoever during negotiation
45. OGN mysteriously canceled StarCraft 2 open broadcasting, there are suspicions that KeSPA had a hand in it
46. Forcing Proleague 10-11 season illegally while the negotiations hasn't ended yet
47. Authorizing MBCGame's forcing of BigFile MSL, Kyong-nam STX cup, and PDPop MSL, which are all illegal
48. Tells Gretech that KeSPA will pay 300 million won per year, which would include rights to open and operate proleague AND individual leagues. This is not fair considering how they took 1.7 billion won from IEG for 3 years
49. Tries to stall the talks by continually changing negotiation terms during negotiation talks
50. Trying to make KeSPA as the lead and operator of StarCraft 2 e-sports in negotiation
51. Ignoring the opinion of fans, KeSPA shows that their actions only focus on their own profits and using force to see it through
* For more information, take a look at '한국E스포츠협회', '프로리그 중계권 사태', '스타크래프트 승부조작스캔들', '스타크래프트 저작권 분쟁' from AngelHalo wiki (Editor's note: I use AngelHalo wiki a lot, and they have very in-depth details on those articles)
I described this as "50+a reasons" because I thought that 50 might not be all of the reason. I wanted to just shut up, not put up any reply, and stay quiet, but I wanted to state "It's already too late" to the opinions of "KeSPA must exist, even after all the faults". I don't see Gretech and Blizzard as the absolute right, and I've already criticized some of Gretech's actions through previous writings and replies. But, it is for certain that KeSPA is an absolute evil. They only care about the logic of the corporations and profits all the while ignoring the fans. My thought is that this doesn't even deserve any criticism, and only solution is complete dissolution of KeSPA.
Anyway, I want this situation to end in a happy note for e-sports fan, and I really hope for the day when we can watch progamers and their awesome plays in whatever games they may play -- whether it be StarCraft 1 or 2.
Holy shit I knew KeSPA was dick organization, but this...? How can they even talk about esports when they provide little support for other games? Thanks for translation!
Ugh. I didn't have much of an opinion on this topic before as I knew little about it, and from looking at the surface of it I was not a fan of Blizzard's actions. However, after reading this KeSPA comes across as a comicbook megacorporation, basically the Weyland-Yutani of e-sports. I'm actually happy to see Blizzard taking a real stand against them, this along with their mass hacker bans makes me feel quite secure in Blizzard's hardline stance against those trying to destroy their games.
Paying reporters to throw mud at Starcraft 2 and 'enslaving' progamers is truly disgusting, I hope KeSPA loses their monopoly completely and more fairminded companies cannibalise their empire.
Hm, gj. I was going to translate this but couldn't be bothered. This is exactly why I find it so funny that all the foreign fans are dissing on Blizzard and supporting Kespa, while all the koreans are dissing Kespa and supporting Blizzard.
On November 14 2010 18:04 Shizuru~ wrote: Great OP that states facts mainly instead of all personal opinions, which lately even in this forum have been flooded by endless amount of mis-informed/un-informed stances unfortunately...
Kespa needs to die for the sake of E-Sports development, not just for Starcraft:Brood War or Starcraft 2 but for the gaming industry as a whole, yes a central governing body is needed when the industry starts to mature, but it will not be Kespa, not a corporate puppet body, but one that is formed by the passionate members of the gaming community, pro-gamers, coaches, managers etc...
So you DO mean KeSPA... instead of one that is formed by the corporation that made the game and controls every aspect of it?
Either way, the title reads "A Korean fan explains why he hates KeSPA", thus it is a personal opinion based on one's interpretation of events~
Also, to many people, death of KeSPA IS death of BW... and all things resulting from it...
PPS: The lawsuit predictions and analogies need to stop, one could write a book about it with all the misinformed posts since this became a hot topic a few months ago.
On November 14 2010 18:13 TheRabidDeer wrote: I dont want to pay you to eat this food, but I want to eat the food.
What do you do? You pay.
Dishonest analogy. You mix up two things. I point it out. You mix it even more stubbornly.
It is hardly a dishonest analogy. And I am about to blow your mind:
On the top of the box of the game that you bought at the store, it reads: "The use of this software product is subject to the terms of an End User License Agreement available at "http://www.starcraft2.com/legal/eula.html, and all use of the product is subject to your registration of a Battle.net account and your acceptance of the Battle.net Terms of Use."
You know going into the purchase what the eula is, how to access it, and whether you agree with it. You have no excuse.
To clarify, this is printed on the outside of the box and is clearly visible to anybody prior to purchase.
On November 14 2010 17:13 Gonodactylus wrote: No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
Not reading something that you agree to by using your own fingers to agree to it without anybody forcing you to do so is how you agreed to their terms of use. Ignorance of what you're agreeing to is nobody's fault but your own. If I get pulled over for speeding, I don't tell the officer I didn't read the speed limit sign and can therefore not be punished.
On November 14 2010 18:06 Gonodactylus wrote: He's bragging about being an undergrad, not me. BTW, you missed the point of one side having no say as to what is in the contract. A contract is supposed to be something between two equal parties that both parties want and can agree upon. An EULA is not that.
As for morality, laws are supposed to be moral. If they aren't, they are wrong laws even if they win in court. Now mr.undergrad did not read Transformation of American Law. Did you?
I didn't miss a point. A contract is merely a formal, legally binding, and usually in some form written agreement between two parties. It does not have to include the wants and needs of both sides for an agreement to take place. Have you ever heard of a non-negotiable contract?
And sure, laws are supposed to be moral, but that still has no relevance at all in this argument.
If there's 4/5 people over and over making false analogies, not understanding IP rights, and saying that Kespa enslaves progamers and other crazy stuff, I can't argue against all that just by sheer size of volume.
I have to concede because this is not a fair debate. I can't win no matter how right I am. Enjoy the victory. Also enjoy esports where players have no rights whatsoever.
On November 14 2010 18:26 Gonodactylus wrote: If there's 4/5 people over and over making false analogies, not understanding IP rights, and saying that Kespa enslaves progamers and other crazy stuff, I can't argue against all that just by sheer size of volume.
I have to concede because this is not a fair debate. I can't win no matter how right I am. Enjoy the victory. Also enjoy esports where players have no rights whatsoever.
You're arguing that the EULA isn't fair, which it most likely isn't. We're telling you it's irrelevant whether it's fair or not, because you agreed to it by clicking agree.
I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
A really good read. Even though I've tried to read up as much as possible on Kespa and Gretech and everything that happened there was still a lot of stuff that I've never seen before.
On November 14 2010 18:27 Zerste wrote: I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
That again is factually incorrect and probably irrelevant even if it were true.
People outside the SC BW section have no idea at all what Kepsa is and what they have actually done. Kespa is just losing to Blizzard propaganda at this point. They are going to lose even if they win in court.
On November 14 2010 18:18 Gonodactylus wrote: If I go into contract with a credit company, I go into contract with a credit company. I don't suddenly also have a contract with Blizzard that I can't understand and didn't agree to.
Except that it says "Battle.net registration required" on the back of the SC2 box, hence you're made aware of the fact that you have to use battle.net before purchase, which in turn means you are made aware of the fact that you have to agree to the EULA as it's part of Battle.net before purchase.
I've yet to see any product or service which require you to enter any form of contract or agreement where you're allowed to use the product/service without agreeing to the terms first.
The EULA offers you the same two options as any other contract; accept or decline. You're free to decline the EULA and not play the game, I don't see how that extortion in any shape or form when you're can just return the game.
On November 14 2010 18:26 Gonodactylus wrote: If there's 4/5 people over and over making false analogies, not understanding IP rights, and saying that Kespa enslaves progamers and other crazy stuff, I can't argue against all that just by sheer size of volume.
I have to concede because this is not a fair debate. I can't win no matter how right I am. Enjoy the victory. Also enjoy esports where players have no rights whatsoever.
Well that was a gracefully way of admitting defeat with out compromising your opinion that your opinions are right and regardless of how you argue for them other people are wrong and idiots for not understanding your arguments. You impressed me!
On November 14 2010 18:27 Zerste wrote: I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
That again is factually incorrect and probably irrelevant even if it were true.
People outside the SC BW section have no idea at all what Kepsa is and what they have actually done. Kespa is just losing to Blizzard propaganda at this point. They are going to lose even if they win in court.
Seems like all the assumptions that were made in the BW threads months ago are resurfacing again. Then again, this is the first time (or so I believe) that this topic has been specifically placed in the SC2 forum. It's like those handful of pro-Blizzard guys showing up in the BW forums and being shut down by the masses of BW fans in that forum section, except in reverse for you.
Would suggest having people read up on the old posts before assuming stuff like that; however I am noticing quite a few names from the past discussions.
On November 14 2010 18:27 Zerste wrote: I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
That again is factually incorrect and probably irrelevant even if it were true.
People outside the SC BW section have no idea at all what Kepsa is and what they have actually done. Kespa is just losing to Blizzard propaganda at this point. They are going to lose even if they win in court.
I'm pretty sure that people in BW section have no idea what KeSPA is except for veterans and people who actually live in Korea.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
um no, if you want to compare SC to SOCCER, then BLIZZARD would have constructed the stadium, and maintains everything in the stadium, and if some tourny uses blizzard's stadium x-days then they would obviously have to pay
On November 14 2010 18:27 Zerste wrote: I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
That again is factually incorrect and probably irrelevant even if it were true.
People outside the SC BW section have no idea at all what Kepsa is and what they have actually done. Kespa is just losing to Blizzard propaganda at this point. They are going to lose even if they win in court.
Atleast we know how to spell it.
Also, you have pretty much done every single thing you could have done to turn people against you. You have patronized pretty much everyone who don't agree with you, based on that you supposedly have a PhD. You have yet to point to a source backing your claims. And to top it off you martyr yourself.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
You hit 'I Agree' to the terms and conditions just to play. Whether or not you read it does not matter. It was a contract presented to you, with clear terms and conditions, and the ability for you to accept or deny those terms. Whatever f'd up laws they have in EU I could care less about. To any rational, logical person, you are in the wrong.
On November 14 2010 17:13 Gonodactylus wrote: If there's 4/5 people over and over making false analogies, not understanding IP rights, and saying that Kespa enslaves progamers and other crazy stuff, I can't argue against all that just by sheer size of volume.
I have to concede because this is not a fair debate. I can't win no matter how right I am. Enjoy the victory. Also enjoy esports where players have no rights whatsoever.
Actually it's with Kespa where players have no rights. GOM/Blizzard do not have any power-hungry rules dictating who can play what, when they can play it, when they can fucking pause or say ingame, etc.
The most elegant proof:
1) What happens if a current Brood War player switches to play SC2 now? He is banned from proleague, loses his license and if you're as unlucky as Nada, stats are wiped and reputation is attacked.
2) What would happen if an SC2 player were to swap to Brood War?
On November 14 2010 18:04 Shizuru~ wrote: Great OP that states facts mainly instead of all personal opinions, which lately even in this forum have been flooded by endless amount of mis-informed/un-informed stances unfortunately...
Kespa needs to die for the sake of E-Sports development, not just for Starcraft:Brood War or Starcraft 2 but for the gaming industry as a whole, yes a central governing body is needed when the industry starts to mature, but it will not be Kespa, not a corporate puppet body, but one that is formed by the passionate members of the gaming community, pro-gamers, coaches, managers etc...
So you DO mean KeSPA... instead of one that is formed by the corporation that made the game and controls every aspect of it?
Either way, the title reads "A Korean fan explains why he hates KeSPA", thus it is a personal opinion based on one's interpretation of events~
Also, to many people, death of KeSPA IS death of BW... and all things resulting from it...
PPS: The lawsuit predictions and analogies need to stop, one could write a book about it with all the misinformed posts since this became a hot topic a few months ago.
Personally, I have this depressing conspiracy theory, that this bullshit IP rights fiasco is prolonging the life of professional BW and KeSPA would otherwise actually switch all ProLeague teams and players to SC2 to try to stop decreasing TV viewer numbers. In my theory, that is the reason Blizzard doesn't have LAN in SC2, in case they need to cut off KeSPA running their own tournaments.
On November 14 2010 18:42 Blondinbengt wrote: Atleast we know how to spell it.
Also, you have pretty much done every single thing you could have done to turn people against you. You have patronized pretty much everyone who don't agree with you, based on that you supposedly have a PhD. You have yet to point to a source backing your claims. And to top it off you martyr yourself.
Way to represent the SC BW section.
Thank you for acting like an ally, then kicking me in the head when I am already down and spitting on me before you leave. I never really said I have a PhD anyway. Read more carefully.
I am no longer giving sources. Gomtv Classic, Second Life EULA cases, nah. Anyway, I wasn't even supposed to give sources as people claimed they knew stuff better than me already.
Lawl I just read the entire thread thanks to Gonodactylus' incredible ridiculous statements haha :D
Some kind of KeSPA Internet agent or what the fuck? How can you post 22 completely wrong and made up facts? Like what the fuck, you are just telling us EULAs do not matter AT ALL? Jesus ridiculous Christ...
On November 14 2010 17:13 Gonodactylus wrote: I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
You either have downs or are delusional to believe you didn't enter a contract when you clicked "I ACCEPT"? It doesn't matter what you think and NO you wouldn't win in court if blizzard decided to cancel your access multi-player for whatever reason they come up with. Your failure to read and click "I ACCEPT" is all they need to decide that. This works in Europe also. It's painful to even read your other posts.
On November 14 2010 18:42 Blondinbengt wrote: Atleast we know how to spell it.
Also, you have pretty much done every single thing you could have done to turn people against you. You have patronized pretty much everyone who don't agree with you, based on that you supposedly have a PhD. You have yet to point to a source backing your claims. And to top it off you martyr yourself.
Way to represent the SC BW section.
Thank you for acting like an ally, then kicking me in the head when I am already down and spitting on me before you leave. I never really said I have a PhD anyway. Read more carefully.
I am no longer giving sources. Gomtv Classic, Second Life EULA cases, nah. Anyway, I wasn't even supposed to give sources as people claimed they knew stuff better than me already.
On November 14 2010 18:42 Blondinbengt wrote: Atleast we know how to spell it.
Also, you have pretty much done every single thing you could have done to turn people against you. You have patronized pretty much everyone who don't agree with you, based on that you supposedly have a PhD. You have yet to point to a source backing your claims. And to top it off you martyr yourself.
Way to represent the SC BW section.
Thank you for acting like an ally, then kicking me in the head when I am already down and spitting on me before you leave. I never really said I have a PhD anyway. Read more carefully.
I am no longer giving sources. Gomtv Classic, Second Life EULA cases, nah. Anyway, I wasn't even supposed to give sources as people claimed they knew stuff better than me already.
What are you talking about, where did I act like an ''ally''?
And to be fair, you are the one who have been kicking and spitting on others, then you martyr yourself and now you are complaining about me calling you on it, that's pretty weak.
On November 14 2010 16:53 Gonodactylus wrote: How much more simple has someone with a PhD in IP has to put it to this undergrad? (lol)
I would say that's saying you have a PhD.
To try and get things back on topic, are there any similar posts by korean fans that lists critism towards Blizzard/Gomtv instead? Would be very interesting to read something from the opposite side of the issue.
On November 14 2010 19:08 Blondinbengt wrote: I would say that's saying you have a PhD.
To try and get things back on topic, are there any similar posts by korean fans that lists critism towards Blizzard/Gomtv instead? Would be very interesting to read something from the opposite side of the issue.
No, there isn't such a list. There just aren't much to use against Blizzard/Gretech compared to KeSPA. Gretech hasn't done much in BW since the GomTV Classic fiasco, and Blizzard really didn't do anything other than to trying to talk to KeSPA.
Any complaints that exist are the same thing KeSPA / DES has been saying, that:
1) Blizzard is too greedy and unreasonable. 2) Blizzard wants to kill SC BW. 3) Gretech is too greedy and unreasonable.
Being wrong because of ignorance is one thing. Being deliberately ignorant so you can be wrong so you can be on the immoral side is another.
I have been called an idiot, down syndrome and a whole list of other things and I never blinked. I coolly tried to argue my point, which I still believe is valid and backed up by court cases despite people now trying to ridicule it.
And now suddenly I am the bad guy?
And I only said I am as much a PhD as he is a law undergrad law student. I don't believe him, he doesn't believe me. That's all. Still, it seems he didn't read the books I did. Nur did he know about the cases.
On November 14 2010 18:04 Shizuru~ wrote: Great OP that states facts mainly instead of all personal opinions, which lately even in this forum have been flooded by endless amount of mis-informed/un-informed stances unfortunately...
Kespa needs to die for the sake of E-Sports development, not just for Starcraft:Brood War or Starcraft 2 but for the gaming industry as a whole, yes a central governing body is needed when the industry starts to mature, but it will not be Kespa, not a corporate puppet body, but one that is formed by the passionate members of the gaming community, pro-gamers, coaches, managers etc...
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black aren't you misinformed by stating what is written by the article given by the op as fact ? Kespa do not have to die for E-sports developments it has already been a tour de force in ensuring that highly competitive tournaments continues to exist . It's your opinion and i choose to stick to mine .
id never asked for any money from quake tournaments valve never asked for any money from cs tournaments blizzard themselves didn't ask for any money from wc3 tournaments and suddenly they are so intent on a few hundred thousand dollars from kespa? (even though they are making a shitton of money from wow) i dont even care but they could at least say "yes we want to kill bw"
On November 14 2010 18:27 Zerste wrote: I enjoy that part particularly considering how KESPA was the one telling players they're not allowed to play in GOM's Classic.
That again is factually incorrect and probably irrelevant even if it were true.
People outside the SC BW section have no idea at all what Kepsa is and what they have actually done. Kespa is just losing to Blizzard propaganda at this point. They are going to lose even if they win in court.
I'm pretty sure that people in BW section have no idea what KeSPA is except for veterans and people who actually live in Korea.
On November 14 2010 19:23 eSen1a wrote: id never asked for any money from quake tournaments valve never asked for any money from cs tournaments blizzard themselves didn't ask for any money from wc3 tournaments and suddenly they are so intent on a few hundred thousand dollars from kespa? (even though they are making a shitton of money from wow) i dont even care but they could at least say "yes we want to kill bw"
On November 14 2010 19:23 eSen1a wrote: id never asked for any money from quake tournaments valve never asked for any money from cs tournaments blizzard themselves didn't ask for any money from wc3 tournaments and suddenly they are so intent on a few hundred thousand dollars from kespa? (even though they are making a shitton of money from wow) i dont even care but they could at least say "yes we want to kill bw"
Ok so because they didn't care about the money in the past shows that they're wanting to kill bw so that they can get more money from sc2? You didn't think this through did you?
Thank you so much to Pizzapie and Selith for translating these articles. It must have taken a while and your work is very much appreciated.
A thankyou must also go to Gonodactylus. A lesser person might have stopped posting after embarrassing themselves the way you did on page 5. But not you! You just kept on going. I for one don't mind a thread being completely derailed as long as it's for a good reason, reasons like "the benefit of the TL community" or "your ego".
The most disgusting thing beyond all the other obviousness is how badly the players are being treated under Kespa. To backtalk Starcraft legends and disrespect them openly is almost making me sick to my stomach. I wish there would have been more competent people behind Kespa.
looking back at how poorly run Kespa is, i cant help but wonder if the culture/system somehow encouraged players to rig matches. I mean if the existing organization is an asshole, and you can justify your own greed as "sticking it to the man," then i could understand why top players did what they did.
:'(, savior, even after all you did, i ... i still..... :'(
On November 14 2010 19:13 Gonodactylus wrote: And I only said I am as much a PhD as he is a law undergrad law student. I don't believe him, he doesn't believe me.
So, you don't believe he's an undergrad, and you're saying you're as much a PhD as he's an undergrad. So basically, you're saying that you're NOT a PhD? This is getting confusing.
Also, PhD or not, you claim to have a lot of knowledge about this, and you begin to see that simply stating facts is not going to win the 'debate' (if you can call it that). Could you please start referring us to your sources? At the moment, people might mistake the facts you're pointing out to them as just being your opinion.
On November 14 2010 19:19 Sawamura wrote: Kespa do not have to die for E-sports developments it has already been a tour de force in ensuring that highly competitive tournaments continues to exist.
Sometimes you have to take a step back in order to go two steps forward.
While Kespa has driven the Korean e-sports scene to the point it's at now, it doesn't mean the foundations for the growth of e-sports have been healthy or that it's been done the right way.
Korean e-sports scene in general (even pre-kespa) made a lot of mistakes down the road that are slowly coming back to bite them, and I should also add - rightfully coming back to bite them. Not to mention that kespa's reputation was severely damaged a number of times way before the final showdown began with the coming of SC2. Then among an ocean of examples, just look at the way they've treaded NaDa recently (twice even - during showmatch vs TLO and after fully switching to SC2).
The BW scene under KeSPA regulation might be exciting, big, popular and flashy (no pun intended), but you can't save something that's fundamentally rotten in its core. Even now, regardless of the outcome of all this mess, BW scene has suffered permanent damage. No amount of clinging to the past and the "old ways" will help.
On November 14 2010 19:39 WilbertK wrote: Could you please start referring us to your sources? At the moment, people might mistake the facts you're pointing out to them as just being your opinion.
Not until a certain number of people publicly apologize.
As for the 50+ reasons as to why Kespa is bad. Some are factually wrong. Some are disputable. And some are even why Kespa is good, like no.3, no9 through 13 and several others.
Most of the negative ones have to do with Korean culture and a lack of a player union. People like Boxer and Nada could have formed player unions but instead they did in fact betray progaming, as kespa puts it, as they are now in Blizzard's camp when their entire career they thank to SCBW/Korea.
Korean progamers never speak out on anything. Be it against Kespa/Blizzard/North Korea/US whatever. That's a problem they have. They don't stand up for their rights. They have to do this themselves. But never will they have it as good under Gomtv as Blizzard fears professional teams as one day the teams may stand up against them again, creating a new Kespa.
If Kespa could run SC2 leagues, SC2 would have been way way bigger. Globally as well as in Korea. Blizzard should have teamed up with Kespa and OGN and MBC, yet it was Blizzard's choice to destroy Kespa and Kespa's fear of being destroyed. You can't blame Kespa for fighting back and fighting dirty. SC2 could have been huge. Yet we only have amateur tournaments outside of Korea and in Korea we have only gomtv with a semi-pro tournament only broadcaster through the internet. No huge sponsors, no professional teams, no cable tv broadcasting. Imagine if all teams just started a SC2 team alongside their SC BW team and ran leagues besides the ones we have now. It would have been so much bigger and more professional. Remember any other tournaments in Korea are banned. We have hundreds of tournaments that don't really matter here in the foreigner scene. In Korea they don't have anything like that, only Gomtv.
Listen to what SuperDanialMan has said about this all. He worked personally with most people at Gomtv/Kespa/OGN/MBC, etc.
On November 14 2010 19:39 WilbertK wrote: Could you please start referring us to your sources? At the moment, people might mistake the facts you're pointing out to them as just being your opinion.
Not until a certain number of people publicly apologize.
As for the 50+ reasons as to why Kespa is bad. Some are factually wrong. Some are disputable. And some are even why Kespa is good, like no.3, no9 through 13 and several others.
Most of the negative ones have to do with Korean culture and a lack of a player union. People like Boxer and Nada could have formed player unions but instead they did in fact betray progaming, as kespa puts it, as they are now in Blizzard's camp when their entire career they thank to SCBW/Korea.
Korean progamers never speak out on anything. Be it against Kespa/Blizzard/North Korea/US whatever. That's a problem they have. They don't stand up for their rights. They have to do this themselves. But never will they have it as good under Gomtv as Blizzard fears professional teams as one day the teams may stand up against them again, creating a new Kespa.
Conversely, I have sources that state that it is fact that everything you said it wrong!
But I won't cite them until I get 120 people to give me a hug over this forum.
If you don't get what I'm saying, it's easy to call others wrong, and state that you have sources, but then put out a demand before being willing to cite them.
On November 14 2010 19:39 WilbertK wrote: Could you please start referring us to your sources? At the moment, people might mistake the facts you're pointing out to them as just being your opinion.
Not until a certain number of people publicly apologize.
As for the 50+ reasons as to why Kespa is bad. Some are factually wrong. Some are disputable. And some are even why Kespa is good, like no.3, no9 through 13 and several others.
Most of the negative ones have to do with Korean culture and a lack of a player union. People like Boxer and Nada could have formed player unions but instead they did in fact betray progaming, as kespa puts it, as they are now in Blizzard's camp when their entire career they thank to SCBW/Korea.
Korean progamers never speak out on anything. Be it against Kespa/Blizzard/North Korea/US whatever. That's a problem they have. They don't stand up for their rights. They have to do this themselves. But never will they have it as good under Gomtv as Blizzard fears professional teams as one day the teams may stand up against them again, creating a new Kespa.
Why should we apologize?
Also, SC2 already has progaming teams that are sponsored (ogs/prime/werra/startale/etc). Hell, boxer has his own sponsorship.
e-sports in korea has reached a point where a KeSPA is not really necessary. The players are sponsored and have their houses, the game is popular, the broadcasters want to broadcast and everything is good. There is no reason to have a KeSPA right now for SC2. The foundation that KeSPA laid out for BW is being put out on their own terms by the players.
every second one of you so called "reasons to hate KeSpA" can be read both way. for example, did it really kill sc that a teamleague was getting "forcefully started by KeSpA" every major sport has teamleagues, except maybe golf and tennis;-)
On November 14 2010 19:52 Heimatloser wrote: every second one of you so called "reasons to hate KeSpA" can be read both way. for example, did it really kill sc that a teamleague was getting "forcefully started by KeSpA" every major sport has teamleagues, except maybe golf and tennis;-)
Great read, even though it took me 15 minutes. I agree with this Korean fan, KeSPA isn't as 'great' as I once thought. I really thought it was Blizzard that were the bad guys, but now it's almost like both of them are.
On November 14 2010 19:39 WilbertK wrote: Could you please start referring us to your sources? At the moment, people might mistake the facts you're pointing out to them as just being your opinion.
Not until a certain number of people publicly apologize.
Now I get it, you have a PhD in trolling right? Expecting others to apologize when you spout nonsense for like 5 whole pages.
On November 14 2010 19:46 Gonodactylus wrote: Most of the negative ones have to do with Korean culture and a lack of a player union. People like Boxer and Nada could have formed player unions but instead they did in fact betray progaming, as kespa puts it, as they are now in Blizzard's camp when their entire career they thank to SCBW/Korea.
First, Kespa has players like Boxer and Nada to thanks for there being an esports scene, it was their popularity that kept people watching and by not allowing Boxer and Nada to play SC2 Kespa was betraying progaming. Boxer and Nada went against Kespa not progaming, and just because Kespa waves around the rules doesn't equate them to progaming.
Secondly, just because there isn't a player union doesn't make it fair for Kespa to impose unfair rules, nor make people who leave kespa's system villains for not following them or organizing unions. Especially since korean culture isn't big on individualism and people standing up for there right to not be exploited (that's just what it looks like to me, i don't really know)
Third, you are either a fantastic troll or employed by Kespa.
23. While KeSPA is made because of StarCraft, support for other games are virtually nil. Especially, zero support for WarCraft 3, a game that's only behind StarCraft in terms of popularity
On November 14 2010 19:46 Gonodactylus wrote: If Kespa could run SC2 leagues, SC2 would have been way way bigger. Globally as well as in Korea. Blizzard should have teamed up with Kespa and OGN and MBC, yet it was Blizzard's choice to destroy Kespa and Kespa's fear of being destroyed. You can't blame Kespa for fighting back and fighting dirty.
Blizzard wanted to get KeSPA on board for SC2. Hence the negotiations. But KeSPA didn't want Blizzard there. It's clear that KeSPA does not and has never respected the fact that Blizzard makes and owns StarCraft. So they don't want Blizzard involved in any way. So instead of working with Blizzard, they oppose them at every turn.
If you believe that KeSPA had nothing to do with the cancellation of the GOM Classic, you're fooling yourself. It was a non-KeSPA-sanctioned tournament, one that got Blizzard's personal approval/money, and it was growing in popularity. So KeSPA killed it.
KeSPA declared war first. Blizzard was willing to talk, but KeSPA didn't want that. They didn't want to acknowledge Blizzard's right, and now they're paying the price for it.
On November 14 2010 19:46 Gonodactylus wrote: If Kespa could run SC2 leagues, SC2 would have been way way bigger. Globally as well as in Korea. Blizzard should have teamed up with Kespa and OGN and MBC, yet it was Blizzard's choice to destroy Kespa and Kespa's fear of being destroyed. You can't blame Kespa for fighting back and fighting dirty.
Blizzard wanted to get KeSPA on board for SC2. Hence the negotiations. But KeSPA didn't want Blizzard there. It's clear that KeSPA does not and has never respected the fact that Blizzard makes and owns StarCraft. So they don't want Blizzard involved in any way. So instead of working with Blizzard, they oppose them at every turn.
If you believe that KeSPA had nothing to do with the cancellation of the GOM Classic, you're fooling yourself. It was a non-KeSPA-sanctioned tournament, one that got Blizzard's personal approval/money, and it was growing in popularity. So KeSPA killed it.
KeSPA declared war first. Blizzard was willing to talk, but KeSPA didn't want that. They didn't want to acknowledge Blizzard's right, and now they're paying the price for it.
There's no prove to all the word that you spoke you are only assuming which party shed first blood and as long as they are no sources to back it up you are merely talking empty talks .
Well it all started back when Kespa realized they could make huge profits with BW and Blizzard didn't care. All the years made the issue deeper and it was only when SC2 got released that this issue turned into an open conflict.
Quite frankly, since they have such opposite interests, I don't see any way this could resolve without one of them disappearing: Kespa won't agree to pay for something they've had for free all this years, and Blizzard won't let people make money on something they created and own anymore (hence no LAN). I think Kespa should have been the less stubborn one, cause they obviously can't straight up fight Blizzard. But now the damage is done, Blizzard's got a lot better economy, and it's just a matter of time til they give the final push and roll over Kespa's base x)
wow. i did not knew that KeSPA was this fucked up. but how big is KeSPA anyway? i can hardly imagine they could "fight" blizzard these days. i mean.. activision is huge, they made the game and so on, earn a shitload of money with their other games..
when reading the OP it sounds like KeSPA was big because blizzard did not give a sh** back then but now with SC2 they dont even considering KeSPA to get involved with.
its like a fight between a 10 year old girl with pigtails and a hells angel, isnt it?
On November 14 2010 15:30 CanucksJC wrote: The articles mentioned at the end of OP are pretty much garbage. I did a quick scan, and this is some of the bs the journalist (same person writing all of them) pulled out of his ass
- the success of sc2 in korea is nothing but a sudden spark, and even credits that brief moment to WoW players trying out sc2 for a couple days. - rumour that FruitDealer purposely lost to BoxeR like the infamous match fixing scandal in BW - mentions some riot of gamers that sc2 fried their graphics card - treats sc2 as a single player game and speculates when people will transfer over to playing multiplayer - blames GSL for the WeRRa scandal. says that this is one of many side effects such a huge tournament can have on players, and notes the lack of organization. suggests an organization like KeSPA control these teams like how it's done in BW. questions Blizzard's ability to promote e-sports
Yup, he's pretty much garbage.
Actually, SC2 did fry some people's cards in beta when there was no limit to FPS rate.
But it only affected people that over clocked their cards because normally those cards would shut down after getting to a certain temperature.
When trying to promote a game, hardcore nerds and people who rely on gaming computers to make a living are probably the two groups of people you least want to ruin the computers of.
Actually no, it was a Nvidia graphics card issue which caused the graphics cards to fry in conjunction with SC2. Although certainly bad for SC2's press, it wasn't their fault.
Wow, every post in this thread keeps making bigger and bigger assumptions of evil stuff that KeSPA has done. And most of this has been discussed before, are people too busy watching GSL to follow what has been said around the forums?
Accusing KeSPA of shutting down GOM classic when they let their players play for 4 seasons, really...
Said this before, this is a translation of a Korean fan's opinion on the matter, which is based on personal interpretations of the events that have happened, it isn't FACT. Stop making it seem like the guy is pouring out information direct from KeSPA/Gretech. I have a Korean friend too, and he isn't as anti-KeSPA as people make out all the Korean netizens to be.
As Milkis said before in the Community News thread, Korean netizens hardly reflect actual Korean fans. It's fun to read and all, but please don't cite them as hard facts to bash KeSPA further. Though they have made their mistakes in the past, they do have put out some of the best quality e-Sports out there, and deserve a little respect/credit for it.
On November 14 2010 21:27 leecH wrote: wow. i did not knew that KeSPA was this fucked up. but how big is KeSPA anyway? i can hardly imagine they could "fight" blizzard these days. i mean.. activision is huge, they made the game and so on, earn a shitload of money with their other games..
when reading the OP it sounds like KeSPA was big because blizzard did not give a sh** back then but now with SC2 they dont even considering KeSPA to get involved with.
its like a fight between a 10 year old girl with pigtails and a hells angel, isnt it?
Kespa carries weight in Korea, it's made up of the companies that sponsor the bw teams. There's a good bit of history involved which you should read, but basically at one point Kespa started charging for the rights to broadcast at which point this feud started.
On November 14 2010 20:05 Talin wrote: To be honest, it's better to go back to point 0 than depend on bully organizations like KeSPA to drive e-sports forward.
Things should either be done the right way or they shouldn't be done at all.
Especially when Selith translation pointed out that KeSPA doesn't support any e-sport except BW.
On November 14 2010 20:05 Talin wrote: To be honest, it's better to go back to point 0 than depend on bully organizations like KeSPA to drive e-sports forward.
Things should either be done the right way or they shouldn't be done at all.
Especially when Selith translation pointed out that KeSPA doesn't support any e-sport except BW.
Heard of the Sudden Attack Proleague? Or Kart Rider? Tekken? Dungeon Fighter?
Find it hard to believe that you have not seen leagues/competitions of those games being advertised among other games if you watch the Proleague streams...
On November 14 2010 21:38 IntoTheEmo wrote: As Milkis said before in the Community News thread, Korean netizens hardly reflect actual Korean fans. It's fun to read and all, but please don't cite them as hard facts to bash KeSPA further. Though they have made their mistakes in the past, they do have put out some of the best quality e-Sports out there, and deserve a little respect/credit for it.
"Netizens" aren't "actual" fans? It doesn't matter what a casual, less informed fan thinks and this appears to be general opinion among fans online, you know the ones who actually follow this stuff.
On November 14 2010 19:46 Gonodactylus wrote: If Kespa could run SC2 leagues, SC2 would have been way way bigger. Globally as well as in Korea. Blizzard should have teamed up with Kespa and OGN and MBC, yet it was Blizzard's choice to destroy Kespa and Kespa's fear of being destroyed. You can't blame Kespa for fighting back and fighting dirty.
Blizzard wanted to get KeSPA on board for SC2. Hence the negotiations. But KeSPA didn't want Blizzard there. It's clear that KeSPA does not and has never respected the fact that Blizzard makes and owns StarCraft. So they don't want Blizzard involved in any way. So instead of working with Blizzard, they oppose them at every turn.
If you believe that KeSPA had nothing to do with the cancellation of the GOM Classic, you're fooling yourself. It was a non-KeSPA-sanctioned tournament, one that got Blizzard's personal approval/money, and it was growing in popularity. So KeSPA killed it.
KeSPA declared war first. Blizzard was willing to talk, but KeSPA didn't want that. They didn't want to acknowledge Blizzard's right, and now they're paying the price for it.
There's no prove to all the word that you spoke you are only assuming which party shed first blood and as long as they are no sources to back it up you are merely talking empty talks .
Blizzard did try to partner with KeSPA first, for a good long three years. Instead they got spit at until they found a better partner. As for the GOMTV Classic issue again, I don't know if it's 100% true but heres a GOM employee, the very Junkka whom I thank for keeping in touch with the community, stating his stance on what happened.
Ok now I see where all the misunderstanding is coming from.
Gretech is GOMTV. GOM stands for Gretech Online Media. We tried to contribute by making a tournament called GOMTV Classic(and it was first tournament anyone in Korea tried to broadcast to the rest of the world) but KESPA comes inand says we do not have the right to make tournaments when they don;t even pay copyright to Blizzard. They threaten all pro players that they will lose their license i they play in GOM Classic and manages to shut down GOM classic. Now we run GSL which we also send out English broadcast. And you say we have contriubted nothing? well maybe we would have done more if KESPA really did care about esports.
I can give credit to OGN and MBC but not Kespa. KESPA is an organization made of representives from sponsors not gaming fans. The esports todays exists because of the players and fans who support it. All Kespa has been doing is abuse their power to earn money. They forced OGN and MBC to pay 1500million KRW to broacast SC. Now they still won't pay Blizzard its copyright and offers 300 million to have all the right to SC tournaments and broadcasting. No wonder most Korean SC fans including myself hate KESPA.
I was absolutely outraged when I read the article about what Kespa did to NaDa after he joined SC2. NaDa probably contributed to esports 1000times more than Kespa and that's how they treat him.
I'm not saying Gretech is right and Kespa is wrong because I work for GOM. There is no right and wrong in reality. But I'd rather support GOM which tries to care for global fans even though it's small and underfunded rather than Kespa which doesn't give a damn about global fans cuz most sponsors don't see any merit in it. I really wish situation hadn't come to this, causing disturbance to fans all over the world, but there seems little choice left now.
Sadly, either not many people seemed to believe it as KeSPA reports say the opposite or they just missed the post, but it's a source, and I certainly believe him.
On November 14 2010 21:38 IntoTheEmo wrote: Wow, every post in this thread keeps making bigger and bigger assumptions of evil stuff that KeSPA has done. And most of this has been discussed before, are people too busy watching GSL to follow what has been said around the forums?
Accusing KeSPA of shutting down GOM classic when they let their players play for 4 seasons, really....
Well it looks like you haven't followed it either, there were 3 seasons not 4, unless you count the invitational(which clearly wasn't a season). And it's been said before that all 7 teams backed off after GOM didn't pay kespa for broadcasting reasons. When lilsusie asked about season 4 she was told that Blizzard was negotiating with Kespa about it, implying that Kespa was somehow involved with the processes and not just the teams deciding their players couldn't manage the busy schedules.
Fraidnot, what you say contradicts what that Gomtv guy is saying.
Fact is Kespa didn't ban Gomtv from using their players for several seasons/tournaments. Only some of the teams did. I actually remember that there was news that Kespa would actually authorize the league officially. Then Blizzard suddenly appeared all over Gomtv's league and of course that triggered a reaction. I don't know if at that point the teams that still participated also pulled all by themselves or if they were forced by Blizzard. Fact is no player was ever punished from playing in a Gomtv league.
Why should Blizzard be allowed to use Gom get to undermine Kespa with expensive Kespa-funded players?
On November 14 2010 21:38 IntoTheEmo wrote: Wow, every post in this thread keeps making bigger and bigger assumptions of evil stuff that KeSPA has done. And most of this has been discussed before, are people too busy watching GSL to follow what has been said around the forums?
Accusing KeSPA of shutting down GOM classic when they let their players play for 4 seasons, really....
Well it looks like you haven't followed it either, there were 3 seasons not 4, unless you count the invitational(which clearly wasn't a season). And it's been said before that all 7 teams backed off after GOM didn't pay kespa for broadcasting reasons. When lilsusie asked about season 4 she was told that Blizzard was negotiating with Kespa about it, implying that Kespa was somehow involved with the processes and not just the teams deciding their players couldn't manage the busy schedules.
Yeah I counted GSI in it. Seemed pretty big of an event to me. Anyway I don't see anything of the sort that you are implying, just that lilsusie stated that KeSPA was involved in the negotiations (why wouldn't they be, they represent BW esports and the players). If KeSPA didn't like GOM in the first place, they would not have allowed the players to play at all - also in Blizzcon and WCG amongst other things.
Wow, to the OP, you provided some very interesting information. I had no idea how many underhanded things KeSPA has tried. KeSPA and the people that think they are in the right should be ashamed, now that so much is known about the wrong they've attempt to do.
The shutting down of GOM classic, the wiping of Nada's record, the hiring of fake journalist, the banning of programmers from playing SC2 are inexcusable.
It seems Blizzard went out of their way to help the players and seek the input of Koreans. They unveiled the game in Korea and over the development process was always seeking feedback from professional players. The Blizzard CEO even made a special trip to Korea to talk with anyone in hopes of resolving the situation. KeSPA responded by warning people to not go to Mike Morhaime hotel room, presumably through threats.
KeSPA attempts to control who can be professional gamers, and then threatens and intimidates these people by preventing them from speaking up or showing interest in other games or by wiping records. Oh and don't forget they biggest game fixing scandal of all time happened with their players under their watch.
Blizzard helps support open tournaments, like the GSL, where anyone can show up and play, and if they're good enough and work their way through qualifiers they can end up on TV or on an professionally casted Internet stream.
At this point any KeSPA supporters still left should feel ashamed.
I've been around TL since 2003, and I remember there being nothing but hate for KeSPA during those past 7 years up until just recently. There was always minimal support for KeSPA in the foreign community as far as I could tell, and I don't see what has happened in the past year that could have changed that.
On September 14 2009 17:40 SpiritWolf wrote: The blacklisting of gom really doesn't surprise me. Gom is supported by blizzard. Kespa doesn't want blizzard to encroach on their market so they are discouraging players from doing gom. When SC2 comes out kespa will get owned and back down or gom will become the main source for sc2.
GOM decided not to cooperate with Kepsa before Blizzard even got involved from what I'm aware. Blizzard supported GOM in season 3, after a lot of teams decided not to participate.
True, but before gom wasnt large enough to be a real threat. With blizzards backing and starcraft 2 on the horizon gom has the potential to expand massively. kespa is putting alot of pressure on teams to not compete in gom in order to kill it before it can hurt their korean esports monopoly.
On September 14 2009 18:33 Alethios wrote: Fuck KeSPA. I haven't heard anything positive about this idiots in so long. Seems every time I look they're disqualifying another gamer for coughing too loudly.
I don't care whether or not they're fighting to keep themselves relevant or not. Companies have the right to increase their profit margins by dubious practices, and we have the right not to buy their products. Seriously, fuck them.
Blizzard should release a SC patch specifically aimed to fuck these wankers.
On September 14 2009 18:38 fearus wrote: Blizzard should flex its legal muscele against Kespa.
On September 14 2009 18:29 ZeitgeistMovie wrote: Look, no one is in the "wrong" here. All parties are fighting for their interests. I wish people would stop being ignorant fools and stop blaming KeSPA. Every esthablishment will fight to keep themselves relevant. Nothing one is to blame here, maybe except the system because this is how the system works. This is just business/politics, and innocent people will suffer along the way. That's just the reality of it all. No one has all the information on the matter so picking sides is just jumping the gun and really useless. Just see how things play out and hope Esports survive in Korea, and grow everywhere else.
The reason why many people hate KeSPA is that, beyond being just another greedy corporation, it was supposed to be promoting korean e-sports in general, and doing stuff like helping out new leagues, defending players' rights etc - but in reality KeSPA is doing the exact opposite.
These quotes might be out if context, but still this seemed to be the general opinion about KeSPA a little over a year ago. While this may not be relevant to the current discussion, I'm just wondering if people could point out what's changed about KeSPA now. It' still the same organization that people used to hate. Have people forgotten all their their past "deeds"? Before SC2, KeSPA was the devil, has anything happened to change that? Sure, some might not like Blizzard, but I don't so how KeSPA was ever any better. I'm not trying to argue that KeSPA is good or bad, I'm just curious as to WHY people's opinion have swung.
If Blizzard wasn't trying as hard as possible to piss off their fans with the money-grubbing shenanigans they've been pulling with the release of SC2, it would be hard to imagine anyone rooting for Kespa. But as it is, many people see Kespa as the lesser of 2 evils.
Imagine that Blizzard decided to pursue their current line of action immediately after the cancellation of GOMTV Classic 3, I'm sure TL would be supporting Blizzard almost unanimously. But instead, their legal moves against Kespa now looks like an attempt to kill SC:BW.
wow i really understand now very well whats the deal with kespa and blizzard, this post explain in fewpoints something i could not get right by my me bc my english s...
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
Really? I was under the impression that they were an extremely megalomaniac people and fiercely proud of themselves esp. in relation to SC... Maybe you know more than I do about this... though I seriously doubt the veracity of your statements.
On November 14 2010 14:54 CanucksJC wrote: Right now, on every article on fomos, there's flame wars going on between scbw fans and sc2 fans.
Also, it's the nature of Koreans. We're known to be furious keyboard warriors and like to participate in discussions that may lead to people killing each other or themselves. We love to rip on others that we don't agree with. Obviously, scbw fans are not happy with the release of sc2. Their popular opinion is that sc2 will die and all the success is so far is credited to SlayerSBoxeR and NaDa, while the sc2 fans like to make fun of scbw by calling them illegal gamers. Pretty funny to observe actually.
Pretty sad and extremely counter-productive imo. Also ANYONE who cuts Nada is EVIL to me. Am really surprised that they wud go against one of their most manner players without whom BW would be a pale ghost of what it is. To me atleast. Nada got me and my friends interested in the professional BW scene and I cant see any reason to support Kespa after this. This is the straw that breaks the camels back for me. I'm officially not going to follow Proleague and MSL this year as a small sign of protest. P.S: I know Kespa doesn't care what I do. So dont reply and tell me something I already know thanks. P.P.S:I'll prob still follow the battle-reports..Heh..
On November 14 2010 15:08 keV. wrote: I'm glad someone posted this, it will give new users who don't know what the hell they are talking about some context, on both sides.
Personally I've always been 100 percent behind gom/blizz since KeSPA fucked up the GOM classic.
Actually I found this to be a pretty one-sided recap of KeSPA's dealings, which is pretty accurate when you get rid of the author's personal bias. There is a lot of over exaggeration as well. Karma is definitely a bitch.
This thread is definitely in the wrong section though.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
In football (soccer) there are 8 people who says what may and what may not be done by fifa uefa etc. 4 of those people are from schotland due to the fact that they created football. a majority of those 8 people have to agree on every rule change and great tournament etc. So the creators of football are in a way still the owners of the game.
I don't believe Blizzard is trying to kill off BW. I believe that Blizzard is trying to secure the future of the SC2 franchise going forward. There is not a lot of money changing hands (corporately speaking) in esports IP licensing. There is, however, a lot of future revenue forcasting, and "final say" going on, and who has it.
If kespa can successfuly take total control of BW in Korea, what's to say they won't take control of SC2 as well? Since Blizzard doesn't make much money from battle.net as a continuous revenue stream, the only money they make will be from expansions. If kespa can derail the SC2 scene, or marginalize it, in Korea, that makes a big, big difference in the Blizzard's income statement for the future. Not only that, but Blizz should have the final say in a lot of decisions that have to do with broadcasting any of their games. That in itself is a moral rule. Like not exploit teenagers so old men in suits can live lavishly in a "not for profit" wrapper.
Does anyone else see the raw emotion of the players in the GSL? As a spectator, it trumps by far anything i've ever seen in proleague. In every round you have jubilation of winning and the sting of loss evident on screen without even understanding Korean. I believe this is because the players can really be who they are, and not puppets of a old boy's corporation.
Blizzard may not always look smart, but I do believe they have the global player base's best interests at heart.
Another note to why Kespa will fail eventually is their business model. They basically rely on raping MBC and OGN and sponsorships without creating hardly any recurring revenue. It was said basically in another milkis article that the sponsorships don't get a lot of patronage from progaming fans anyhow.
The model of GSL and MLG, although not perfect, creates a much more sustainable income for executives to look at and say, "yes this is working, let's expand it." The kespa officials are either too short sighted, stubborn, or ignorant to realize the greatest source of revenue is a global viewer base, who now as young professional adults can afford to sub monthly events.
If Blizzard or Gomtv wants to really stick it to Kespa, they'll form a players union. When there are certain guaranteed living conditions/rules in place, along with these outrageous prize pools, and the possibility of a much longer career, it would take an intensly pro BW die hard to stick to the kespa model then, regardless of how fewer apm(lol) SC2 takes.
Does anyone else see the raw emotion of the players in the GSL? As a spectator, it trumps by far anything i've ever seen in proleague. In every round you have jubilation of winning and the sting of loss evident on screen without even understanding Korean. I believe this is because the players can really be who they are, and not puppets of a old boy's corporation.
You are a lier today Leta und Flash thumbs down was pretty funny. Stork Jaedong finals, while Jaedong loosing he has this baby face no expression of emotions? lol There are tons of Stories in the proleague where Player express their emotion. Seriesly dont write retarded stuff.
P.S: I know Kespa doesn't care what I do. So dont reply and tell me something I already know thanks.
Well it is dumb if you have fun to watch Proleague. I dont really know what you want accomplish with that, you neither harm Kespa with or help your beloved Nada.
wow, very enlightening post. I always hated Kespa, but even for them this makes them evil.
I didn't know all the details about Kespa, so I always tried to stay neutral in this conflict, but now I'm starting to think that Kespa is the bad guy here, since they are only interested in profits and yet they claim to be a "non-profit" organization.
I've been against KeSPA since they killed GOM. I'd imagine that Blizzard was pretty annoyed when KeSPA spits in their face as soon as they started to support Brood War in Korea. I'd imagine that if KeSPA just let it be, Blizzard would have been more open to negotiations, but I'm happy with the way it turned out, cause GOM is much more foriegner-friendly.
On November 15 2010 00:07 AyJay wrote: And then there is question why KeSPA should have all rights to Blizzard games.
It doesn't. It just has the rights to the players. How the hell does Kespa claim to have the rights to Blizzard games?
Where have you been all this time? KeSPA says that Starcraft became so popular so that means it's public property not Blizzards and since they own all rights to their players they think BW belongs to them including broadcasting rights.
God Tl netizens is a funny thing, but I guess this is the sc2 forum after all...
a Korean netizen, first of all, korean netizens have reputation for being OBLIVIOUS and posting alot of hate, really fast (see Sangho retirement from sc bw...)
Second of all, there is no such thing as black and white in this case, why? Because every side has each side of the story, jeesus...
I don't keep up with the BW scene much anymore, so can someone catch me up? So far what I've garnered is
1) Kespa is dying 2) MBC/OGN/Etc. are going to Gretech for approval now, not Kespa 3) Kespa is holding players hostage from SC2 or Blizzard and forcing them to play BW
Kespa is wrong because they can negotiate a good deal for the players? So confused. Blizzard supporters have it so backwards.
Kespa never claims people with their own players need their rights to broadcast SC BW. Kespa only claims they don't need Blizzard's permission. They claim they only need to pay the standard royalties and want to go into a deal where not only the IP rights of Blizzard and OGN/MBC are protected, but also that of the players/teams/kespa themselves.
On November 15 2010 01:02 Iplaythings wrote: God Tl netizens is a funny thing, but I guess this is the sc2 forum after all...
a Korean netizen, first of all, korean netizens have reputation for being OBLIVIOUS and posting alot of hate, really fast (see Sangho retirement from sc bw...)
Second of all, there is no such thing as black and white in this case, why? Because every side has each side of the story, jeesus...
Right, and the enlightened danish netizens surely know more about the subject. Furthermore, having such reputation, assuming that's even the case, doesn't mean much as it doesn't mean the reputation reflects reality.
I like the fan's points. I'm not a big fan of everything Blizzard's been doing in this situation, but they've made attempts to diffuse the situation before it became a big mess and KeSPA refused to get along. Between the two organizations I feel Blizzard is a lesser evil.
On November 15 2010 01:03 Gonodactylus wrote: Kespa is wrong because they can negotiate a good deal for the players? So confused. Blizzard supporters have it so backwards.
Kespa never claims people with their own players need their rights to broadcast SC BW. Kespa only claims they don't need Blizzard's permission. They claim they only need to pay the standard royalties and want to go into a deal where not only the IP rights of Blizzard and OGN/MBC are protected, but also that of the players/teams/kespa themselves.
Once again this Is why they are wrong, they do need blizzards permission. The players are irrelevant to this. Yes the players should be treated well and everything but it is irrelevant to Blizzard owning Starcraft.It is a fact that you cannot get past.
Maybe you would have a point in a world where there had to be a professional starcraft bw/2 scene but there doesn't have to be.
That's the big issue. Kespa owns the players because they invest and 'create' them. It costs a huge amount of money. If Blizzard owns the players for free then that's terrible for the players. You say the players should be 'treated well and all' but you want them to be slaves of Blizzard's marketing engine. At least with Kespa/the teams players get an actual deal. Blizzard is a greedy for-profit company with shareholders that expect big dividend. Kespa is non-profit and fighting for it's lives, playing dirty.
So wait, you are saying you rather have amateur esports where Blizzard can abuse it than actual esports Blizzard can't abuse.
Let's not forget that Blizzard by far by far made the most money off of SC BW esports. Blizzard isn't going to make anymore money off of SC BW esports with SC2 out. And now they do this. Remember them clapping happily in the audience a long time ago?
Everyone still supporting Blizzard should be deeply deeply ashamed.
People should listen to all SuperDanialMan's podcasts. He did the most for foreigners in Korea then everyone ever did. And he knows all people involved personally.
Blizzard is throwing huge money at Gomtv who are running league in Korea. Blizzard could just have handed it to OGN/MBC/Kespa and it would have been better and bigger. Then Blizzard could have dumped the money to make the same league as GSL they have right now in Europe and NA. That would have been huge. But they don't. Blizzard thinks esports in NA and EU aren't profitable. That's why they throw all their money at Gomtv and destroying Kespa.
What we want is completely irrelevant. Also, you are overestimating how much blizzard would make if sc2 really took off in Korea as it would still be a drop in a bucket compared to their WoW earnings. Most SC1/BW copies weren't even sold at full price.
Kespa is "non-profit" in name only as the companies behind are very much for profit.
On November 15 2010 01:25 Gonodactylus wrote: That's the big issue. Kespa owns the players because they invest and 'create' them.
No.
It costs a huge amount of money. If Blizzard owns the players for free then that's terrible for the players. You say the players should be 'treated well and all' but you want them to be slaves of Blizzard's marketing engine. At least with Kespa/the teams players get an actual deal.
Blizzard doesn't claim to own the players, but it does own the game.
[quote[So wait, you are saying you rather have amateur esports where Blizzard can abuse it than actual esports Blizzard can't abuse.[/quote] What is Blizzard abusing?
Let's not forget that Blizzard by far by far made the most money off of SC BW esports. Blizzard isn't going to make anymore money off of SC BW esports with SC2 out. And now they do this. Remember them clapping happily in the audience a long time ago?
What? Companies make money? Blizzard didn't make SC just out of the goodness of its heart?
Things have changed. When Blizzard made SCBW, they would never have thought it would have become some sort of sport. Now they know better and they want to make sure they retain control over their property, which it is.
Blizzard doesn't claim to own the players, but it does own the game.
They don't own the players as humans but they do as esports players. Everything they create it theirs. That's why they attack Kespa because Kespa claims players have IP rights.
What is Blizzard abusing?
Esports.
What? Companies make money? Blizzard didn't make SC just out of the goodness of its heart?
We aren't talking about the game. We are talking about esports. Blizzard didn't make esports. Blizzard benefited huge out of what third parties did for them. And now they are suing the exact same people.
Here's what SDM is saying: "Gomtv is a major fuckup." and "I can't even host SC2 tournaments in my PC bang because no one will show up. SC2 is not a popular game."
Go to the SDM thread for more info.
SDM also agrees lack of professionalism is the cause of the Werra scandal. Have seen it him repeat several times. It's Blizzard's fault SC2 in Korea lacks professionalism. People here say it's Kespa paid for propaganda.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
We aren't talking about the game. We are talking about esports. Blizzard didn't make esports. Blizzard benefited huge out of what third parties did for them. And now they are suing the exact same people.
Tough. To think that this whole incident might even force everyone to acknowledge that SC has an international community and isn't limited to one place. Blizzard obviously has a lot of interest in esports, and I think they are a lot more reasonable than people give them credit for.
Does anyone else see the raw emotion of the players in the GSL? As a spectator, it trumps by far anything i've ever seen in proleague. In every round you have jubilation of winning and the sting of loss evident on screen without even understanding Korean. I believe this is because the players can really be who they are, and not puppets of a old boy's corporation.
This is complete and utter garbage. It's so sad to read ignorant statements like this on teamliquid.net of all places. There have been so many amazing moments in the history of the proleague and we have people like this just dismissing it all because of their bias.
On November 15 2010 01:37 Gonodactylus wrote: What has Blizzard done for esports outside of Gom?
MLG, IEM, ESL?
Proof? Why do they have such a small prize pool if Blizzard threw so much money at them? Gomtv got like millions from Blizzard, to destroy Kespa/OGN/MBC. But MLG, IEM, ESL get almost nothing?
I bet they fund their entire project themselves and I don't get the feeling they particularly like Blizzard either. For example, still not giving them LAN.
Kepsa/OGN/MBC/the teams could have taken care of themselves. Blizzard chased out huge sponsorships by attacking Blizzard, who are the sponsors. So Blizzard had to pay the money themselves which will only continue as long as it is good marketing for SC2 game sales.
Blizzard could have let Korea take care of itself and help out MLG, IEM, ESL, etc. Blizzard can help them get huge sponsors. I watched MLG and I saw the same ads over and over.
Also, what companies are EG, Root gaming and Fanatic? I have no idea what products these companies maken.
It's obviously nonsense especially considering Boxer after beating Nada was just about the most emotional out of all the players. Still, there's some truth into it as new, more inexperienced players will generally be more emotional/unrestrained than many year veterans.
On November 15 2010 01:25 Gonodactylus wrote: That's the big issue. Kespa owns the players because they invest and 'create' them. It costs a huge amount of money. If Blizzard owns the players for free then that's terrible for the players. You say the players should be 'treated well and all' but you want them to be slaves of Blizzard's marketing engine. At least with Kespa/the teams players get an actual deal. Blizzard is a greedy for-profit company with shareholders that expect big dividend. Kespa is non-profit and fighting for it's lives, playing dirty.
So wait, you are saying you rather have amateur esports where Blizzard can abuse it than actual esports Blizzard can't abuse.
Let's not forget that Blizzard by far by far made the most money off of SC BW esports. Blizzard isn't going to make anymore money off of SC BW esports with SC2 out. And now they do this. Remember them clapping happily in the audience a long time ago?
Everyone still supporting Blizzard should be deeply deeply ashamed.
People should listen to all SuperDanialMan's podcasts. He did the most for foreigners in Korea then everyone ever did. And he knows all people involved personally.
I am not saying what I would rather have I am just saying what it is. What I want has no bearing on this at all.
It is irrelevant that Kespa spends money on players. It is irrelevant how blizzard would treat the players, It is irrelevant that Kespa is non profit and Blizzard is greedy. It is irrelevant that blizzard could abuse esports. It is irrelevant that Blizzard made money off BW esports. It is irrelevant that Blizzard isn't going to make more money off BW with starcraft 2 out. If Blizzard said clear as day we want BW dead it would be irrelevant. None of this has anything to do with Blizzard owning starcraft. It is the only thing that matters.
It has nothing to do with me supporting Blizzard or Kespa. It is just how things are. Blizzard or Kespa being morally right or wrong is once again Irrelevant. I really couldn't care if kespa found a way to screw blizzard out of some money nor if Blizzard wins, all I am saying Is blizzard owns starcraft, everything esle is irrelevant.
No matter what your opinion is on the subject. Starcraft is owned by blizzard and they can do whatever they want with it, AND they can stop you from doing almost anything with it. But they did spend millions of dollars and thousands of hours working hard to create a suite of games that are loved by so many people around the world.
The only people getting shafted here are the players stuck with Kespa and the people who are buying into the propaganda.
I'm sure they'll work an agreement out eventually that is beneficial (for the corporations) and makes little to no difference for the players.
and i agree with the soccerball comparision, because.. Blizzard has moved from selling products to services.. For example.. WoW is a service not a product anymore. Starcraft is still a product.. We all paid for the game, we can use it however the hell we want.. When we buy a soccer ball they dont monitor wtf we do with it, its ours. -_-;
I think mostly everyone was blaming blizzard/gretech and on KeSPA's side for once, but i think this will change most peoples views, but the articles they've been producing sound hillarious, except the bashing on NaDa is fucked -_-
On November 15 2010 01:37 Gonodactylus wrote: What has Blizzard done for esports outside of Gom?
Sponsor GOM classic, make Worldwide Invitationals, Blizzcon tournament stage
WWI and Blizzcon was more Kespa supporting Blizzard than the other way around. Not to mention any WWI outside Korea and Blizzcon was an absolutely terrible run event. Not to mention Blizzard charged entrance fees for that and those events surely made them net profit. And in the end they turned WWI into Blizzcon global before they just stopped with WWI altogether, which is probably because of they fight they picked with Kespa. And you say sponsor Gom classic? How is that besides Gom/outside Korea? It's exactly the same thing. A Kespa/BW killing move.
Blizzard cares so little for esports they even refuse to make good maps because good esports maps are too hard for casuals. That's their line, not mine. I think they are wrong. But even if they were right, it shows where their priorities are. For Blizzard esports is just more game sales. It will all collapse very soon, people. Don't worry. Then there will be nothing left but scorched earth and you will all wonder how it all could have happened.
On November 15 2010 01:37 Gonodactylus wrote: What has Blizzard done for esports outside of Gom?
MLG, IEM, ESL?
Proof? Why do they have such a small prize pool if Blizzard threw so much money at them? Gomtv got like millions from Blizzard, to destroy Kespa/OGN/MBC. But MLG, IEM, ESL get almost nothing?
I bet they fund their entire project themselves and I don't get the feeling they particularly like Blizzard either. For example, still not giving them LAN.
Probably because they don't have an opposing organization trying to prevent it from getting off the ground either? Also might be a cultural/business thing. I don't know as there are no details about the negotiations as far as I know.
As for the LAN thing, I'll go off on a wild guess from my uniformed self with no proof or information to back it up.
Blizzard is afraid that if a LAN version got out, an organization like KESPA will take it and go "LAWLZ ESport public domain QQ Blizzard". With the current setup, no one can do that without Blizzard just going "LAWLZ banned bitches".
They have said that a "tournament server" is in the works so who knows what the hell that means.
okay some people here still doesnt seem to get why blizzard didnt put the LAN in sc2... it was not because they fear kespa or anything like that.... its because of the GIANT level of piracy that exists nowadays making that if they released it whit lan 20 mins after the release the game would be out for free in 101 sites all over the globe making blizzard lose a LOT of money cause... why would you buy a game that you can play for free?.
thats why we have no lan... blame today`s culture of it... not blizzard.
Speaking of lan, how come starcraft 2 still isn't hacked for lan? While I have no need for a lan patch, I sure as heck expected there to be one out like a week after game release. Sure there are still talks of lan emulator but I don't see anything fruitful as of yet.
On November 14 2010 22:07 Gonodactylus wrote: Fraidnot, what you say contradicts what that Gomtv guy is saying.
Fact is Kespa didn't ban Gomtv from using their players for several seasons/tournaments. Only some of the teams did. I actually remember that there was news that Kespa would actually authorize the league officially. Then Blizzard suddenly appeared all over Gomtv's league and of course that triggered a reaction. I don't know if at that point the teams that still participated also pulled all by themselves or if they were forced by Blizzard. Fact is no player was ever punished from playing in a Gomtv league.
Why should Blizzard be allowed to use Gom get to undermine Kespa with expensive Kespa-funded players?
What? I'm seriously having a hard time understanding the point of view you're coming from, yes kespa sanctioned the second season, and at that time players from mbc, ogn and estro weren't playing because they had their own tournaments. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=79157 At this point season 3 comes and Blizzard helps sponsor the tournament. Then season 4 comes and this event which was sanctioned by kespa for season 2 suddenly has no players. Why? because Gom didn't pay kespa for broadcasting rights, rights which Kespa had no legal claim to. I don't know where you get the idea that Blizzard would want to sponsor a tournament and then force teams to pull their players from that tourney.
Of course no player was ever punished from playing in Gomtv, it's not like any of the players played against Kespa's wishes. Kespa doesn't own players, they don't own teams either, the companies that make up Kespa sponsor the teams. So let me ask what gives Kespa the right to pressure players into not playing in tournaments where they get the opportunity to play for twice the prize pool of Kespa sanctioned tourneys?
KeSPA claimed the rights to Proleague, not Starcraft. Big difference.
Does not change the fact that Blizzard is entitled to something, but based on the amount of work each entity put in, I'd say public advertisement in various tournaments should be enough for Blizzard, while monetary payment should go to KeSPA for running Proleague.
On November 15 2010 02:04 ddrddrddrddr wrote: Speaking of lan, how come starcraft 2 still isn't hacked for lan? While I have no need for a lan patch, I sure as heck expected there to be one out like a week after game release. Sure there are still talks of lan emulator but I don't see anything fruitful as of yet.
the reason for there not being lan emulators yet is that blizzard actually got into the move (like 2 weeks before the beta finished) and hunted the hacking teams that where triying to get the lan working and then treathened them that if they didnt stopped they will go to court wich well... none of them really wanted to... so the lan projects kinda died right there.
pd: there`s still some rumours of some people that haves a working emulator of battlenet... sadly acording to the rumours is way too unstable and the ladder barely works.
Frankly I don't see how people can argue that blizzard doesn't own the rights to SC when SC is built on blizzard's proprietary code. If nothing else, broadcasting copyrighted material (Starcraft computer generated models) like that should be illegal.
On November 15 2010 01:37 Gonodactylus wrote: What has Blizzard done for esports outside of Gom?
MLG, IEM, ESL?
Proof? Why do they have such a small prize pool if Blizzard threw so much money at them? Gomtv got like millions from Blizzard, to destroy Kespa/OGN/MBC. But MLG, IEM, ESL get almost nothing?
I bet they fund their entire project themselves and I don't get the feeling they particularly like Blizzard either. For example, still not giving them LAN.
Kepsa/OGN/MBC/the teams could have taken care of themselves. Blizzard chased out huge sponsorships by attacking Blizzard, who are the sponsors. So Blizzard had to pay the money themselves which will only continue as long as it is good marketing for SC2 game sales.
Blizzard could have let Korea take care of itself and help out MLG, IEM, ESL, etc. Blizzard can help them get huge sponsors. I watched MLG and I saw the same ads over and over.
Also, what companies are EG, Root gaming and Fanatic? I have no idea what products these companies maken.
Wow you're like the least informed most opinionated guy out here. EG, Root, Fanatic... they aren't companies they are teams who have sponsors like Intel.
The rest of your post is just pure conjecture and then not even very well thought out like Sony Ericsson last time I checked was a good sponsor. and god dammit you are a troll! I feel so stupid..
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
What you are saying here undermines our entire modern business contract law and business surrounding it.
If the court allows the simple argument of "TL;DR" as legal defense, then everybody could go into a contract without worrying about it being enforced. Then our entire business world would be left in ruins.
Court agrees that's retarded, so they enforce the contract even if you didnt read it, carelessness is not a defense here.
In fact, carelessness is something that totally destroys your defense.
I have various cases in common law to back up my argument, like the case of 2 law grads against Microsoft, they used the exact same argument-- TL;DR, therefore not enforceable.
What did the judge say? The freakin contract is right in front of you, clearly presented, if you don't read it and click "I AGREE" in bold letters-- hey, its your problem.
if you want to read these cases, i will link them.
Why does everybody drag it into details when it's actually quite clear if you look at the relevant things?
OGN/MBC need permission from Blizzard to broadcast Starcraft. Graphics and sound are copyrighted works that cannot be broadcasted without permission. In return for a license Blizzard can ask for anything they wish and it's up to the broadcaster whether to accept. Should Blizzard sue OGN/MBC if the negotiations don't work? Yes, or otherwise there wouldn't have been any reason to have negotiations in the first place. Also if they didn't sue, their partner Gretech would have been at a competitive disadvantage, having some limitations from their contract while their competition could just ignore all demands. You do support your business partners, do you not?
Players' IP rights blahblah
Competitive performances most likely not protected by copyright law. Source
Blizzard didn't do anything for X years
I haven't ever heard of anyone losing IP rights due to non-reinforcement, only happens in patent law. Would most likely deter Blizzard from asking for excessive compensation for damages retroactively though.
Free advertisement should be enough compensation
Morally, maybe. You don't get to tell a company "that's enough money for now" or "you have another successful project so you shouldn't look to make any more money from this one" legally. Would companies want to make ESPORTS-viable games if it means less sales than single player games without compensation from licenses?
Irrelevant argument extravaganza:
Kespa is evil. (Will buy license from Blizzard, continue being evil.)
Comparison to soccer ball/photoshop/blueberry pie.
Mr. Morhaime was rude to someone.
Starcraft 2 is too much ball vs ball 1 base all-in bullshit.
About 95% of the items in the list in this OP.
Bobby Kotick being the antichrist.
Kespa doesn't care about global ESPORTS. (The K does stand for Korean.)
pp/ㅎㅎ/a/esc. (Stupid rules happen, get complained about and fixed.)
So perhaps then, after Kespa dies out after lawsuit, then gogo GomTV Classic version 2? I still want to see sc1 flourish in korea, as it still is a very fun game to watch.
On November 15 2010 02:49 Teddyman wrote: Why does everybody drag it into details when it's actually quite clear if you look at the relevant things?
OGN/MBC need permission from Blizzard to broadcast Starcraft. Graphics and sound are copyrighted works that cannot be broadcasted without permission. In return for a license Blizzard can ask for anything they wish and it's up to the broadcaster whether to accept. Should Blizzard sue OGN/MBC if the negotiations don't work? Yes, or otherwise there wouldn't have been any reason to have negotiations in the first place. Also if they didn't sue, their partner Gretech would have been at a competitive disadvantage, having some limitations from their contract while their competition could just ignore all demands. You do support your business partners, do you not?
Players' IP rights blahblah
Competitive performances most likely not protected by copyright law. Source
Blizzard didn't do anything for X years
I haven't ever heard of anyone losing IP rights due to non-reinforcement, only happens in patent law. Would most likely deter Blizzard from asking for excessive compensation for damages retroactively though.
Free advertisement should be enough compensation
Morally, maybe. You don't get to tell a company "that's enough money for now" or "you have another successful project so you shouldn't look to make any more money from this one" legally. Would companies want to make ESPORTS-viable games if it means less sales than single player games without compensation from licenses?
Irrelevant argument extravaganza:
Kespa is evil. (Will buy license from Blizzard, continue being evil.)
Comparison to soccer ball/photoshop/blueberry pie.
Mr. Morhaime was rude to someone.
Starcraft 2 is too much ball vs ball 1 base all-in bullshit.
About 95% of the items in the list in this OP.
Bobby Kotick being the antichrist.
Kespa doesn't care about global ESPORTS. (The K does stand for Korean.)
pp/ㅎㅎ/a/esc. (Stupid rules happen, get complained about and fixed.)
Imaginary academic qualifications.
wow you said everything better in 1 post than I do in 10 posts
Moves/BOs/strategies being IP of players, EULA not applying because people don't read it, WTF... the amount of ignorance in this thread is overwhelming...
On November 15 2010 02:49 Teddyman wrote: Why does everybody drag it into details when it's actually quite clear if you look at the relevant things?
OGN/MBC need permission from Blizzard to broadcast Starcraft. Graphics and sound are copyrighted works that cannot be broadcasted without permission. In return for a license Blizzard can ask for anything they wish and it's up to the broadcaster whether to accept. Should Blizzard sue OGN/MBC if the negotiations don't work? Yes, or otherwise there wouldn't have been any reason to have negotiations in the first place. Also if they didn't sue, their partner Gretech would have been at a competitive disadvantage, having some limitations from their contract while their competition could just ignore all demands. You do support your business partners, do you not?
Players' IP rights blahblah
Competitive performances most likely not protected by copyright law. Source
Blizzard didn't do anything for X years
I haven't ever heard of anyone losing IP rights due to non-reinforcement, only happens in patent law. Would most likely deter Blizzard from asking for excessive compensation for damages retroactively though.
Free advertisement should be enough compensation
Morally, maybe. You don't get to tell a company "that's enough money for now" or "you have another successful project so you shouldn't look to make any more money from this one" legally. Would companies want to make ESPORTS-viable games if it means less sales than single player games without compensation from licenses?
Irrelevant argument extravaganza:
Kespa is evil. (Will buy license from Blizzard, continue being evil.)
Comparison to soccer ball/photoshop/blueberry pie.
Mr. Morhaime was rude to someone.
Starcraft 2 is too much ball vs ball 1 base all-in bullshit.
About 95% of the items in the list in this OP.
Bobby Kotick being the antichrist.
Kespa doesn't care about global ESPORTS. (The K does stand for Korean.)
pp/ㅎㅎ/a/esc. (Stupid rules happen, get complained about and fixed.)
So I have a quick question for everybody talking about EULA's and the like.
Even knowing that a battle.net account is required after the PURCHASE of the game from a retail store. Why, after, say, a week or two of playing, can't we resell the game to another person to play? Why is there no way to transfer the game ownership to another account?
It seems like the first sale doctrine would be very clear on this. So a EULA, stating that you could not resell the copy of the game would already be deeply flawed, as law already covers this. Not to mention case law already covers this. Specifically Timothy S. Vernor v Autodesk Inc. As the EULA is definitely not legally binding therefore, how can you say that he has agreed to a contract by clicking accept. It seems a flawed premise.
EDIT: Additionally, for the people stating that it's a licensing agreement. Because it resembles a sale, the first sale doctrine held for that case, so it seems that it could be extended to apply to Blizzard's games. Therefore, you should be able to transfer ownership of the product, for any price you chose, to another person, without Blizzard's agreement.
On November 15 2010 03:36 hinnolinn wrote: So I have a quick question for everybody talking about EULA's and the like.
Even knowing that a battle.net account is required after the PURCHASE of the game from a retail store. Why, after, say, a week or two of playing, can't we resell the game to another person to play? Why is there no way to transfer the game ownership to another account?
It seems like the first sale doctrine would be very clear on this. So a EULA, stating that you could not resell the copy of the game would already be deeply flawed, as law already covers this. Not to mention case law already covers this. Specifically Timothy S. Vernor v Autodesk Inc. As the EULA is definitely not legally binding therefore, how can you say that he has agreed to a contract by clicking accept. It seems a flawed premise.
You can resell your physical copy of the game (CD) but not your battle.net account. Blizzard even allows you to give your copy of the game for people to use their guest passes with. EULA is not legally bound at first, but Blizzard can use it against you if you go to court with them, since you hereby agreed to the terms and conditions if you installed and used it with your battle.net account.
Anyways, you can always try to ask Blizzard to remove starcraft 2 from your battle.net account, but you have to have a good reason to do so.
Vernor v Autodesk appears to have been overturned this September and it was and is far from clear the first sale doctrine even applied. Obviously I don't know much about case law in general in the US.
On November 15 2010 03:36 hinnolinn wrote: So I have a quick question for everybody talking about EULA's and the like.
Even knowing that a battle.net account is required after the PURCHASE of the game from a retail store. Why, after, say, a week or two of playing, can't we resell the game to another person to play? Why is there no way to transfer the game ownership to another account?
It seems like the first sale doctrine would be very clear on this. So a EULA, stating that you could not resell the copy of the game would already be deeply flawed, as law already covers this. Not to mention case law already covers this. Specifically Timothy S. Vernor v Autodesk Inc. As the EULA is definitely not legally binding therefore, how can you say that he has agreed to a contract by clicking accept. It seems a flawed premise.
EDIT: Additionally, for the people stating that it's a licensing agreement. Because it resembles a sale, the first sale doctrine held for that case, so it seems that it could be extended to apply to Blizzard's games. Therefore, you should be able to transfer ownership of the product, for any price you chose, to another person, without Blizzard's agreement.
Timothy S. Vernor v Autodesk Inc. was completely and fully overturned in the US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. The judges sided with Autodesk and enforced its EULA.
On November 15 2010 02:49 Teddyman wrote: Why does everybody drag it into details when it's actually quite clear if you look at the relevant things?
OGN/MBC need permission from Blizzard to broadcast Starcraft. Graphics and sound are copyrighted works that cannot be broadcasted without permission. In return for a license Blizzard can ask for anything they wish and it's up to the broadcaster whether to accept. Should Blizzard sue OGN/MBC if the negotiations don't work? Yes, or otherwise there wouldn't have been any reason to have negotiations in the first place. Also if they didn't sue, their partner Gretech would have been at a competitive disadvantage, having some limitations from their contract while their competition could just ignore all demands. You do support your business partners, do you not?
Players' IP rights blahblah
Competitive performances most likely not protected by copyright law. Source
Blizzard didn't do anything for X years
I haven't ever heard of anyone losing IP rights due to non-reinforcement, only happens in patent law. Would most likely deter Blizzard from asking for excessive compensation for damages retroactively though.
Free advertisement should be enough compensation
Morally, maybe. You don't get to tell a company "that's enough money for now" or "you have another successful project so you shouldn't look to make any more money from this one" legally. Would companies want to make ESPORTS-viable games if it means less sales than single player games without compensation from licenses?
Irrelevant argument extravaganza:
Kespa is evil. (Will buy license from Blizzard, continue being evil.)
Comparison to soccer ball/photoshop/blueberry pie.
Mr. Morhaime was rude to someone.
Starcraft 2 is too much ball vs ball 1 base all-in bullshit.
About 95% of the items in the list in this OP.
Bobby Kotick being the antichrist.
Kespa doesn't care about global ESPORTS. (The K does stand for Korean.)
pp/ㅎㅎ/a/esc. (Stupid rules happen, get complained about and fixed.)
Imaginary academic qualifications.
The only feedback is that, until the courts or laws distinctly define the issue, we can't assume that Blizzard has performance rights to Starcraft. With the Korean climate, it may actually end up being ruled in KESPA's favor.
That being said, the outcome I hope for is that Blizzard doesn't have performance rights over SCII. Not necessarily just because of KESPA, but because this impacts every tournament, ever. A game can't grow if it's being choked.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
What you are saying here undermines our entire modern business contract law and business surrounding it.
If the court allows the simple argument of "TL;DR" as legal defense, then everybody could go into a contract without worrying about it being enforced. Then our entire business world would be left in ruins.
Court agrees that's retarded, so they enforce the contract even if you didnt read it, carelessness is not a defense here.
In fact, carelessness is something that totally destroys your defense.
I have various cases in common law to back up my argument, like the case of 2 law grads against Microsoft, they used the exact same argument-- TL;DR, therefore not enforceable.
What did the judge say? The freakin contract is right in front of you, clearly presented, if you don't read it and click "I AGREE" in bold letters-- hey, its your problem.
if you want to read these cases, i will link them.
I would, actually. I was under the strong impression that Click Through EULAs have - repeatedly - been ruled as non-enforceable. Maybe district to district variations may apply?
Believe it or not, TL;DR; is a valid defense in many ways.
Okay, I admit I did not see the ruling from September of this year. I apologize for bringing that argument, though in reading through the opinion, I find myself hoping that Congress does change first sale doctrine to protect against licensing as software companies do.
But, I do have to ask whether sales of autocad are not covered by first sale because they are sold directly from autodesk and not a retailer. If so, I wonder whether a video game sold through a third party retailer such as Gamestop would then have first sale accompanied.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
What you are saying here undermines our entire modern business contract law and business surrounding it.
If the court allows the simple argument of "TL;DR" as legal defense, then everybody could go into a contract without worrying about it being enforced. Then our entire business world would be left in ruins.
Court agrees that's retarded, so they enforce the contract even if you didnt read it, carelessness is not a defense here.
In fact, carelessness is something that totally destroys your defense.
I have various cases in common law to back up my argument, like the case of 2 law grads against Microsoft, they used the exact same argument-- TL;DR, therefore not enforceable.
What did the judge say? The freakin contract is right in front of you, clearly presented, if you don't read it and click "I AGREE" in bold letters-- hey, its your problem.
if you want to read these cases, i will link them.
I would, actually. I was under the strong impression that Click Through EULAs have - repeatedly - been ruled as non-enforceable. Maybe district to district variations may apply?
Believe it or not, TL;DR; is a valid defense in many ways.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
What you are saying here undermines our entire modern business contract law and business surrounding it.
If the court allows the simple argument of "TL;DR" as legal defense, then everybody could go into a contract without worrying about it being enforced. Then our entire business world would be left in ruins.
Court agrees that's retarded, so they enforce the contract even if you didnt read it, carelessness is not a defense here.
In fact, carelessness is something that totally destroys your defense.
I have various cases in common law to back up my argument, like the case of 2 law grads against Microsoft, they used the exact same argument-- TL;DR, therefore not enforceable.
What did the judge say? The freakin contract is right in front of you, clearly presented, if you don't read it and click "I AGREE" in bold letters-- hey, its your problem.
if you want to read these cases, i will link them.
I would, actually. I was under the strong impression that Click Through EULAs have - repeatedly - been ruled as non-enforceable. Maybe district to district variations may apply?
Believe it or not, TL;DR; is a valid defense in many ways.
usually? no. sometimes they are, sometimes they're not. as far as the law is concerned there is nothing accepted as a general rule. that means they're not seen as legal contracts by any court, the evaluation of the enforceability of them comes from the circumsances of the case. it's a grey area.
usually? no. sometimes they are, sometimes they're not. as far as the law is concerned there is nothing accepted as a general rule. that means they're not seen as legal contracts by any court, the evaluation of the enforceability of them comes from the circumsances of the case. it's a grey area.
Actually in common law, courts do find EULAs to be contracts and will treat it as any other contract. Accepting or using the product via EULA will legally bind you to the contract. However, many courts do have a dislike for standard form contracts and will impose contra proferentem depending on whether how unreasonable the terms are by their interpretation. Depending on jurisdiction, the contract may not be enforced, but as a general rule, they do legally bind you to it at first.
On November 15 2010 03:23 nokz88 wrote: Moves/BOs/strategies being IP of players, EULA not applying because people don't read it, WTF... the amount of ignorance in this thread is overwhelming...
Thissssss. I can understand people wanting KeSPA to win because they are concerned with broodwar, but really there is no legal basis for KeSPA coming out on top in this.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
No, in soccer the ball, the median of play is usually obscured because it is so small on the screen, as well the company who provided the ball probably provided it because they want the brand to be seen, thus, the copyright is provided so that the soccer league can use the ball without fear of legal action, but in SC, the median of play (the game) is clear as day to any RTS fan, and not having that copyright provided can allow blizzard to take any number of steps towards making KeSPA stop airing SC, like copyright infringement, to wrap it up i have to say, i believe e-sports can be considered sports but that doesn't mean you can avoid copyrights like KeSPA is trying to do, if the soccer league used and advertised a brand of ball that they didn't have a copyright for or otherwise the producer didn't want advertised for some reason, there would be a shitstorm of legal action.
Teddy just dominated this entire thread. Summed up everything relevant and disregarded everything moronic throughout 15 pages of garbage in 3 concise paragraphs. Of course there is always corporation vs. corporation greed, and anyone who seriously things KeSPA is 'non-profit' at heart needs to get their head checked out. While I am certainly far from an avid blizzard supporter, KeSPA has very obviously been doing some seriously shady shit for a while now. On a note of personal amusement:
Rofl, you guys either A. got trolled by Gonodactylus harder than i've seen any thread get trolled in a long time, or B. Spent 10+ pages of thread arguing with someone that very clearly has a mental disability (or is so absurdly pro KeSPA/burn blizzard that he's not going to hear an inch of anyone else's argument or consider any information outside his own viable.) And yet, the information he provides, he won't site until '50 people publically apologize' Not to mention endlessly spewing nonsensical bullshit and claiming to have a PhD once he feels threatened because someone else on the thread was actually semi-educated on the subject. And then shortly thereafter indirectly admits he does not have a PhD in jack shit when other posters begin pointing out his lack of ability to even write or make points properly... much less get a doctorate. Especially funny because the person he was going back and forth with was writing coherent, logical posts, wile Gonodactylus was just repeating the same dead-end logic with more and more hostility as he went on. I was shocked that anyone even continued to respond to him past this point, I couldn't help myself but to read through the rest of the thread, way too much entertainment to pass up during a dead day at work.
For those of you who seem to actually have some legal background, is there any precedent for athletes having IP rights over their "moves," so to speak?
On November 15 2010 05:35 FrostOtter wrote: For those of you who seem to actually have some legal background, is there any precedent for athletes having IP rights over their "moves," so to speak?
No, because they do not obtain legal documentations and do not proceed to any process of copyrighting or trademarking those "moves." Just because they do those moves first or many times, does not mean they have any rights to it.
Michael Jordan and Nike has trademarked his famous jumpman logo, but players can use that certain move in a basketball game.
IF they have copyrighted and published a book about their strategies, ideas, thoughts, philosophy behind the game or possibly even game theory, they have some IP rights about it. However, including too many references to another copyright or trademark will infringe the rights of the owner of those IP rights.
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.
I'm surprised how long of history KeSPA and Blizzard had. "42. In Germany, when NaDa was invited for a show match, someone re-streamed this though a Korean Live-Streaming website (called AFRIKA), KeSPA called the managers and made him GG in the middle of a game and end the game immediately. 43. As soon as NaDa moved to the SC2 scene, KeSPA had 'Deleted' NaDa's database. Later they re-uploaded it due to the fan's anger and they replied back as a 'Glitch' in the system."
Thats insane. I remember reading somewhere isn't KeSPA a non-profit? correct me if I'm wrong.
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.
On November 14 2010 15:50 Fiel wrote: "How can Kespa consider starcraft public property? I just don't get it. It's a creation that was made with the purpose to sell and make money. That's what copyrights are for... sigh"
Because you also have to consider what KeSPA did to change public understanding of Starcraft. Their organization completely changed one of Blizzard's products that, like most other strategy games from the 90s, would have been swept under the rug by now. Their investment into the product is worth something too, isn't it? So since KeSPA has helped Blizzard indirectly, it would seem rude of Blizzard to stomp in their face about IP rights. I think it's because of KeSPA that I can still go to Wal-Mart and find Starcraft sitting on a shelf for $15. Also, remember that KeSPA is a not-for-profit organization solely dedicated to eSports. To say that KeSPA is a threat to Starcraft is totally off-base, but to say that KeSPA is a threat to international copyright is most likely accurate.
so KeSPA had something to do with the fact that i can still go find diablo 2 battle chest in wal-mart too? I mean, scbw is 12 years old, diablo 2 is younger but only by two years. maybe it just has to do with the fact that blizzard releases quality products?
if i remember correctly they played their matches on iCCup maps, and i believe that iCCup has absolutely no connection to KeSPA...
we should give the dota team IP rights over warcraft 3 because they changed the scene!
oh KeSPA is non-profit? maybe, but not their subsidiaries.
Wow thanks for this! Learned a few more interesting things, like Kespa deleting Nada's data base. Like WTF.
Also, I hate when people (or in this situation Kespa) tries to compare Starcraft to a sport. They always give unfair examples. I guess that's the purpose but I'm sure they know they are unfair comparisons.
17. KeSPA goes 'e-sports is also sports', 'do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match', 'SC is a public property and is accessible by anyone' etc bullcrap
It's pretty complex because of all the factors involved in each aspect, but I people understand. Basically, in soccer, the audience pays the stadium to watch, which goes towards the stadium's Owner/Creator. People pay to come to the venues to watch Starcraft, so ok sure Kespa should get some money in that respect, but like in soccer or any other sport that money goes towards the players too right? (correct if im wrong).
However, the stadium is tied with the ball and the rules of soccer, in order for it to be soccer. The stadium + ball + rules = Computer (may be even the game's engine) + Mouse + the programming that makes Starcraft.
Blizzard doesn't own the computers or the mice of course, but they own the game, or the rules and ideas that define soccer. Because of this anyone making money out of their copyrighted property, Kespa can't make money off of their property (since it's in their terms of service or whatever). When they buy starcraft, just like any DVD movie, they don't own the movie. They only own a copy of it. There are limits to using the DVD, for example (this may not be the real rule, but there are several like this) if you record a television show, you can only show it for educational purposes and only within X something days, by which then you must delete it. And of course you can't buy a DVD, show it at a school or something, and charge money for it.
Then again the laws in Korea may be different or may be those laws only apply to DVD. Anyways I probably did a bad job with comparisons too since I'm not a lawyer but meh xD. But anyways the bottom of it is, Blizzard's terms of service for SC1 probably give him full control of it, and because Kespa is using the game with those terms of service, they are breaking rules, perhaps not the law, but they are violating Blizzard's ToS.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
wtf is this. soccer ball does not = soccer.
This isn't starcraft players paying Blizzard to play. This is starcraft players playing Razer to use their mouses.
Soccer did not cost a company millions of dollarsand dozens of programmers to develop and millions more spent on marketing.
Any comparison between a computer game and real sporting games is just irrelevant. The electronic games industry emerged in the past 20 years, of course it'll have a different set of rules.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
Not in this situation, I don't think. That would be analogous to asking pay the keyboard/mouse/monitor manufacturers every time they touched their equipment for a game. Starcraft is the game itself, created by Blizzard, which would be more like paying the entrance fee to a football match held in a stadium.
I think a better argument would sit somewhere on the distinction and rights of contents generation.
That's what this is all about really. No one is arguing the intellectual property rights of Blizzards, they've made the game, they have the IP.
Its the contents that are generated by the game that is contested at the moment.
An example pro Kespa would be, if a programmer makes a program in visual studio, who would own the program? Microsoft or the programmer? In this example, it would obviously be the programmer but this is an established case with a very defined role/contract between the two party.
Gaming and gaming contents are not so simple because the industry is so young, the established contracts and roles are not clearly defined and I personally feel that it is not Blizzard's role to manage E-sports unless they have made efforts to establish a division of Blizzard E-sport or something.
Ultimately Kespa would have to back down in one way or another, Blizzard have already made arrangment in regards to EULA and partnerships and holds all the cards. An argument can be made for SCBW favouring Kespa but not SCII.
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.
Awesome translation! TBH when I first got into SC I never though of KeSPA as that bad but damn this article and alot of recentish events really makes me think KeSPA's preettty bad...
On November 15 2010 08:17 TheGreatHegemon wrote: Starcraft is nothing but a massive set of rules. Anything processed/displayed on a computer is merely being run through the rules/instructions.
That's right, you can create a new game with the exact same rules.
Be sure not to call it StarCraft (registered trademark) though, and do not use any assets (graphics, sounds) from SC either (copyrighted material). You should also watch out for any obviously similar software algorithms (might be patented).
Again : (using Football, or Soccer to you Americans, as the analogy - because KeSPA uses it)
Football ==== computer hardware Stadium ==== battle.net FIFA / UEFA / National Associations === Blizzard
Now because Blizzard is the ruling organ and intellectual property (IP) owners of which everyone has to comply to and Blizzard ALSO owns the stadium on which the game is played, it is pretty safe to say that KeSPA has no legal case at all.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
Which is why all you see when you go to Korea is BMW's... LOL
Well, even someone semi-educated on legal matters know, legally speaking KeSPA has no case here.
Period.
With that being said, judges are people, they have views, what a Korean court would do is unknown to me since I have no idea what Koreans laws are like(Hell, Chinese laws dont even have the idea of trespass). And the case would be heard in Korea, so no one knows what's the court's position, are they sympathetic to KeSPA? Or are they strong on IP rights?
However, I do suspect the court would rule in favor of Blizz, since it is so clear that they have the IP rights and KeSPA has none whatsoever. Yet win or not, the case is going to take a long time.
What the fans should be worried about more is whether if Blizz asks for an injunction. Which is to stop the occurring events-- OSL/MSL. Basicly the court will step in and stop them from happening, and they will have to stop or it will be a criminal offence.
I think it's highly unlikely though, I mean they might get it if they ask for it(but then again, its in Korea and its hard to get an injunction in general), even if they CAN get it, I don't see a benefit from them, because that would be LITERALLY putting an end to the BW pro scene, and likely would prevent any further possibilities to do business with these already established casters.
And of course, they will get a whole bunch of angry fans because they dont get to watch flash and Jaedong play. That's a PR thing.
If they still have any sense in them, they wouldn't do it.
And yes, I'm on blizzard's side. Because IP rights should be protected, it's what ensures the reward for creativity in our society.
You make something great, you get compensated, maybe even overcompensated.
On November 15 2010 09:05 Sozeles wrote: GET YOUR ANALOGIES RIGHT!!!
Again : (using Football, or Soccer to you Americans, as the analogy - because KeSPA uses it)
Football ==== computer hardware Stadium ==== battle.net FIFA / UEFA / National Associations === Blizzard
Now because Blizzard is the ruling organ and intellectual property (IP) owners of which everyone has to comply to and Blizzard ALSO owns the stadium on which the game is played, it is pretty safe to say that KeSPA has no legal case at all.
Please. Understand. Please.
Football = Starcraft Stadium = Broadcasting Station Studios (Professional BW games are played over LAN, not Battle.net) FIFA = KeSPA (They're the ones that organize the leagues. Not Blizzard.)
Blizzard has absolutely nothing to do with the stadiums or studios in which these games are being played nor do they have anything to do with organizing the leagues or governing them. The only thing they are related to is the product itself that's being used for the leagues organized by KeSPA.
As many will argue, a ball and a video game are a bit different in the fact that the video game has voice acting and art, which they would say is intellectual property, but the design of a ball itself and the logos on it is intellectual property and the product of research as well. Besides, what KeSPA is selling is not the broadcast rights to the game, but rather, the broadcast rights to their teams and players. Just because you get permission from Spalding to use their ball and logo in a commercial doesn't mean you get to use a clip of Lebron James.
Blizzard has no rights to the actual gameplay of the players, which is their own intellectual property and the property of KeSPA through their contracts. The trouble is that they're claiming that they do and should, which makes no sense at all. The only people Blizzard can go after (and indeed the only ones they wisely chose to) are the broadcasting companies for this reason because they're the only ones potentially in the wrong. Blizzard can't do anything about KeSPA itself except to try to shut them down by making it unprofitable for the broadcasting companies to broadcast Brood War leagues.
I'm quite sure that everyone here agrees that Kespa has done more for Esports than Blizzard. But they did it the wrong way and are a detriment for Esports in the future. They don't care about the players, not one bit. If they cared about Esports, why would they not allow the players to play SC2? If they cared about Esports, why would they **** Gom tv in the ass. If they cared about Esports, why would they give Zero support to any other type of Esport?
I think this thread shud be spotlighted. And I think this should be in the BW section. I also think Gonodactylus has had a troll-ball with noone stopping his unsupported and vigorous attempts to defame a company that gives us the games we love.
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.
On November 15 2010 09:05 Sozeles wrote: GET YOUR ANALOGIES RIGHT!!!
Again : (using Football, or Soccer to you Americans, as the analogy - because KeSPA uses it)
Football ==== computer hardware Stadium ==== battle.net FIFA / UEFA / National Associations === Blizzard
Now because Blizzard is the ruling organ and intellectual property (IP) owners of which everyone has to comply to and Blizzard ALSO owns the stadium on which the game is played, it is pretty safe to say that KeSPA has no legal case at all.
Please. Understand. Please.
Football = Starcraft Stadium = Broadcasting Station Studios (Professional BW games are played over LAN, not Battle.net) FIFA = KeSPA (They're the ones that organize the leagues. Not Blizzard.)
Blizzard has absolutely nothing to do with the stadiums or studios in which these games are being played nor do they have anything to do with organizing the leagues or governing them. The only thing they are related to is the product itself that's being used for the leagues organized by KeSPA.
As many will argue, a ball and a video game are a bit different in the fact that the video game has voice acting and art, which they would say is intellectual property, but the design of a ball itself and the logos on it is intellectual property and the product of research as well. Besides, what KeSPA is selling is not the broadcast rights to the game, but rather, the broadcast rights to their teams and players. Just because you get permission from Spalding to use their ball and logo in a commercial doesn't mean you get to use a clip of Lebron James.
Blizzard has no rights to the actual gameplay of the players, which is their own intellectual property and the property of KeSPA through their contracts. The trouble is that they're claiming that they do and should, which makes no sense at all. The only people Blizzard can go after (and indeed the only ones they wisely chose to) are the broadcasting companies for this reason because they're the only ones potentially in the wrong. Blizzard can't do anything about KeSPA itself except to try to shut them down by making it unprofitable for the broadcasting companies to broadcast Brood War leagues.
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?
On November 15 2010 09:05 Sozeles wrote: GET YOUR ANALOGIES RIGHT!!!
Again : (using Football, or Soccer to you Americans, as the analogy - because KeSPA uses it)
Football ==== computer hardware Stadium ==== battle.net FIFA / UEFA / National Associations === Blizzard
Now because Blizzard is the ruling organ and intellectual property (IP) owners of which everyone has to comply to and Blizzard ALSO owns the stadium on which the game is played, it is pretty safe to say that KeSPA has no legal case at all.
Please. Understand. Please.
Football = Starcraft Stadium = Broadcasting Station Studios (Professional BW games are played over LAN, not Battle.net) FIFA = KeSPA (They're the ones that organize the leagues. Not Blizzard.)
Blizzard has absolutely nothing to do with the stadiums or studios in which these games are being played nor do they have anything to do with organizing the leagues or governing them. The only thing they are related to is the product itself that's being used for the leagues organized by KeSPA.
As many will argue, a ball and a video game are a bit different in the fact that the video game has voice acting and art, which they would say is intellectual property, but the design of a ball itself and the logos on it is intellectual property and the product of research as well. Besides, what KeSPA is selling is not the broadcast rights to the game, but rather, the broadcast rights to their teams and players. Just because you get permission from Spalding to use their ball and logo in a commercial doesn't mean you get to use a clip of Lebron James.
Blizzard has no rights to the actual gameplay of the players, which is their own intellectual property and the property of KeSPA through their contracts. The trouble is that they're claiming that they do and should, which makes no sense at all. The only people Blizzard can go after (and indeed the only ones they wisely chose to) are the broadcasting companies for this reason because they're the only ones potentially in the wrong. Blizzard can't do anything about KeSPA itself except to try to shut them down by making it unprofitable for the broadcasting companies to broadcast Brood War leagues.
Bwahaha. Really? Stadium - Broadcasting studios, FIFA = KESPA. Glad you aren't a lawyer,mate!
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
It's a fair argument, but soccer uses balls from Mitre, Nike, and many more. The game is only Starcraft, and there aren't any other organizations beside Blizzard that Kespa can negotiate with. Also, the players aren't the ones paying ball manufacturers for a match, the organization is. I'm sure the EPL or La Liga pays ball manufacturers to use the balls. Or it could be vice versa, the ball manufacturers might have to pay the leagues to advertise the balls.
Wouldn't it be better if there were a purely international league in the first place? I think esports internationally would be much stronger than regional leagues (although obviously regional tournaments are fine).
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
The guy is completely right, the only people that agree with KESPA in this matter are the young SC1 fanboys that refuse to let go and roll with the times, i was sort of like that during the SC2 beta but quickly realized that i was just being stubborn. Ever since the first lawsuit, i was browsing the threads wondering what the fuck was going on here when i saw people defending KESPA. Yes, it's somewhat shitty of Blizzard to wait with the lawsuit right until SC2 drops, but they have all the right in the world to do this. They own the rights to Starcraft 2, KESPA is making a profit off their game without out Blizzards consent.
I seriously can not understand what KESPA is trying to achieve with this, they have absolutely no case.
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
If undergrads knew enough to speak intelligently on a subject then they wouldn't be undergrads. No offense, and I'm sure one day you will be really great in your field, but saying you know what you are talking about because you are an undergrad is like saying you know what life is like because you are in high school.
You might know more than Joe Nobody, but you don't know enough to speak accurately on the subject-- you can just speculate a little more carefully than people outside of the field.
Again, not trying to be offensive, just pointing out that your credentials don't amount to much (though they are more than mine, I only minored in polisci when I was an undergrad).
Edit: Like the guy above me said, I too was pretty skeptical of SC2 when it was announced and during beta. I played BW from like 99 onward, so it was a big change-- but then one of my friends forced me to play SC2, and I haven't looked back.
I have some feeling this doesn't give a very complete picture. It paints KeSPA as completely evil, but then why did MBCgame and OGN agree to pay fees to them in the first place, if they are just some random bastards? Surely they must have got something in return?
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
If undergrads knew enough to speak intelligently on a subject then they wouldn't be undergrads. No offense, and I'm sure one day you will be really great in your field, but saying you know what you are talking about because you are an undergrad is like saying you know what life is like because you are in high school.
You might know more than Joe Nobody, but you don't know enough to speak accurately on the subject-- you can just speculate a little more carefully than people outside of the field.
Again, not trying to be offensive, just pointing out that your credentials don't amount to much (though they are more than mine, I only minored in polisci when I was an undergrad).
Edit: Like the guy above me said, I too was pretty skeptical of SC2 when it was announced and during beta. I played BW from like 99 onward, so it was a big change-- but then one of my friends forced me to play SC2, and I haven't looked back.
I think both of you are on the same side of the argument and you're calling shit on him. Why?
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
Well then, tell me more about these "well known legal cases" on IP in the esport industry which is still in its infancy and probably still doesnt even have legal precendent.
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
If undergrads knew enough to speak intelligently on a subject then they wouldn't be undergrads. No offense, and I'm sure one day you will be really great in your field, but saying you know what you are talking about because you are an undergrad is like saying you know what life is like because you are in high school.
You might know more than Joe Nobody, but you don't know enough to speak accurately on the subject-- you can just speculate a little more carefully than people outside of the field.
Again, not trying to be offensive, just pointing out that your credentials don't amount to much (though they are more than mine, I only minored in polisci when I was an undergrad).
Edit: Like the guy above me said, I too was pretty skeptical of SC2 when it was announced and during beta. I played BW from like 99 onward, so it was a big change-- but then one of my friends forced me to play SC2, and I haven't looked back.
I think both of you are on the same side of the argument and you're calling shit on him. Why?
Because whether I am on the right side of an argument or not doesn't mean that I don't have standards.
Whether we agree that SC is Blizzard's property and they can do whatever or not doesn't mean being in college makes someone an expert on law.
Notice that I haven't claimed to be an expert, just offered my opinions. Which pretty much everyone in this thread should also be doing unless they are indeed a practicing lawyer of some sort.
After some consideration, here's a summation of the facts as I know them and my opinion on them.
The Past In 2007, KeSPA sold the broadcasting rights of Proleague to MBC and OGN. OGN/MBC were originally against this because they did not recognize KeSPA as the legal owner of Proleague. But with the professional players and teams backing up KeSPA, OGN and MBC had no room for negotiation.
After the KeSPA and MBC/OGN transaction went down, Blizzard decided to sue OGN and MBC. Why them, instead of KeSPA? There's been some speculation about this by other TL members, but I believe it's for a reason that other people haven't mentioned yet.
Current Situation Blizzard has NO case against KeSPA.
But how is this possible?! KeSPA was the one selling the broadcasting rights in the first place!
KeSPA sold the broadcasting rights to Proleague, not Starcraft. The parties in trouble are OGN/MBC. Not only do they need to purchase broadcasting rights to Proleague from KeSPA, but they also need to buy broadcasting rights to Starcraft from Blizzard. The latter lets you show the game, while the former lets you show the pros playing. The irony behind this is that out of all the parties involved, MBC/OGN are the most innocent ones. Perhaps, the true champions of e-sports since they are the original creators of the Proleague.
The Future So what's going to happen?
I'm guessing KeSPA will let MBC/OGN take the fall. KeSPA has shown in the past that they don't give a fuck about MBC/OGN and are willing to find other broadcasters instead. Gretech will fizzle initially because while they have broadcasting licenses to Starcraft, they won't be able to get any pro players to participate. And not many people will wants to watch amateurs. KeSPA, on the other hand, won't have much luck either because while they may find other broadcasting companies, I doubt Blizzard will sell broadcasting rights to any company associated with KeSPA.
From this point on, one of two things can happen:
1) Starcraft 1 e-sports dies. 2) KeSPA disbands; the pro players realize their best chance of continuing their SC1 career is with whatever broadcasting company is backed up by Blizzard
In conclusion, regardless of legalities, Blizzard holds all the chips, However, that doesn't stop me from saying, "Fuck Blizzard and KeSPA."
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
If undergrads knew enough to speak intelligently on a subject then they wouldn't be undergrads. No offense, and I'm sure one day you will be really great in your field, but saying you know what you are talking about because you are an undergrad is like saying you know what life is like because you are in high school.
You might know more than Joe Nobody, but you don't know enough to speak accurately on the subject-- you can just speculate a little more carefully than people outside of the field.
Again, not trying to be offensive, just pointing out that your credentials don't amount to much (though they are more than mine, I only minored in polisci when I was an undergrad).
Edit: Like the guy above me said, I too was pretty skeptical of SC2 when it was announced and during beta. I played BW from like 99 onward, so it was a big change-- but then one of my friends forced me to play SC2, and I haven't looked back.
Well, in fact I dont think I am an expert on the matter, since blizzard isnt paying me big bucks for every 10mins I spent on the case. But compare to the guy who claims Blizzard has no IP rights and EULA is non-enforceable because he havent read it. I think I have more than enough knowledge to educate him.
On the other hand, I don't think it requires a license or a PhD to realize some people here dont know wtf they are talking about.
No one is 100% sure on this, even lawyers, because they also have to spend time reading the materials. However, there are simple legal facts that they can just tell you right off the bat without even reading the facts.
Also, almost everywhere there are some who are more informed than others, it shows in their posts clearly, when they see something retarded or ill informed, is it wrong to point out?
I hope Blizzard wins this lawsuit. KeSPA has been pounding their monopoly on BW for far too long and it's starting to disgust me. I hope they learn to co-exist with the GSL and I'm looking forward to a team league for SC2!
Well, in fact I dont think I am an expert on the matter, since blizzard isnt paying me big bucks for every 10mins I spent on the case. But compare to the guy who claims Blizzard has no IP rights and EULA is non-enforceable because he havent read it. I think I have more than enough knowledge to educate him.
I agree.
On the other hand, I don't think it requires a license or a PhD to realize some people here dont know wtf they are talking about.
Again, I agree.
Also, almost everywhere there are some who are more informed than others, it shows in their posts clearly, when they see something retarded or ill informed, is it wrong to point out?
No, it is not wrong. It just seemed to me the undergrad thing was as silly as the PhD-claiming guy, because really one only needed common sense to point out he was wrong.
On the other hand, I re-read your post and think I misunderstood the tone, so I apologize for me being grumpy (I never learn to stop posting when I'm tired).
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
Well then, tell me more about these "well known legal cases" on IP in the esport industry which is still in its infancy and probably still doesnt even have legal precendent.
Sure, laws on this area still need to be worked on.
But claiming a company has no IP rights on a game it created is simply idiotic, not reading the EULA and click "I Accept" makes it unenforceable even more so. And, although I didn't read the EULA for starcraft, but I suspect they would've put something along the lines of "you are not authorized to use it for commercial purposes".
Which is exactly what these people have been doing.
Of course, court won't enforce everything on the contract, but it does provide ground for a reasonable guess.
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
Well then, tell me more about these "well known legal cases" on IP in the esport industry which is still in its infancy and probably still doesnt even have legal precendent.
Sure, laws on this area still need to be worked on.
But claiming a company has no IP rights on a game it created is simply idiotic, not reading the EULA and click "I Accept" makes it unenforceable even more so. And, although I didn't read the EULA for starcraft, but I suspect they would've put something along the lines of "you are not authorized to use it for commercial purposes".
Which is exactly what these people have been doing.
Of course, court won't enforce everything on the contract, but it does provide ground for a reasonable guess.
Which is, MBC/OGN have no case.
No matter which side of the argument your own, people will agree that Blizzard is the only party legally allowed to sell the game itself. The use of that game (Such as for pro-league), is what the argument's about.
On November 15 2010 11:43 MayorITC wrote: After some consideration, here's a summation of the facts as I know them and my opinion on them.
The Past In 2007, KeSPA sold the broadcasting rights of Proleague to MBC and OGN. OGN/MBC were originally against this because they did not recognize KeSPA as the legal owner of Proleague. But with the professional players and teams backing up KeSPA, OGN and MBC had no room for negotiation.
After the KeSPA and MBC/OGN transaction went down, Blizzard decided to sue OGN and MBC. Why them, instead of KeSPA? There's been some speculation about this by other TL members, but I believe it's for a reason that other people haven't mentioned yet.
Current Situation Blizzard has NO case against KeSPA.
But how is this possible?! KeSPA was the one selling the broadcasting rights in the first place!
KeSPA sold the broadcasting rights to Proleague, not Starcraft. The parties in trouble are OGN/MBC. Not only do they need to purchase broadcasting rights to Proleague from KeSPA, but they also need to buy broadcasting rights to Starcraft from Blizzard. The latter lets you show the game, while the former lets you show the pros playing. The irony behind this is that out of all the parties involved, MBC/OGN are the most innocent ones. Perhaps, the true champions of e-sports since they are the original creators of the Proleague.
The Future So what's going to happen?
I'm guessing KeSPA will let MBC/OGN take the fall. KeSPA has shown in the past that they don't give a fuck about MBC/OGN and are willing to find other broadcasters instead. Gretech will fizzle initially because while they have broadcasting licenses to Starcraft, they won't be able to get any pro players to participate. And not many people will wants to watch amateurs. KeSPA, on the other hand, won't have much luck either because while they may find other broadcasting companies, I doubt Blizzard will sell broadcasting rights to any company associated with KeSPA.
From this point on, one of two things can happen:
1) Starcraft 1 e-sports dies. 2) KeSPA disbands; the pro players realize their best chance of continuing their SC1 career is with whatever broadcasting company is backed up by Blizzard
In conclusion, regardless of legalities, Blizzard holds all the chips, However, that doesn't stop me from saying, "Fuck Blizzard and KeSPA."
Thanks for the information, I was wondering why Blizzard wouldnt sue KeSPA instead of those two, but of course these lawyers earning huge salaries would know what to do more than us.
They would only go to court if they think they can win, or they think they can generate more chips on the table for negotiation.
On November 15 2010 11:05 Onisparda wrote: What is with everyone pretending to be IP experts and stating random shit as if they were facts.
Because obviously we are more informed on the matter than you are?
I know this since I've been educated on contract law and talk about it with my prof, some of the others talked about it because they are undergrad in law, and you clearly don't know shit since you can't differentiate "well known legal cases" and "random shit".
Well then, tell me more about these "well known legal cases" on IP in the esport industry which is still in its infancy and probably still doesnt even have legal precendent.
Sure, laws on this area still need to be worked on.
But claiming a company has no IP rights on a game it created is simply idiotic, not reading the EULA and click "I Accept" makes it unenforceable even more so. And, although I didn't read the EULA for starcraft, but I suspect they would've put something along the lines of "you are not authorized to use it for commercial purposes".
Which is exactly what these people have been doing.
Of course, court won't enforce everything on the contract, but it does provide ground for a reasonable guess.
Which is, MBC/OGN have no case.
No matter which side of the argument your own, people will agree that Blizzard is the only party legally allowed to sell the game itself. The use of that game (Such as for pro-league), is what the argument's about.
Ya well, i got trolled by that Gonodactylus guy.
Hence what i wrote was mostly directed at his arguments, which made no sense at all.
Heh...I can see why myself as well as some others outside of Korea favor KeSPA while those inside Korea favor Blizzard (they can see how controlling KeSPA is while we see how controlling Blizzard is). I kind of knew that KeSPA was extremely underhanded like that but I had no idea they stooped to actions that low. The way that post was made it seems KeSPA will use any form of business threat from mistreatment of players and whatnot to get their way.
Lesser of two evils...it's really hard to say. Though if what was said in that Korean post, Blizzard is starting to come out the better person. Blizzard at the very least doesn't try to hide it (i.e. stabbing you in the front instead of the back).
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.
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..
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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)
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.
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)
That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.
To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.
I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
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)
That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.
To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.
Because buying and using software willingly is like having a gun held to your head to sign a contract.
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)
That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.
To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.
Because buying and using software willingly is like having a gun held to your head to sign a contract.
Just an example you cant be "forced" to agree to a contract it has to be voluntary and has to be known before transaction. I seriously worry for the US if this is how you conduct business.
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)
That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.
To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
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)
That text might work in the US but doesnt fly here. Ignorance of international law isnt an excuse. If you dont agree then full refund should be available should you not agree and blizzards EULA doesnt allow for that.
To give an example if i held a gun to someones head and made them sign an agreement or threat of financial loss (blackmail) it wouldnt be legally binding and that is in effect the same protection being applied here.
That's a completely horrible analogy
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
You have gotten refunds for many games simply because companies dont like to deal with sour customers. They would rather just take the loss of having to sell the game as used than argue with a customer. It isnt really because of consumer rights.
I also fail to believe what you are saying, as they provide a very clear indication of what you will have to agree to, and that you will need to get a battle.net account with its own terms of use agreement. They even provide a way to see EXACTLY what you will agree to by giving a link to the EULA. To me, that just comes down to the consumer being willfully ignorant.
I also like that you arent even citing any sources for all of this, yet claim it as fact. I know that the UK has some pretty crazy consumer protection laws, but I dont think they would protect you this far since nothing is hidden.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.
I didn't say that I knew more, I said that living in your country does not make you an expert and that your own government is not being as definite as you are--
I repeat, I went to your country's Intellectual Property Office site and read what they had to say about EULA, which was a ~150 page report that was not nearly as certain of the position as you claim it is. I'm not telling you your rights, I'm just saying that I'm not going to declare you infallible on British law just because you are a citizen and I am not.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
You have gotten refunds for many games simply because companies dont like to deal with sour customers. They would rather just take the loss of having to sell the game as used than argue with a customer. It isnt really because of consumer rights.
I also fail to believe what you are saying, as they provide a very clear indication of what you will have to agree to, and that you will need to get a battle.net account with its own terms of use agreement. They even provide a way to see EXACTLY what you will agree to by giving a link to the EULA. To me, that just comes down to the consumer being willfully ignorant.
I also like that you arent even citing any sources for all of this, yet claim it as fact. I know that the UK has some pretty crazy consumer protection laws, but I dont think they would protect you this far since nothing is hidden.
No wrong I have been refused before stating my statutory rights and its at that point that they know they have to comply with the law. Its not clear at all if the EULA agreement isnt clearly stated on the product. Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. Blizzards EULA breaks our data protection laws for one and cannot be overridden the same goes for consumer rights.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.
I didn't say that I knew more, I said that living in your country does not make you an expert and that your own government is not being as definite as you are--
I repeat, I went to your country's Intellectual Property Office site and read what they had to say about EULA, which was a ~150 page report that was not nearly as certain of the position as you claim it is. I'm not telling you your rights, I'm just saying that I'm not going to declare you infallible on British law just because you are a citizen and I am not.
OK tell me what the national speed limit is for an A road in the UK without looking it up or how old you have to be before you are allowd to drink alcohol here. Sometimes actually living in the country means you know more about it.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.
I didn't say that I knew more, I said that living in your country does not make you an expert and that your own government is not being as definite as you are--
I repeat, I went to your country's Intellectual Property Office site and read what they had to say about EULA, which was a ~150 page report that was not nearly as certain of the position as you claim it is. I'm not telling you your rights, I'm just saying that I'm not going to declare you infallible on British law just because you are a citizen and I am not.
OK tell me what the national speed limit is for an A road in the UK without looking it up or how old you have to be before you are allowd to drink alcohol here. Sometimes actually living in the country means you know more about it.
No idea what the first one is, but I believe the 2nd is 18. Now, without looking, tell me what a logical fallacy is.
Because, last time I checked, knowing basic traffic law and somehow picking up intellectual property law on the street were a little bit different-- and as you so helpfully pointed out for me, I could look up either of those laws on the internet, so it really doesn't matter whether I live there or not.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
I didn't realize that living in your country made you an expert on your country's laws.
As it so happens, I do know a bit about the legal profession, though I am not an expert nor do I know much about contract law. What I do know is that by scanning Google (including your country's Intellectual Property Office's official website) I was able to find that your government is much more ambivalent about what is and is not legal than you are.
I am undone an american knows more about the law and my consumer rights because of "google". Unbelievable. While you are googling how about you stop by the office of fair trading.
I didn't say that I knew more, I said that living in your country does not make you an expert and that your own government is not being as definite as you are--
I repeat, I went to your country's Intellectual Property Office site and read what they had to say about EULA, which was a ~150 page report that was not nearly as certain of the position as you claim it is. I'm not telling you your rights, I'm just saying that I'm not going to declare you infallible on British law just because you are a citizen and I am not.
OK tell me what the national speed limit is for an A road in the UK without looking it up or how old you have to be before you are allowd to drink alcohol here. Sometimes actually living in the country means you know more about it.
No idea what the first one is, but I believe the 2nd is 18. Now, without looking, tell me what a logical fallacy is.
Because, last time I checked, knowing basic traffic law and somehow picking up intellectual property law on the street were a little bit different-- and as you so helpfully pointed out for me, I could look up either of those laws on the internet, so it really doesn't matter whether I live there or not.
Wrong you can consume alcohol here at any age you just cant purchase it below the age of 18. Knowing your consumer rights is about as basic as it gets matey.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
From what I can piece together from various sites, it isn't as cut and dry in the UK as you would like to believe, either.
It seems to just be more legal opinions without any case law.
You think you know more about my countrys laws than me? Nice try. We have very strong data protection and consumer protection laws and thats just one european country I know for a fact that there are others that you wouldnt get anywhere with.
I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs.
You have gotten refunds for many games simply because companies dont like to deal with sour customers. They would rather just take the loss of having to sell the game as used than argue with a customer. It isnt really because of consumer rights.
I also fail to believe what you are saying, as they provide a very clear indication of what you will have to agree to, and that you will need to get a battle.net account with its own terms of use agreement. They even provide a way to see EXACTLY what you will agree to by giving a link to the EULA. To me, that just comes down to the consumer being willfully ignorant.
I also like that you arent even citing any sources for all of this, yet claim it as fact. I know that the UK has some pretty crazy consumer protection laws, but I dont think they would protect you this far since nothing is hidden.
No wrong I have been refused before stating my statutory rights and its at that point that they know they have to comply with the law. Its not clear at all if the EULA agreement isnt clearly stated on the product. Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. Blizzards EULA breaks our data protection laws for one and cannot be overridden the same goes for consumer rights.
When the customer starts arguing, companies cave. Simple as that. The fact that you think its law leads me to believe you are confused.
EDIT
Wrong you can consume alcohol here at any age you just cant purchase it below the age of 16. Knowing your consumer rights is about as basic as it gets matey.
Which obviously explains why there is a 150 page document just about EULA's.
On November 15 2010 14:52 Vimsey wrote: Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. .
List a few of those, please.
Type in EULA and illegal or court case and you will have more information than you need.
Interesting, because the entire first two pages of results (before things started getting off-topic a bit) were just forums or websites asking whether or not EULAs are legal, and were mostly answered in much the same way this thread has been-- by laypersons with no real experience on either side.
Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
On November 15 2010 14:27 Pleiades wrote: I could say the same thing about ignorance of not looking at cover/packaging. I said earlier, if you don't agree to it, don't use it. If you don't agree to that either, take it to court or ask your law maker to change it. Complaining here won't do anything.
Im quite happy to take it to court since I know that US laws dont apply here.
EULAs arent pieces of legislature. You can just as well claim theyre unconstitutional or whatnot in a US court.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I dont know just get annoyed when US companies think their laws apply internationally and got involved when people quote EULAs like they are shira law.
On November 15 2010 14:52 Vimsey wrote: Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. .
List a few of those, please.
Type in EULA and illegal or court case and you will have more information than you need.
We don't want to know about other cases. We just want to know about your "personal" cases, aka. first hand experience, about legal cases with EULA.
Asking personal information about liquid members is against the forum rules.
Well, since you claimed that you involves in EULA legal cases, you need to backup your claim with proofs. I don't want your name or any personal information, just tell me your experience with it. Or else, people will just think you made things up for the sake of arguing (which is what I feel right now).
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries since you cant blindly agree to it. Sorry for being clumsy.
On November 15 2010 14:52 Vimsey wrote: Thats before I get into the many legal EULA cases that have pointed out the how poorly written they are. .
List a few of those, please.
Type in EULA and illegal or court case and you will have more information than you need.
We don't want to know about other cases. We just want to know about your "personal" cases, aka. first hand experience, about legal cases with EULA.
Asking personal information about liquid members is against the forum rules.
Well, since you claimed that you involves in EULA legal cases, you need to backup your claim with proofs. I don't want your name or any personal information, just tell me your experience with it. Or else, people will just think you made things up for the sake of arguing (which is what I feel right now).
If i give a personal case and proof i have to give my name and court details dont I. :/
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
On November 14 2010 16:59 lao wrote: your argument is not a legal one. starcraft and starcraft 2 (and all videogames really) are licensed to the end-user. you do not truly BUY the game. you "license" the game for personal use. this is made explicit in every single end-user agreement you will ever see for professional proprietary non open source software.
end of discussion.
This doesn't even matter. You create new intellectual property. Blizzard has to claim rights over this through their EULA, which they do. If you were right they wouldn't even have to claim this in their EULA.
Also, I think licensing and EULA's are illegal under law. You buy a physical disc but you get tricked once you open the box and have to agree to something you never knew about when you made the purchase. But again, corporations win always vs normal people because the laws are rigged, so yeah it doesn't matter. End of discussion.
lol like 20 pages ago. I found this hilarious.
this post = "I'm wrong, but it doesn't matter. End of discussion."
And even if it meant that you could somehow "know a bit more" about copyright laws particular to the country you reside in, that just means you have knowledge of them by virtue of some preexisting circumstance. Voila, somebody reads your nation's law, and they have that same knowledge. Please try to be more reasonable with your tone and actually use the facts [specific case law, specific lines of regulation, precedent, etc] instead of strange tangential points that seem to imply "I live in this country, and therefore I'm right."
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
Anyway, what we are trying to argue here is totally different from what Blizzard and OGN/MBC are at the court.
Vimsey's cases, assuming he didn't make things up, are more likely to be a personal case involving one purchase. However, Blizzard's case involves a much more larger scale. It's not just you can't read EULA before and don't agree with it. It's broadcasting IP rights material that is protected by EULA, which can be read on the manual. It's a different story.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
EULA's for a video game do not equal U.S. laws. I don't understand why several people are using that as a legitimate argument. It's a term of agreement for using Blizzards property which you essentially 'rented'. It doesn't matter if you break it in Cuba, Israel, Australia or Korea, if you break the agreement, you pay the consequences. While you can argue terms inside the EULA in court, I wouldn't imagine the consequences are very different in other countries.
for instance, copyright infringement is like $250,000, I would assume for other nations, it is some outrageous amount of money as well, while it might not equate to exactly the same, you still will be paying a very similar price for breaking the law
On November 15 2010 15:28 Rickilicious wrote: EULA's for a video game do not equal U.S. laws. I don't understand why several people are using that as a legitimate argument. It's a term of agreement for using Blizzards property which you essentially 'rented'. It doesn't matter if you break it in Cuba, Israel, Australia or Korea, if you break the agreement, you pay the consequences. While you can argue terms inside the EULA in court, I wouldn't imagine the consequences are very different in other countries.
for instance, copyright infringement is like $250,000, I would assume for other nations, it is some outrageous amount of money as well, while it might not equate to exactly the same, you still will be paying a very similar price for breaking the law
Only if you have copyrights in that country for example when Budweiser USA tried to sue Budweiser in the cech republic for using the name Budweiser.
Blizzard even gives you a number to call if you don't agree to the EULA of their games for the refund of the purchase price. Well on the US version it does.
"THIS SOFTWARE IS LICENSED, NOT SOLD. BY INSTALLING, COPYING OR OTHERWISE USING THE GAME (DEFINED BELOW), YOU AGREE TO BE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT. IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL, COPY OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Yeah... only for the fools who scroll down and agree to the EULA/TOS without actually reading it. Blizzard clearly states what you can do with their product and how much restrictions you have upon it.
Which means every actual customer, no matter what their expertize on IP law is... No one reads them. No one agrees to them. This isn't even disputed so don't try it. There's actual research done on how often these things get read. You only have your lawyers read them if you are an organization/corporation that deals with Blizzard.
Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
I never went into contract with Blizzard. I had no say in whatever they put in the EULA and I didn't read it. I bought a box with a disc for both SC and SC2. I installed it and as everyone I didn't spend 5 hours reading and translating that wall of text. I never went into any contract with Blizzard. I don't know how you can claim I did, even though I would lose claiming this in US court. Of course I would win anywhere in the EU, which is where I am located.
You hit 'I Agree' to the terms and conditions just to play. Whether or not you read it does not matter. It was a contract presented to you, with clear terms and conditions, and the ability for you to accept or deny those terms. Whatever f'd up laws they have in EU I could care less about. To any rational, logical person, you are in the wrong.
On November 14 2010 17:13 Gonodactylus wrote: If there's 4/5 people over and over making false analogies, not understanding IP rights, and saying that Kespa enslaves progamers and other crazy stuff, I can't argue against all that just by sheer size of volume.
I have to concede because this is not a fair debate. I can't win no matter how right I am. Enjoy the victory. Also enjoy esports where players have no rights whatsoever.
Actually it's with Kespa where players have no rights. GOM/Blizzard do not have any power-hungry rules dictating who can play what, when they can play it, when they can fucking pause or say ingame, etc.
The most elegant proof:
1) What happens if a current Brood War player switches to play SC2 now? He is banned from proleague, loses his license and if you're as unlucky as Nada, stats are wiped and reputation is attacked.
2) What would happen if an SC2 player were to swap to Brood War?
Yeah, exactly. Peace.
Loved your Elegant Proof, this is what sets Kespa apart from GOMtv.
See, suddenly these hotshot 'law undergrads' liars are forced to turn around.
And in fact we are talking about SC BW, not SC2. Remember, this is on the wrong forum. SC BW had nothing on the box about Blizzard owning the replays, the maps the matches and whatever you create using their game.
Secondly, it's right; Blizzard isn't even suing Kespa. So how does it even matter how much you hate kespa? Do you hate OGN&MBC? And I again want to point out that OGN&MBC were, besides Blizzard, one of the few actually making a profit. They got broadcasting rights of the players for free and it's very cheap to create the content. So Kespa made them force to pay to the teams. That is good. It made player conditions better for sure.
OGN and MBC are the only two organizations that can run professional Starcraft tournaments and broadcast them to a wide audience; be it SC BW or SC2. Blizzard is now suing their biggest potential ally because of blind greed.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
And even if an EULA holds up in the US, remember how it holds up in court that corporations have personhood. That was never a law. It still isn't a law. US is a very corrupt country. The fortune500 owns the country, control the politicians and judges.
Blizzard will probably win vs MBC and OGN. But when they extort MBC and OGN into agreeing the rights are 50-50 between them when Kespa runs the leagues and the players provide the creative content the viewers come to watch for, how is that fair and moral? That's all I am saying. Blizzard is immoral. EULAs, which everyone uses, are weak and ought to be illegal always. That's all I am saying and no matter how ignorant of a student at some crappy community college you are, that doesn't change what is already there in print. And let's not forget the Korean government already told Blizzard to change their EULA as it would have been obviously illegal. They didn't change this for the rest of the world because it isn't an issue for the governments there. And if corporations were really real persons, we would all diagnose them as psychopaths and lock them up. They act as psychopaths because they must as bound by law to act as such. Case Dodge bros vs Ford.
As for all those people calling me 'idiot', 'troll', 'kespa agent', 'down syndrome', 'retard', fuck you guys too.
Im going to sign out now but I think i need to state my opionion on the OP I dont like the way Kespa went about this and am behind Blizzard and remember when they undermined the GOMTV tournaments. I just dont like this EULA=law shit being bandied about.
On November 15 2010 15:39 Gonodactylus wrote: And in fact we are talking about SC BW, not SC2. Remember, this is on the wrong forum. SC BW had nothing on the box about Blizzard owning the replays, the maps the matches and whatever you create using their game.
On the back of my BW case:
"The use of this software product is subject to the terms of the enclosed End User License Agreement. You must accept the End User License Agreement before you can use this product. The Campaign Editor contained in this product is provided strictly for your personal use. The use of the Campaign Editor is subject to additional license restrictions contained inside the product and may not be commercially exploited."
Opening up the EULA afterwards does indeed state more restrictions for commercial use, aka what OGN/MBC currently does. Just wanted to point that out.
Edit: I'm not gonna argue about whether or not its morally right or wrong but it is indeed there. As for the rest of your post I just don't feel like bothering because many other people have/will anyway.
Does it say that in Korea on all SC and SC BW cases. Thats the issue. And then there has to be something about esports at the EULA at that time. Now you couldn't read it before opening online for sure. So that's void too. And then it has to be in law for Blizzard to win anyway.
On November 15 2010 15:39 Gonodactylus wrote: See, suddenly these hotshot 'law undergrads' liars are forced to turn around.
And in fact we are talking about SC BW, not SC2. Remember, this is on the wrong forum. SC BW had nothing on the box about Blizzard owning the replays, the maps the matches and whatever you create using their game.
Secondly, it's right; Blizzard isn't even suing Kespa. So how does it even matter how much you hate kespa? Do you hate OGN&MBC? And I again want to point out that OGN&MBC were, besides Blizzard, one of the few actually making a profit. They got broadcasting rights of the players for free and it's very cheap to create the content. So Kespa made them force to pay to the teams. That is good. It made player conditions better for sure.
OGN and MBC are the only two organizations that can run professional Starcraft tournaments and broadcast them to a wide audience; be it SC BW or SC2. Blizzard is now suing their biggest potential ally because of blind greed.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
And even if an EULA holds up in the US, remember how it holds up in court that corporations have personhood. That was never a law. It still isn't a law. US is a very corrupt country. The fortune500 owns the country, control the politicians and judges.
Blizzard will probably win vs MBC and OGN. But when they extort MBC and OGN into agreeing the rights are 50-50 between them when Kespa runs the leagues and the players provide the creative content the viewers come to watch for, how is that fair and moral? That's all I am saying. Blizzard is immoral. EULAs, which everyone uses, are weak and ought to be illegal always. That's all I am saying and no matter how ignorant of a student at some crappy community college you are, that doesn't change what is already there in print. And let's not forget the Korean government already told Blizzard to change their EULA as it would have been obviously illegal. They didn't change this for the rest of the world because it isn't an issue for the governments there. And if corporations were really real persons, we would all diagnose them as psychopaths and lock them up because they are bound by law to act as such. Case Rover vs Ford.
As for all those people calling me 'idiot', 'troll', 'kespa agent', 'down syndrome', 'retard', fuck you guys too.
First of all, most of your statements are opinionated. Second, you never backed up your claim of E-sports player's IP being violated by Blizzard. I asked you to clarify on that.
I never said laws were morally right or immoral. Heck, I don't even agree to numerous laws, but I do understand the concepts and reasoning for some of them. Lastly, I don't care if Blizzard or OGN/MBC wins, I'm just interested in what's going on with this case and the future of IP laws.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
When you get so many buckets of shit thrown on top of you, you no longer care about standing on the high ground. Especially not when it comes in respond to correcting simple facts as for example Gomtv classic and who pulled out to make season 4 not happen.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
The direct link is on the box www.starcraft2.com/legal/eula.html I dont have my original box for BW, so I cant verify that they have a link on that box, but I know that it does say you need to agree to the EULA.
Its also not "many pages of legalese" most of it is quite plain english
also "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
On November 15 2010 15:49 Gonodactylus wrote: Does it say that in Korea on all SC and SC BW cases. Thats the issue. And then there has to be something about esports at the EULA at that time. Now you couldn't read it before opening online for sure. So that's void too. And then it has to be in law for Blizzard to win anyway.
Why would there need to be something about esports? Why are you making up random stuff as if it is fact!?
I was trying to come up with something ridiculous that you would make up next, but nothing I could think of is as ridiculous as the stuff you say on a regular basis.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
That is a US one there is no link on the EU UK online store from where you can purchase a game when you should be able to view it to a EULA. Looking at the the EU site i can only find a "terms of use" not an EULA. Since the terms of use actually refers to the EULA in its text its quite laughable really. Also reading its terms on privacy at contravenes UK data protection law you have to give the option of opting out of sharing private information with third parties and they dont do that.
On November 14 2010 23:01 Gamjadori wrote: I've been around TL since 2003, and I remember there being nothing but hate for KeSPA during those past 7 years up until just recently. There was always minimal support for KeSPA in the foreign community as far as I could tell, and I don't see what has happened in the past year that could have changed that.
On September 14 2009 17:40 SpiritWolf wrote: The blacklisting of gom really doesn't surprise me. Gom is supported by blizzard. Kespa doesn't want blizzard to encroach on their market so they are discouraging players from doing gom. When SC2 comes out kespa will get owned and back down or gom will become the main source for sc2.
GOM decided not to cooperate with Kepsa before Blizzard even got involved from what I'm aware. Blizzard supported GOM in season 3, after a lot of teams decided not to participate.
True, but before gom wasnt large enough to be a real threat. With blizzards backing and starcraft 2 on the horizon gom has the potential to expand massively. kespa is putting alot of pressure on teams to not compete in gom in order to kill it before it can hurt their korean esports monopoly.
On September 14 2009 18:33 Alethios wrote: Fuck KeSPA. I haven't heard anything positive about this idiots in so long. Seems every time I look they're disqualifying another gamer for coughing too loudly.
I don't care whether or not they're fighting to keep themselves relevant or not. Companies have the right to increase their profit margins by dubious practices, and we have the right not to buy their products. Seriously, fuck them.
Blizzard should release a SC patch specifically aimed to fuck these wankers.
On September 14 2009 18:29 ZeitgeistMovie wrote: Look, no one is in the "wrong" here. All parties are fighting for their interests. I wish people would stop being ignorant fools and stop blaming KeSPA. Every esthablishment will fight to keep themselves relevant. Nothing one is to blame here, maybe except the system because this is how the system works. This is just business/politics, and innocent people will suffer along the way. That's just the reality of it all. No one has all the information on the matter so picking sides is just jumping the gun and really useless. Just see how things play out and hope Esports survive in Korea, and grow everywhere else.
The reason why many people hate KeSPA is that, beyond being just another greedy corporation, it was supposed to be promoting korean e-sports in general, and doing stuff like helping out new leagues, defending players' rights etc - but in reality KeSPA is doing the exact opposite.
These quotes might be out if context, but still this seemed to be the general opinion about KeSPA a little over a year ago. While this may not be relevant to the current discussion, I'm just wondering if people could point out what's changed about KeSPA now. It' still the same organization that people used to hate. Have people forgotten all their their past "deeds"? Before SC2, KeSPA was the devil, has anything happened to change that? Sure, some might not like Blizzard, but I don't so how KeSPA was ever any better. I'm not trying to argue that KeSPA is good or bad, I'm just curious as to WHY people's opinion have swung.
Although I haven't been around that long, I also remember how hated Kespa was even in Season 2 and 3 of Gomtv. After GOMTV Season 3 was canceled, you could scarcely find a Kespa supporter on TL it seemed. But somehow in this last year, Blizzard has become the devil and Kespa this irreplaceable, untouchable organization (never mind the crucial role Boxer and many of the players had in building up esports, building interest ie a market that companies would even be interested in investing.)
I've found the BW debates rather frustrating that all Kespa's past injustices seem to have been forgotten and that Blizzard is assumed to be wanting to shut down BW despite little evidence to support the assumption. (Except for the oft heard "why would they not?" It also seems the Kespa defenders, although a few are older TL posters, most seem to have joined in the last year or in the last 6 months.
I also find it interesting how the foreign community is always trying to downplay the Korean's outrage of Kespa. Calling naysayers "not the real fans" or from the BW thread "they've been spoiled for too long. They don't know what Kespa has done for them." Seems to me that many Koreans have weighed what Kespa has done and found Kespa wanting. Who are we to listen to if not the Koreans in their own country about their own organization?
I, for one am glad that Kespa's dirty laundry is being hung out. Even if every item on the list isn't hundred percent accurate, the sum total is pretty damning.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
That is a US one there is no link on the EU UK online store from where you can purchase a game when you should be able to view it to a EULA. Looking at the the EU site i can only find a "terms of use" not an EULA. Since the terms of use actually refers to the EULA in its text its quite laughable really. Also reading its terms on privacy at contravenes UK data protection law you have to give the option of opting out of sharing private information with third parties and they dont do that.
Why are you looking at the online store? The online store means you are entering a direct contract with blizzard, so if you disagree with the terms of use/EULA there is a direct break in the sale and you can easily get a refund, there is a reason they include this in the EULA.
Also, I read the terms and there are lots of options for opting out.
"Blizzard allows you to control the way that we use personal identifying information that we might obtain. At the time you provide personal information, Blizzard may give you the option of declining any future offers or information about new products, promotions, or services. In addition, many of the "mailings" Blizzard may send you, such as newsletters, have procedures within them to cancel the receipt of any future mailings. Lastly, you may be given the opportunity to "opt-out" of certain features or functionality (e.g. Real ID). "
and there are many other scenarios mentioned therein that also contain opportunities to opt out.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
please do not use such a stupid argument. im also gonna try to ignore that stupid comment that tries to imply a soccer ball maufacturer has any kind of right to the sport. that would be the same thing as saying keyboard manufacturers have the right to all the games that is played with them. the soccer ball is only a tool to play the game. just like a controller is used to play a video game.
video games are not the same thing as professional sports. a game like soccer/football/basketball/etc can not be traced back to any individual or group of individuals. those sports have a LONG history and there has been different variations of them in the course of that history from continent to continent.
starcraft on the other hand has a very clear and obvious developer and maker. not only that but its a electronic piece of entertainment, the same as a movie or console game. they can decide to do w/e they want to do with the game they made. its there legal right to do so. they could have even charged us $$ each month to play on there servers but luckily they didnt because that obviously would have been bad for them.
so just stop comparing a video game to a real life sport like soccer/football/baseball/etc. its getting so damn ridiculous on these forums and it has to stop. i can understand that its compared to poker/chess, but when you compare it to real life sports then that is where a line should be drawn imo.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
I think the main problem of KeSPA is that their main argument is based on "StarCraft is sport and therefor public property" is a little in contradiction with their business model of "controlling everything".
While they build up the arguably most succesful E-Sport business so far, if they piss off the fans, the players (man i still feel bad for Jaedong somehow) und tournament organizers one can question what their real purpose is. If they would act more like a association which helps the above mentioned "real" pillars of E-Sports and less like a dictature the whole discussion would be complete different.
But at the end of the day, I also think that Blizzard - as a company - should have less to say in such culture important things. There must be some sort of fair agreement that Blizzards will get paid or gets some free advertisement, but I rather won't have them any decission making rights. I support their lawsuit only because the counterpart (KeSPA) seems to be more damaging then useful.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
On November 15 2010 15:02 AlBundy wrote: Vimsey what are you trying to say? I'm trying to follow that thread but you seem obsessed with UK laws which seem totally irrelevant in a case involving US and KR parties.
I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
That is a US one there is no link on the EU UK online store from where you can purchase a game when you should be able to view it to a EULA. Looking at the the EU site i can only find a "terms of use" not an EULA. Since the terms of use actually refers to the EULA in its text its quite laughable really. Also reading its terms on privacy at contravenes UK data protection law you have to give the option of opting out of sharing private information with third parties and they dont do that.
Why are you looking at the online store? The online store means you are entering a direct contract with blizzard, so if you disagree with the terms of use/EULA there is a direct break in the sale and you can easily get a refund, there is a reason they include this in the EULA.
Also, I read the terms and there are lots of options for opting out.
"Blizzard allows you to control the way that we use personal identifying information that we might obtain. At the time you provide personal information, Blizzard may give you the option of declining any future offers or information about new products, promotions, or services. In addition, many of the "mailings" Blizzard may send you, such as newsletters, have procedures within them to cancel the receipt of any future mailings. Lastly, you may be given the opportunity to "opt-out" of certain features or functionality (e.g. Real ID). "
and there are many other scenarios mentioned therein that also contain opportunities to opt out.
Stop making shit up!
Because it had been stated that the EULA is there to read when it isnt. Also "As a general rule, Blizzard will not forward your information to a third party without your permission. However, we may divulge this data to third party vendors in response to a product order or to add you to a vendor’s commercial bulletin circulation list. In some cases, we can also disclose this information if our License Agreements or Terms of Service have been violated or if, in all good faith, we judge it is legally justified
As with any business, your personal information is also an asset of Blizzard and will become part of our normal business records. As such, in the event of a merger, acquisition, reorganization, bank-ruptcy, or other similar event, your personal information may be transferred to Blizzard 's successor or assignee."
This is from the Blizzard privacy policy in the EULA, it contravenes the UK data protection act and yet they say it applies to the UK and show me where I can "opt out" of this option. This is not making shit up, Ta.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
On November 15 2010 15:04 FrostOtter wrote: [quote] I think he is clumsily (there is no drinking age in the UK, after all) attempting to say that US law does not apply in other countries, although he is beating around the bush and ignoring that EULAs will often say that any sections not applicable under local law do not void the entirety of the EULA.
No but the fact that you cant read it before purchase in many countries voids it in its entirety in those countries. Sorry for being clumsy.
Why can you not read it before purchase? It is available online and the box tells you where to go to see it online... it even says you need a bnet account and an active internet connection.
You cant do that it has to be on the product you cant say the rules were posted in the vorgon halls for 50 years on the internet. At least in this country in yours maybe not.
Edit if you purchase it online then you have a point.
I would like to see a box of medication in your country if such things have to be visible on the outside of the box... because here in america we can have pages of information/warnings/other stuff that is required, and there aint no way in hell you are fitting that on the outside of a box.
I would also like to see the rule that says the entirety of the agreement has to be on the product.
I have just gone onto blizzards online website and at no point does it offer you the oppotunity to read the EULA prior to purchaseand thats ONLINE. Also many courts will argue that many pages of legalese containing much content that contravenes local laws to be about as binding as toilet paper.
That is a US one there is no link on the EU UK online store from where you can purchase a game when you should be able to view it to a EULA. Looking at the the EU site i can only find a "terms of use" not an EULA. Since the terms of use actually refers to the EULA in its text its quite laughable really. Also reading its terms on privacy at contravenes UK data protection law you have to give the option of opting out of sharing private information with third parties and they dont do that.
Why are you looking at the online store? The online store means you are entering a direct contract with blizzard, so if you disagree with the terms of use/EULA there is a direct break in the sale and you can easily get a refund, there is a reason they include this in the EULA.
Also, I read the terms and there are lots of options for opting out.
"Blizzard allows you to control the way that we use personal identifying information that we might obtain. At the time you provide personal information, Blizzard may give you the option of declining any future offers or information about new products, promotions, or services. In addition, many of the "mailings" Blizzard may send you, such as newsletters, have procedures within them to cancel the receipt of any future mailings. Lastly, you may be given the opportunity to "opt-out" of certain features or functionality (e.g. Real ID). "
and there are many other scenarios mentioned therein that also contain opportunities to opt out.
Stop making shit up!
Because it had been stated that the EULA is there to read when it isnt. Also "As a general rule, Blizzard will not forward your information to a third party without your permission. However, we may divulge this data to third party vendors in response to a product order or to add you to a vendor’s commercial bulletin circulation list. In some cases, we can also disclose this information if our License Agreements or Terms of Service have been violated or if, in all good faith, we judge it is legally justified
As with any business, your personal information is also an asset of Blizzard and will become part of our normal business records. As such, in the event of a merger, acquisition, reorganization, bank-ruptcy, or other similar event, your personal information may be transferred to Blizzard 's successor or assignee."
This is from the Blizzard privacy policy in the EULA, it contravenes the UK data protection act and yet they say it applies to the UK and show me where I can "opt out" of this option. This is not making shit up, Ta.
The personal information you provide Blizzard will allow us to fulfill your product or service order; alert you of new products or services, features, or enhancements; handle/route your customer service or technical support questions or issues; to send eCards or “Recruit-a-Friend” emails; and/or notify you of upgrade opportunities, contests, promotions, or special events and offers. Blizzard may enhance or merge the personal information collected at a Blizzard site with data from third parties. Blizzard may also provide your personal information to other companies or organizations that offer products or services that may be of interest to you. In such cases, we will notify you that the information will be shared and provide you with an opportunity to opt-out.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
On November 14 2010 16:32 DaRkFrosT wrote: Blizzard has every right to sue Kespa, if the list in the OP is correct.
Kespa = greedy as shit =/
The list is so pro blizzard its sickening, I mean, sure KeSPA done alot of shit (DQ of Ruby fx) but I dont get why blizz doesnt treat the SCBW like free advertisement.
You could make a thread which disposed KeSPA as the good guy and Blizzard as the villian and then people would agree on that in the thread.
Sigh, netizens easily manipulated even though I guess all anti kespa would come here to show off their hate...
They DID treat it this way by selling the IP rights to GOM for 1 dollar. 1 dollar. If that is not free, then at least its pretty fucking close.
SO You think that if a consumer doesnt agree with a EULA or if the EULA contravenes their local laws they arent entitled to a refund?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either.
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either.
Where in hell do you see that you opening the box means you agreed to it? Are you high?
On November 15 2010 14:55 Vimsey wrote: [quote] Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either.
Where in hell do you see that you opening the box means you agreed to it? Are you high?
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
On November 15 2010 15:39 Gonodactylus wrote: See, suddenly these hotshot 'law undergrads' liars are forced to turn around.
And in fact we are talking about SC BW, not SC2. Remember, this is on the wrong forum. SC BW had nothing on the box about Blizzard owning the replays, the maps the matches and whatever you create using their game.
Secondly, it's right; Blizzard isn't even suing Kespa. So how does it even matter how much you hate kespa? Do you hate OGN&MBC? And I again want to point out that OGN&MBC were, besides Blizzard, one of the few actually making a profit. They got broadcasting rights of the players for free and it's very cheap to create the content. So Kespa made them force to pay to the teams. That is good. It made player conditions better for sure.
OGN and MBC are the only two organizations that can run professional Starcraft tournaments and broadcast them to a wide audience; be it SC BW or SC2. Blizzard is now suing their biggest potential ally because of blind greed.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
And even if an EULA holds up in the US, remember how it holds up in court that corporations have personhood. That was never a law. It still isn't a law. US is a very corrupt country. The fortune500 owns the country, control the politicians and judges.
Blizzard will probably win vs MBC and OGN. But when they extort MBC and OGN into agreeing the rights are 50-50 between them when Kespa runs the leagues and the players provide the creative content the viewers come to watch for, how is that fair and moral? That's all I am saying. Blizzard is immoral. EULAs, which everyone uses, are weak and ought to be illegal always. That's all I am saying and no matter how ignorant of a student at some crappy community college you are, that doesn't change what is already there in print. And let's not forget the Korean government already told Blizzard to change their EULA as it would have been obviously illegal. They didn't change this for the rest of the world because it isn't an issue for the governments there. And if corporations were really real persons, we would all diagnose them as psychopaths and lock them up. They act as psychopaths because they must as bound by law to act as such. Case Dodge bros vs Ford.
As for all those people calling me 'idiot', 'troll', 'kespa agent', 'down syndrome', 'retard', fuck you guys too.
i honestly don't know if you're trolling or just stupid, first you say that although you pressed agree on the EULA, you won't follow anything said in the EULA because "you had no say in it" and now you're attacking the US as a country by saying its corrupt. nothing you have said in this thread have been based on facts or have made sense... can someone just ban this guy?
That has nothing to do with what I said. I said your analogy was horrible
Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either.
No, I think it doesn't mean that. It means if you read the EULA within 30 days and decide you don't agree, you can return the product with a full refund regardless of box's condition.
Regarding that would EULA will upheld or not, I think it depends on case to case. The case with the size of Blizzard is on another level of what are you trying to argue here.
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
Its scary to think we have a very similar organisation here in South Africa called MSSA doing similar things...... its only a matter of time before i guess we are in the same boat unless people stand together against them.
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
Germany - the system builder edition of windows can only be sold with a new pc according to microsofts eula - german law says you can sell it without one - and it is in fact sold seperately
On November 15 2010 14:55 Vimsey wrote: [quote] Providing now extra input or reason why, cheers.
In your example, you imply that you are forced to sign a contract/agreement against your own free will, that you don't have the choice of not signing it upon threat of physical violence.
If your example was to apply true here, it would mean that Blizzard are forcing you to agree with the EULA by threatening you with damage to your persons (either physical or legal) if you don't agree with purchasing the game and installing it.
Last time I checked, I have not heard of any cases of Blizzard suing people for not buying the game
You cant run the game without "agreeing" to the EULA, You have to give another option for it to be legal.
Your other option is to decline.
Or do you seriously mean to imply that you should be given the option to decline and still run the game? I hope not because that is the same retarded argument that the other guy used earlier in the thread... and he got completely demolished
How many places do you know that openly offer a refund if you have.
1) Opened the game. 2) Registered the account key.
Its not impossible to get your money back but not easy either.
Also a parallel I would draw would be UK banks a few years back that openly sold their customer data to advertisers/marketeers when they put in just such implied agreements into their contracts. You cannot do that anymore.
Once again, since you are blind: "IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY CALL (800) 757-7707 TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE."
Also, you can not register the account key without a battle.net account, which has its own EULA that you must agree to.
PS: I thought you were saying earlier that you had gotten many game refunds because you claimed that the UK had laws that protected you?
EDIT: Ah yea, found it: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=168895¤tpage=19#365 "I have got refunds from many games simply by stating my consumer rights when I have needed to the thing is that most people dont know their rights and if you knew anything about the legal profession you would know how much they laugh at EULAs."
That telephone number is American from the american website.
Yes I have, most dont know their rights and as I said before banks in this country used to have such privacy policy with the option of not opening an account with them. It is not legal..
Well, thanks for making me look up the EU policy "IF YOU DO NOT AGREE TO THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT, YOU ARE NOT PERMITTED TO INSTALL OR USE THE GAME. IF YOU REJECT THE TERMS OF THIS AGREEMENT WITHIN THIRTY (30) DAYS AFTER YOUR PURCHASE, YOU MAY ARRANGE TO RETURN THE GAME TO YOUR RETAILER, OR YOU MAY CONTACT BLIZZARD BY EMAIL AT WOWBILLINGSUPPORTEU@BLIZZARD.COM TO REQUEST A FULL REFUND OF THE PURCHASE PRICE, AND YOU SHOULD DELETE THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM IMMEDIATELY."
Same policy, but an email instead of a phone number.
But opening the box means you have "agreeed"to it before you have had the chance to read it. Their words not mine. As I said it contravenes the data protection act with the option of returning the product. You cant do that either.
No, I think it doesn't mean that. It means if you read the EULA within 30 days and decide you don't agree, you can return the product with a full refund regardless of box's condition.
Regarding that would EULA will upheld or not, I think it depends on case to case. The case with the size of Blizzard is on another level of what are you trying to argue here.
Yes I suppose so but "agreeing" to it by not returning it doesnt imply that its legal. If Blizzard breaks local laws by following their EULA and passing on my private information then I do have the option of reporting them for breaking the data protection act I dont suspect I ever will though or that they will pass on my information to just anyone. Its really sad that its got this far v Kespa.
As you say their case of Blizzard v Kespa is different and I have no clue as to how Korean law will view the tournament licence rule. I hope that Blizzard come out on top because it seemed to me Kespa was trying to become a monopoly. Thats my perception of what went on, not sure if thats how others view it..
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
The privacy policy in the EULA contravenes the UK data protection act.
The argument about starcraft being a sport and therefore public property is just so blatantly wrong it just makes it seems an argument born out of desperation as a last resort. The comparison with football just makes it worse. This is because football has never been a private IP, but Starcraft is. This means that the SC brand has an OWNER (as in... Blizzard) and that owner is entitled to have a say in uses of their IP that generate funds.
If football had a private creator, I'm pretty sure FIFA would have to pay that creator for the use of their IP, that's not the case however, too bad for KeSPA. If this was a local issue Blizz would definitely win a lawsuit against KeSPA, I dunno about an international lawsuit though.
If you want a final say, then... not all EULAs are legally enforced or bounded.
EDIT- I only say this because some software EULA do have clauses that state they are not liable for any damages once you open the product.
Most courts do consider a EULA to legally bind you to them at first, because they recognize it as a contract. That's if you agree to the EULA.
However, these contracts are typically not enforced, since common law dictates that all terms of a contract must be disclosed before the contract is executed. This is applied if you opened the product and did not agree to the EULA. In Blizzard's case, they offer you a refund within 30 days of purchase.
The other part of enforcement of EULAs is how you use the product whether you agreed to it or not. If you agreed to use the product, then your use of it is limited by the EULA and how much liability the company has upon you. If you don't agree and/or violate the EULA and infringe on the IP rights of the company, then it can lead to legal action from them.
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
Don't know about the USA, but EULA has no binding power what-so-ever in Sweden beyond the actual software. For example, if you break Microsofts rules and flash your Xbox 360, they can legaly ban you from Live since that's a service they are offering, they can ban you for any reason they want, so the actual EULA doesn't even matter. If I'm allowed by law to do something with a software, no EULA is going to take away that right, the national law far supercedes any random document a company makes me sign.
I dont care for legal stuff but blackening Nada for walking away... he's like a saint. This one is already a proof enough to see who are bad guys here.
And denying comunication of any sorts between progamers and Blizzard... you dont do that kind of stuff unless you are totally wrong and desperate.
No need to be rude, hmm ok I admit they have changed their wording from their games in the past. On my WC3 box it says "The use of this product is subject to the terms of the enclosed EULA". I got the opening thing from microsoft which is their favourite phrase.
They have now changed that to: - "The use of this product is subject to the EULA licence agreement at etc etc."
It still doesnt fly legally though. All I am saying is that a EULA is not binding a legal contract and that you cannot be made to agree with something that isnt legal in the first place. Which is why its wrong to say but its in the EULA because local laws may well override it. Is that so hard to understand?
find me one case where local law overrides EULA.
The privacy policy in the EULA contravenes the UK data protection act.
It seems like most of it requires your consent/authorization.
"Who collects, processes and uses your information?
When you visit a Blizzard site and you are asked to provide information, you only share this informa-tion with Blizzard except where clearly indicated to the contrary. Some services are, however, pro-vided in conjunction with affiliated companies, and for the provision of these services, Blizzard may share your personal information with its affiliated companies, in particular Blizzard Entertainment SAS in France and Blizzard Entertainment Ireland Limited. If a company other than Blizzard receives your personal data, you will be notified before this operation takes place. In any case, the transfer of per-sonal data to another company will only be carried out with your express authorization.
The information you enter on forms on Blizzard’s websites will only be sent to Blizzard once you have clicked the "Send" or the "OK" button. You can halt the transfer of data at any time by quitting the form screen, i.e. by closing your web browser prior to clicking the "Send" or the "OK" buttons; no in-formation will then be sent to Blizzard.
Please bear in mind that message boards and Internet sites linked to our sites could obtain some of your personal information. We would remind you that Blizzard's Privacy Policy does not apply to these message boards or to these other sites, as we have no control over their activities. How your personal information could be used?
The personal data you submit to Blizzard allows us to process your orders, and provide you with the game, customer, and technical support services, and, if you wish, to inform you of our new products, updates and/or competitions, promotional offers and special events.
With your consent, we can also send your personal information to other companies or organisations who offer products which may be of interest to you.
In addition, you personal information can be displayed within the Real ID feature, should you decide so.
Finally, we can use your personal data to generate internal statistics for marketing, consumer profiles or demographic research, etc. to tailor our products and services to satisfy your requirements. Our aim is to better understand and serve our clients. "
(1)In this section— “research purposes” includes statistical or historical purposes; “the relevant conditions”, in relation to any processing of personal data, means the conditions—
(a)that the data are not processed to support measures or decisions with respect to particular individuals, and
(b)that the data are not processed in such a way that substantial damage or substantial distress is, or is likely to be, caused to any data subject.
(2)For the purposes of the second data protection principle, the further processing of personal data only for research purposes in compliance with the relevant conditions is not to be regarded as incompatible with the purposes for which they were obtained.
(3)Personal data which are processed only for research purposes in compliance with the relevant conditions may, notwithstanding the fifth data protection principle, be kept indefinitely.
(4)Personal data which are processed only for research purposes are exempt from section 7 if—
(a)they are processed in compliance with the relevant conditions, and
(b)the results of the research or any resulting statistics are not made available in a form which identifies data subjects or any of them.
(5)For the purposes of subsections (2) to (4) personal data are not to be treated as processed otherwise than for research purposes merely because the data are disclosed—
(a)to any person, for research purposes only,
(b)to the data subject or a person acting on his behalf,
(c)at the request, or with the consent, of the data subject or a person acting on his behalf, or
(d)in circumstances in which the person making the disclosure has reasonable grounds for believing that the disclosure falls within paragraph (a), (b) or (c).
Miscellaneous: This License Agreement shall be deemed to have been made and executed in the State of California and any dispute arising hereunder shall be resolved in accordance with the law of California. You agree that any claim asserted in any legal proceeding by one of the parties against the other shall be commenced and maintained in any state or federal court located in the State of California, County of Los Angeles, having subject matter jurisdiction with respect to the dispute between the parties. This License Agreement may be amended, altered, or modified only by an instrument in writing, specifying such amendment, alteration or modification, executed by both parties. In the event that any provision of these License Agreement shall be held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable, such provision will be enforced to the maximum extent permissible and the remaining portions of this License Agreement shall be remain in full force and effect. This License Agreement constitutes and contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersede any prior oral or written agreements.
Starcraft II US EULA point 17E and 18 (http://us.blizzard.com/en-us/company/legal/sc2eula.html):
If you are a resident of the United States, any arbitration will take place at any reasonable location convenient for you. For residents outside the United States, any arbitration shall be initiated in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of America. Any Dispute not subject to arbitration (other than claims proceeding in any small claims court), or where no election to arbitrate has been made, shall be decided by a court of competent jurisdiction within the County of Los Angeles, State of California, United States of America, and you and Blizzard agree to submit to the personal jurisdiction of that court.
18. Governing Law. Except as otherwise set forth herein, this License Agreement shall be governed by, and will be construed under, the Laws of the United States of America and the law of the State of Delaware, without regard to choice of law principles. The application of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods is expressly excluded. For our customers who purchased a license to the Game in, and are a resident of Canada, other laws may apply if you choose not to agree to arbitrate as set forth above; provided, however, that such laws shall affect this Agreement only to the extent required by such jurisdiction. In such a case, this Agreement shall be interpreted to give maximum effect to the terms and conditions hereof. Those who choose to access the Service from locations outside of the United States and Canada do so on their own initiative and are responsible for compliance with local laws if and to the extent local laws are applicable
Miscellaneous. This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws applicable in your country of residence. In the event that any provision of this License Agreement shall be held by a court or other tribunal of competent jurisdiction to be unenforceable and/or invalid, the remaining portions of this License Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. This License Agreement constitutes and contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the subject matter hereof and supersedes any prior oral or written agreements; provided however, that this License Agreement shall coexist with the Terms of Use, and in the event of a conflict between this License and the Terms of Use, the terms of this License Agreement shall govern and supersede the Terms of Use. Sections 5, 13, 14, 16, 17 and 18 hereof shall survive the termination of this Agreement. I hereby acknowledge that I have read and understand the foregoing License Agreement and agree that by clicking "Accept" or installing the Game I am acknowledging my agreement to be bound by the terms and conditions of this License Agreement.
So for BW, the legal process will be held in California (Los Angeles) using Californian law.
For SC2 US; if you are US resident, the legal process will be governed by the Laws of the United States of America and the law of the State of Delaware and held in the court of Los Angeles (if I understand it correctly).
For SC2 EU; the legal process will be held and in accordance to each country's law. So the legal process in the and outcome in the UK might not reflect of what would happen in Germany.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
Technically they arent conrtacts and arent legally bound. Clicking yes != user signature accepting the contract. Maybe when they add a requirement of a user digital signature it would be a fully legal signed contract but right now there is a slight chance of wining in court against such EULA.
It's rarely a good idea to discuss an ongoing case. There is a reason even professional law council's disagree on what's right untill the judgement. You can never be sure.
E: What constitutes acceptance to an offer (an hence an agreement) is diffrent in diffrent legal systems. You also have to take local consumer protection into account.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
i think it doesnt seem that illogical that kespa shouldnt have to pay blizz to profit from sc1 tourneys (if played on LAN and not bnet). i guess this is why blizz got rid of LAN support and is making bnet mandatory to stop this from happening.
On November 14 2010 17:07 Pleiades wrote: Of course not all EULAs are legally-bound, but they are a contract you make with the company/developer.
Technically they arent conrtacts and arent legally bound. Clicking yes != user signature accepting the contract. Maybe when they add a requirement of a user digital signature it would be a fully legal signed contract but right now there is a slight chance of wining in court against such EULA.
Um, no, they are legal contracts, and yes, they are legally bound.
Case about the enforcement of EULA in Canada: Rudder v. Microsoft Corp.
This is from Wikipedia, I have the entire case but I thought that would be too hard to read for most people.
Background Rudder brought a class action on behalf of MSN subscribers in Canada for, among other things, improperly charging MSN subscriber's credit cards violating the terms of the contract.
Microsoft filed to dismiss the class action on the grounds of forum non conveniens. They argued that the contract between them and the subscribers contained a forum selection clause which gave exclusive jurisdiction to Washington state to resolve any disputes.
Rudder argued that the particular clause was not valid as it was not adequately brought to the attention of the user. The provision was sufficiently important that it required special notice.
Opinion of the Court Justice Winkler found in favour of Microsoft and held that the clause was enforceable. Winkler rejected Rudder's argument, stating that "Admittedly, the entire Agreement cannot be displayed at once on the computer screen, but this is not materially different from a multi-page written document which requires a party to turn the pages."
Winkler observed that users were required to click on the "I agree" button to accept the terms, and that the impugned clause was no harder to read than any of the others. The sign-up procedure itself required users to click "I agree" twice, where the second time the user was told that they would still be bound to the terms even if they do not read them all. Winkler did not find it reasonable for Rudder to argue for the enforcement of all the other terms of the contract except for the forum clause. A finding in favour of the plaintiff, said Winkler, would not advance the goals of commercial certainty.
In concluding, Winkler held that "click-wrap" agreements in general should be "afforded the sanctity that must be given to any agreement in writing."
Looking at the original text on this decision, I'd say the court's position was quite firm on the legal status of EULA, because of "commercial certainty". Which is one of the important fundamental idea of today's business world.
This is only a lower court decision though, but we can clearly see why most people consider EULA a legal contract.
Of course, not all EULA will be enforeable, but that's up to the court's descretion, but that's the same for any other contract, the court can override any clause in a legal contract that they think is unreasonable. However, they are still legal contracts, and one clause being override doesn't nessesarily undermine the legitmacy of the entire contract.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
listen to this man.
I listened.
It doesn't make sense.
Play the "victim card" or "conspricy card" in an argument only makes you look stupid.
On November 14 2010 16:52 Sozeles wrote: Same with national level, every nations association pays money to FIFA to be able to play official matches. I'll bet it's the same in the US with the armored handball you guys call football, the teams have to pay money to the NFL, NBA or whatever to be able to participate. If you do not pay, you can't play.
Armored Handball is the best alternate name for American football I've ever heard. I just wanted to tell you that. Good job dude!
I don't know if this guy is reading this thread anymore, but you can't use someone else's IP to create IP of your own that is protected by law without obtaining permission of the owner of the original IP. For example, if I want to write a series of short stories set in George R. R. Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" and sell them, I couldn't do it and claim that it's my IP because I'm using his IP. I also couldn't sell this story legally without obtaining Martin's permission first. This is ridiculously simple to understand.
Zemiron, I feel that's a bad analogy. It's much more like writing a book in Windows Word. Which is Microsoft's IP. You are using their IP to create your own.
has anyone read that thing you have to agree to on na to play?
no hosting of any tournament is allowed without blizz= instant ban internet cafe = instant ban sharing your account = instant ban playing a legue game with different software (i think like laddering with a different server) = instant ban
maybe kespa and blizz are as money hungry as each other, but in the sake of sc2 freedom i hope kespa wins.
Kespa is greedy, they are just monopolizing over the fact that they have the players and teams locked up on contracts. They have no future with SC2 and they know it, they are just going milk as much money possible until the big transition.
On November 14 2010 14:26 Pizzapie wrote: Just something I've discovered while browsing the web. Since I'm Korean myself it didn't take me too long to translate this.
The attachment is the screenshot of a forum post in the KeSPA website. This was written (as you can see on the top of the image) was 9th Nov 2010.
So Here goes ============================================================== F***ing KeSPA, despite some views of patriotism they've shown... 1. KeSPA was born 2. Blizzard didn't care about it 3. Found out KeSPA was collecting profit (ticket fee) from offline audience for the OnGameNet Finals match. 4. Blizzard asked KeSPA to stop 5. KeSPA starts an agreement with OGN and MBC to make them pay KeSPA to broadcast SC matches. 6. Blizzard angry. Rawr > 7. GomTV, the only organisation to contact Blizzard directly to ask permission to broadcast 'internet streams' of SC matches. (OGN and MBCgame are cable TV. Original MBC channel itself is a public channel) 8. Blizzard agrees and receives '1 Dollar' to give permission to GomTV. (assuming its a gesture as to show OGN and MBCgame) 9. GomTV opens a league called 'GomTV Classic' 10. At around Season 4 of GomTV Classic, KeSPA calls them and tells them to pay up for broadcasting SC. 11. GomTV tells them we have permission from Blizzard and should step off (bitch). 12. KeSPA commands players to not enter GomTV leagues. (Players had contracts with KeSPA) 13. GomTV Classic fails miserably. 14. Blizzard is more angry. 15. Blizzard, to honor their products and protect its copyright and ownership (legal stuff), steps up to the middle of the conflict. 16. Blizzard and KeSPA goes into negotiation. 17. KeSPA goes 'e-sports is also sports', 'do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match', 'SC is a public property and is accessible by anyone' etc bullcrap 18. Blizzard boss Michael Morheim comes to Korea for the promotion of SC2 and also to have a meeting with the current SC progamers. 19. KeSPA contacts all Korean SC teams and threaten them to not meet up with Michael. 20. Michael Morheim was sent back without any gain. 21. Blizzard tries to negotiate but KeSPA still bullcrapping about 'please understand e-sports' 22. Blizzard and KeSPA came to a result of the negotiation. 23. Blizzard gives rights to GomTV to broadcast any Blizzard games (SC, SC2, WoW, W3). At the same time allowed SC leagues to be broadcasted under KeSPA until August. If they do not follow this conduct, Blizzard will officially show legal action. 24. KeSPA tries to appeal and goes aggressive. 25. Since OGN and MBCgame don't want to lose its broadcasting rights, they try to negotiate with GomTV 26. OGN and MBCgame understands they're still going to be paying money to contract the rights to broadcast leagues anyway, only difference is the receipient. 27. KeSPA's only weapon is the contracted players and teams. 28. After SC2 released, KeSPA did not allow SC players to touch the game. 29. Therefore most SC2 gamers are older (near 1st generation) gamers, new faces or players without tied contracts. 30. Suddenly GomTV announces GSL (SC2 open) 31. The scale of the prize money is off the charts and is the highest in the history of e-sports. 32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2.
(lists of SC2 hating articles and funny part is the reporter/journalist is the same dude) *Blizzard, 'Pressuring' Korea with its 'SC2' release up coming. *[GAME] - Dissapointing reviews of SC2's early stages *Blizzard says 'We must Destroy SC1 for SC2 to live! *'Warning' SC2, Your computer may break down. *'SC2 fried my graphic cards' - Internet Cafe bosses and gamers uproar *Where has the fame of SC2 gone? After 4 weeks of sales... (they compared to food getting cold) *NaDa Lee, Yun-Yeol moving to SC2. Once an honored gamer, now a prize money hunter. *SC2's popularity down the sink. How Deep?
(2 comments below this post) - There is an article dissing NaDa, titled 'He once was an honorable player, now he is a money hunter' The reporter has openly made an article which he can easily be sued for. I am surprised how far these journalists can go for petty money received by such a big oragnisation. Don't they have shame?
- Desperate act of some poor reporter ==============================================================
Words inside brackets are mostly my opinions or comments. I did not do a direct translation, since I am not a professional translator. I only tried to translate how the original poster felt.
============================================================== Thread Title: 50+ reasons why KeSPA is getting flamed.
1) League broadcasting rights conflict
1. A team league organized by MBCgame and Proleague by OGN was forced to unite and taken off of ownership, in order to abolish their private broadcasting rights. (KeSPA butted in between MBC and OGN's efforts to organize the league) 2. Originally created by OGN and OGN+MBCgame united Proleague sponsorship was forcefully taken by KeSPA. 3. For 3 years, requested the Broadcasting Stations to pay 1.7billion Won, with their broadcasting 'rights' which... Blizzard has the copyright of the product (SC). This sparked up another issue when the recent negotiations happened. 4. KeSPA gave some company called IBsports (they have a sub company called IEG). Which would cause KeSPA to wash their hands and could have pushed all the blames to them. 5. Once they boycotted one of the MBCgame Survivor series. 6. KeSPA tries to open their own league called 'KeSPA Cup' but it ended being a small scale than a local internet cafe competition. 7. Forced a cut down in scale for leagues that were 'Player based' and raised in scale for 'Team based' to enlarge their profits through sponsorship. (Sponsoring a team would be more benefitial since they risk less if a team has many good players) 8. League was broadcasted 5 days a week, causing its value per match less anticipated and its excitement to drop.
2) Rules and Policy issues 9. DQ for typing 'PP' instead of 'PPP'. They changed this rule after its first incident. 10. Typed 'a' and got DQ. Later this made the fans re-read their rules and found a backdoor where it quoted 'KeSPA referees "COULD" give the player a DQ' which sparked 'That means they can do whatever they feel like in those situations'. 11. Only able to type GG or gg. If typed WW (which is ㅈㅈ in Korean chat) or any variaties were to be DQed. 12. Accidentally pressing ESC while countdown happening (5,4,3,2,1 for SC) made them leave the game which lead to a DQ. 13. The gameplay which when the Worker-Squeeze-thru-minerals-and-buildings is CLEARLY a bug, was allowed because of this reason. "That is not specified in our rules". Since then, Pro gamers used this as method as a 'strategy' and even maps which require these gameplay appeared. (Funny how SlayerS_BoxeR's allied mine was banned but this.) 14. When the first NATE MSL finals had a problem of a 'Blackout', KeSPA lied about 'we have a replay' even though they did not and made their own decision 15. KeSPA had applied 'bonus points' for players rankings, which were different depending on if they were from OGN or MBC, making another conflict issue between the two. 16. Website database error or so called 'glitch' had made NaDa's (Lee, Yun-Yeol) records to show different to its facts. 17. Because KeSPA did not have a stable record of the players, they had to use OGN and MBCgame's records and made it look like theirs. There even was a broker who were selling player data. (Win Loss ratio and private practice replays) 18. KeSPA did not have a guideline for their sponsors agreements (payments) and requested 2billion won. Sponsors started to back away. 19. If players were drafted and if they declined KeSPA's decision, they had a rule to 'Not allowing in any pro teams for 3 years' so they had to go to a team even if they didn't want to. 20. There was a FA (Free Agent) rule applied in 2009 and whatever the team calls the highest bid for a player, the player wassent to that team. Because not all teams had the similar financial ability, since there were no 'against' rules, the richest team could always bid the highest and get all the best players they wanted. Therefore this FA rule failed. 21. Then they changed the rules into 'Choose your opponent'. This made the tournament less interesting because the viewers could now 'calculate' and predict matches even before the results of any matches came through. Fans started saying 'This could lead to a rigged/fixed matches... which eventually happened... So they changed it to 'Blind Entry' rule where they picked opponents but not publicizing it. 22. Proleague 08-09 post season was participated in '2' days due to financial reasons (whered all the sponsor money go?) and resulted in the lowest audience in history of Proleague.
3) Attitude towards other games. 23. Although KeSPA was made because of Starcraft, their organisation was meant to be for 'ALL' progamers, despite what games they were. Even though Korea had the good players for many other games (W3, Counter-Strike etc) they sought that games other than SC wouldn't make profit, therefore near-ignored support for other games. 24. They completely ignored the league support for Kart-Rider (Game by NCsoft, Famous racing game amongst Asian gamers.) All the contracted players were left to take care of themselves (contracted for nothing pretty much) 25. They hand picked their own players for 'KeSPA league but was never ongoing and the support was hardly seen. 26. Even major game categories were narrowed down to Korean specific games (Sudden Attack, Kart-Rider, Special Force etc) They say they insisted those games as an official e-sports category but never had the department to support them in the first place. 27. Especially for 'Special Force', a game which never had its popularity beyond Korea (obviously not even close to Starcraft), they started devoting its prize money to this game and resulted in the 'Proleague 2 days finals tournament'. (Read 22) 28. Already applying the 5 days per week matches for SC, for an association which should be promoting and supporting 'Games' in general as a sport, mainly focused on SC only and damaged the balance of e-sports, making it 'Starcraft-Sports'. It is suspected how they are named Esports Player Association if they are not doing what they are named after.
4) Fixed Matches issue 29. When the issue sparked, they were as if seeking for justice but they mostly tried to stay out of it (trying to avoid any legal issues) 30. When Progamer Mr. Park, announced his retirement from gaming, KeSPA tried to ignore him and avoided any involvement. 31. When Progamer Mr. Won announced his retirement, They did not even notify this officially and even tried to hide it to be published. 32. They never officially said 'Banned' within their system and they are still in the 'Retired' Status therefore fans were saying 'That is ironic since if they wanted to come back to the Progamer scene, by law they don't have any restrictions to do so' 33. They did not come up with any resolutions or plans to prevent this 'fixed matches' happening in the future.
5) Blizzard and Gretech issue. 34. KeSPA boycotted players entering GomTV classic (Season 4) They are trying to conceal the fact that they've done them on purpose. 35. Ordered the current progamers to enter the Beta phase of SC2 36. Tried to play a game (ironically) involving the media and destroyed the NDA 37. Even though Blizzard holds the copyright for SC, KeSPA says SC is a public property and its accessible by everyone, and saying they've promoted the game. Clearly 'carrying the war into the enemy´s camp'. 38. Players like NaDa and SlayerS_BoxeR were treated as 'traitors' for leaving SC contracts 39. In their public hearing, when they were trying to appeal, they involved progamer names such as Jaedong who is innocent. Bringing in un-notified 3rd party into their conflict. 40. While this public hearing was taken place, they tried to make all other games involving progaming to be public property, just like what they did to SC. 41. Progaming teams and Progamers received threats from KeSPA if they contact anyone from Blizzard or affiliate with them in any possibility, they will give them a hard time. 42. In Germany, when NaDa was invited for a show match, someone re-streamed this though a Korean Live-Streaming website (called AFRIKA), KeSPA called the managers and made him GG in the middle of a game and end the game immediately. 43. As soon as NaDa moved to the SC2 scene, KeSPA had 'Deleted' NaDa's database. Later they re-uploaded it due to the fan's anger and they replied back as a 'Glitch' in the system. 44. As per Blizzard, the negotiation went as KeSPA's attitude was ignoring the fact that Blizzard had the copyrights even though they've CREATED the game. 45. OGN was going to broadcast the SC2 Open as a joint broadcast but was soon denied which lead to suspision that a certain organisation ordered them to cancel it. 46. The Negotiations have not came to a decision yet they've started the 10-11 Proleague, technically illegal. 47. Illegally given approval for MBCgame's Bigfile MSL, Kyung-Nam STX cup and PDPOP MSL. 48. KeSPA said they will pay 300million Won per year when they've requested 1.7billion won per 3 years to the broadcasters, (Read point 3). This is obviously out of logic and an unfair business. (I'd just say Greedy) 49. While negotiating they are continuously spitting out new suggestions and delaying its completion 50. 'SC2 to be handles by KeSPA' was the main topic of KeSPA's opinions in the negotiation period.
51. Complete ignorance towards the viewers and fans and only focusing on their own profit. Typical bully style.
OP of this post wanted to stay quiet but as the situation had gotten this far, he was trying to emphasize the wrong doings of KeSPA's thoughts of 'Even though we made many mistakes, there HAS TO BE an association'. OP Clearly hates this idea and also he had made replies for Gretech's selfish doing as well. But it had came down to his decision that KeSPA is the root of all evil in this case and is positive that this is the case. An organisation trying to earn profits without communicating with its fans or community is always the wrong way to go and should not even be negotiated. Basically saying 'They are not worth it'.
OP Also wishes to see great matches between players and thus providing the entertainment purely for the fans and supporters. Happy Ending is always good. ======================================================================
Please do not hesitate to PM me if u have questions on anything posted here. -Pizzapie
EDIT: I reckon the title should have been "KeSPA hating Korean summarizes situation" or something similar lol. I'm posting as if all Koreans hate KeSPA.
On November 14 2010 14:26 Pizzapie wrote:32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2..
O.O? To what extent, and what examples other than the bit involving Nada that you mentioned?
I'll actually list the article titles as shown in the bottom section of the screenshot. They're some online news website article, typically done by the same jouranlist over and over hating SC2.
I dunno why they're so up in arms about KeSPA "Paying" journalists to write negative things, especially when there is zero evidence of that matter. What's amusing is that there is actual evidence that Blizzard has been paying off Korean journalists to not write anything remotely negative about SC2, but hey, "no one cares about that" right?
pgr21 is pretty much anti kespa trash, they're so anti kespa down there that they will paint them as the devil however they can. meanwhile the "list" has been originating for a while and it's kind of a very skewed way of looking at everything
EDIT: Basically, it's really easy to look at why you dislike something if you're actively looking for why you dislike something. No need to take anything that takes such an extreme interpretation so seriously :|
On November 16 2010 09:50 hinnolinn wrote: Zemiron, I feel that's a bad analogy. It's much more like writing a book in Windows Word. Which is Microsoft's IP. You are using their IP to create your own.
That's a terrible analogy. It is impossible to play Starcraft without using Blizzard's IP. Just as it's impossible to write in Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" world without using Martin's IP. There are plenty of ways to write a book that don't use Word. I think my analogy holds.
On November 16 2010 09:50 hinnolinn wrote: Zemiron, I feel that's a bad analogy. It's much more like writing a book in Windows Word. Which is Microsoft's IP. You are using their IP to create your own.
That's a terrible analogy. It is impossible to play Starcraft without using Blizzard's IP. Just as it's impossible to write in Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" world without using Martin's IP. There are plenty of ways to write a book that don't use Word. I think my analogy holds.
well actually, its a fallacy, more specifically a false analogy.
The situations are altogether different, and you can’t make an analogy between them.
You should qualify what ties the ip of a book to be similar to the ip of a game, when reading your post it appears you have flaws in your argument that appear subjective if not irrelevant.
On November 14 2010 14:26 Pizzapie wrote: Just something I've discovered while browsing the web. Since I'm Korean myself it didn't take me too long to translate this.
The attachment is the screenshot of a forum post in the KeSPA website. This was written (as you can see on the top of the image) was 9th Nov 2010.
So Here goes ============================================================== F***ing KeSPA, despite some views of patriotism they've shown... 1. KeSPA was born 2. Blizzard didn't care about it 3. Found out KeSPA was collecting profit (ticket fee) from offline audience for the OnGameNet Finals match. 4. Blizzard asked KeSPA to stop 5. KeSPA starts an agreement with OGN and MBC to make them pay KeSPA to broadcast SC matches. 6. Blizzard angry. Rawr > 7. GomTV, the only organisation to contact Blizzard directly to ask permission to broadcast 'internet streams' of SC matches. (OGN and MBCgame are cable TV. Original MBC channel itself is a public channel) 8. Blizzard agrees and receives '1 Dollar' to give permission to GomTV. (assuming its a gesture as to show OGN and MBCgame) 9. GomTV opens a league called 'GomTV Classic' 10. At around Season 4 of GomTV Classic, KeSPA calls them and tells them to pay up for broadcasting SC. 11. GomTV tells them we have permission from Blizzard and should step off (bitch). 12. KeSPA commands players to not enter GomTV leagues. (Players had contracts with KeSPA) 13. GomTV Classic fails miserably. 14. Blizzard is more angry. 15. Blizzard, to honor their products and protect its copyright and ownership (legal stuff), steps up to the middle of the conflict. 16. Blizzard and KeSPA goes into negotiation. 17. KeSPA goes 'e-sports is also sports', 'do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match', 'SC is a public property and is accessible by anyone' etc bullcrap 18. Blizzard boss Michael Morheim comes to Korea for the promotion of SC2 and also to have a meeting with the current SC progamers. 19. KeSPA contacts all Korean SC teams and threaten them to not meet up with Michael. 20. Michael Morheim was sent back without any gain. 21. Blizzard tries to negotiate but KeSPA still bullcrapping about 'please understand e-sports' 22. Blizzard and KeSPA came to a result of the negotiation. 23. Blizzard gives rights to GomTV to broadcast any Blizzard games (SC, SC2, WoW, W3). At the same time allowed SC leagues to be broadcasted under KeSPA until August. If they do not follow this conduct, Blizzard will officially show legal action. 24. KeSPA tries to appeal and goes aggressive. 25. Since OGN and MBCgame don't want to lose its broadcasting rights, they try to negotiate with GomTV 26. OGN and MBCgame understands they're still going to be paying money to contract the rights to broadcast leagues anyway, only difference is the receipient. 27. KeSPA's only weapon is the contracted players and teams. 28. After SC2 released, KeSPA did not allow SC players to touch the game. 29. Therefore most SC2 gamers are older (near 1st generation) gamers, new faces or players without tied contracts. 30. Suddenly GomTV announces GSL (SC2 open) 31. The scale of the prize money is off the charts and is the highest in the history of e-sports. 32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2.
(lists of SC2 hating articles and funny part is the reporter/journalist is the same dude) *Blizzard, 'Pressuring' Korea with its 'SC2' release up coming. *[GAME] - Dissapointing reviews of SC2's early stages *Blizzard says 'We must Destroy SC1 for SC2 to live! *'Warning' SC2, Your computer may break down. *'SC2 fried my graphic cards' - Internet Cafe bosses and gamers uproar *Where has the fame of SC2 gone? After 4 weeks of sales... (they compared to food getting cold) *NaDa Lee, Yun-Yeol moving to SC2. Once an honored gamer, now a prize money hunter. *SC2's popularity down the sink. How Deep?
(2 comments below this post) - There is an article dissing NaDa, titled 'He once was an honorable player, now he is a money hunter' The reporter has openly made an article which he can easily be sued for. I am surprised how far these journalists can go for petty money received by such a big oragnisation. Don't they have shame?
- Desperate act of some poor reporter ==============================================================
Words inside brackets are mostly my opinions or comments. I did not do a direct translation, since I am not a professional translator. I only tried to translate how the original poster felt.
============================================================== Thread Title: 50+ reasons why KeSPA is getting flamed.
1) League broadcasting rights conflict
1. A team league organized by MBCgame and Proleague by OGN was forced to unite and taken off of ownership, in order to abolish their private broadcasting rights. (KeSPA butted in between MBC and OGN's efforts to organize the league) 2. Originally created by OGN and OGN+MBCgame united Proleague sponsorship was forcefully taken by KeSPA. 3. For 3 years, requested the Broadcasting Stations to pay 1.7billion Won, with their broadcasting 'rights' which... Blizzard has the copyright of the product (SC). This sparked up another issue when the recent negotiations happened. 4. KeSPA gave some company called IBsports (they have a sub company called IEG). Which would cause KeSPA to wash their hands and could have pushed all the blames to them. 5. Once they boycotted one of the MBCgame Survivor series. 6. KeSPA tries to open their own league called 'KeSPA Cup' but it ended being a small scale than a local internet cafe competition. 7. Forced a cut down in scale for leagues that were 'Player based' and raised in scale for 'Team based' to enlarge their profits through sponsorship. (Sponsoring a team would be more benefitial since they risk less if a team has many good players) 8. League was broadcasted 5 days a week, causing its value per match less anticipated and its excitement to drop.
2) Rules and Policy issues 9. DQ for typing 'PP' instead of 'PPP'. They changed this rule after its first incident. 10. Typed 'a' and got DQ. Later this made the fans re-read their rules and found a backdoor where it quoted 'KeSPA referees "COULD" give the player a DQ' which sparked 'That means they can do whatever they feel like in those situations'. 11. Only able to type GG or gg. If typed WW (which is ㅈㅈ in Korean chat) or any variaties were to be DQed. 12. Accidentally pressing ESC while countdown happening (5,4,3,2,1 for SC) made them leave the game which lead to a DQ. 13. The gameplay which when the Worker-Squeeze-thru-minerals-and-buildings is CLEARLY a bug, was allowed because of this reason. "That is not specified in our rules". Since then, Pro gamers used this as method as a 'strategy' and even maps which require these gameplay appeared. (Funny how SlayerS_BoxeR's allied mine was banned but this.) 14. When the first NATE MSL finals had a problem of a 'Blackout', KeSPA lied about 'we have a replay' even though they did not and made their own decision 15. KeSPA had applied 'bonus points' for players rankings, which were different depending on if they were from OGN or MBC, making another conflict issue between the two. 16. Website database error or so called 'glitch' had made NaDa's (Lee, Yun-Yeol) records to show different to its facts. 17. Because KeSPA did not have a stable record of the players, they had to use OGN and MBCgame's records and made it look like theirs. There even was a broker who were selling player data. (Win Loss ratio and private practice replays) 18. KeSPA did not have a guideline for their sponsors agreements (payments) and requested 2billion won. Sponsors started to back away. 19. If players were drafted and if they declined KeSPA's decision, they had a rule to 'Not allowing in any pro teams for 3 years' so they had to go to a team even if they didn't want to. 20. There was a FA (Free Agent) rule applied in 2009 and whatever the team calls the highest bid for a player, the player wassent to that team. Because not all teams had the similar financial ability, since there were no 'against' rules, the richest team could always bid the highest and get all the best players they wanted. Therefore this FA rule failed. 21. Then they changed the rules into 'Choose your opponent'. This made the tournament less interesting because the viewers could now 'calculate' and predict matches even before the results of any matches came through. Fans started saying 'This could lead to a rigged/fixed matches... which eventually happened... So they changed it to 'Blind Entry' rule where they picked opponents but not publicizing it. 22. Proleague 08-09 post season was participated in '2' days due to financial reasons (whered all the sponsor money go?) and resulted in the lowest audience in history of Proleague.
3) Attitude towards other games. 23. Although KeSPA was made because of Starcraft, their organisation was meant to be for 'ALL' progamers, despite what games they were. Even though Korea had the good players for many other games (W3, Counter-Strike etc) they sought that games other than SC wouldn't make profit, therefore near-ignored support for other games. 24. They completely ignored the league support for Kart-Rider (Game by NCsoft, Famous racing game amongst Asian gamers.) All the contracted players were left to take care of themselves (contracted for nothing pretty much) 25. They hand picked their own players for 'KeSPA league but was never ongoing and the support was hardly seen. 26. Even major game categories were narrowed down to Korean specific games (Sudden Attack, Kart-Rider, Special Force etc) They say they insisted those games as an official e-sports category but never had the department to support them in the first place. 27. Especially for 'Special Force', a game which never had its popularity beyond Korea (obviously not even close to Starcraft), they started devoting its prize money to this game and resulted in the 'Proleague 2 days finals tournament'. (Read 22) 28. Already applying the 5 days per week matches for SC, for an association which should be promoting and supporting 'Games' in general as a sport, mainly focused on SC only and damaged the balance of e-sports, making it 'Starcraft-Sports'. It is suspected how they are named Esports Player Association if they are not doing what they are named after.
4) Fixed Matches issue 29. When the issue sparked, they were as if seeking for justice but they mostly tried to stay out of it (trying to avoid any legal issues) 30. When Progamer Mr. Park, announced his retirement from gaming, KeSPA tried to ignore him and avoided any involvement. 31. When Progamer Mr. Won announced his retirement, They did not even notify this officially and even tried to hide it to be published. 32. They never officially said 'Banned' within their system and they are still in the 'Retired' Status therefore fans were saying 'That is ironic since if they wanted to come back to the Progamer scene, by law they don't have any restrictions to do so' 33. They did not come up with any resolutions or plans to prevent this 'fixed matches' happening in the future.
5) Blizzard and Gretech issue. 34. KeSPA boycotted players entering GomTV classic (Season 4) They are trying to conceal the fact that they've done them on purpose. 35. Ordered the current progamers to enter the Beta phase of SC2 36. Tried to play a game (ironically) involving the media and destroyed the NDA 37. Even though Blizzard holds the copyright for SC, KeSPA says SC is a public property and its accessible by everyone, and saying they've promoted the game. Clearly 'carrying the war into the enemy´s camp'. 38. Players like NaDa and SlayerS_BoxeR were treated as 'traitors' for leaving SC contracts 39. In their public hearing, when they were trying to appeal, they involved progamer names such as Jaedong who is innocent. Bringing in un-notified 3rd party into their conflict. 40. While this public hearing was taken place, they tried to make all other games involving progaming to be public property, just like what they did to SC. 41. Progaming teams and Progamers received threats from KeSPA if they contact anyone from Blizzard or affiliate with them in any possibility, they will give them a hard time. 42. In Germany, when NaDa was invited for a show match, someone re-streamed this though a Korean Live-Streaming website (called AFRIKA), KeSPA called the managers and made him GG in the middle of a game and end the game immediately. 43. As soon as NaDa moved to the SC2 scene, KeSPA had 'Deleted' NaDa's database. Later they re-uploaded it due to the fan's anger and they replied back as a 'Glitch' in the system. 44. As per Blizzard, the negotiation went as KeSPA's attitude was ignoring the fact that Blizzard had the copyrights even though they've CREATED the game. 45. OGN was going to broadcast the SC2 Open as a joint broadcast but was soon denied which lead to suspision that a certain organisation ordered them to cancel it. 46. The Negotiations have not came to a decision yet they've started the 10-11 Proleague, technically illegal. 47. Illegally given approval for MBCgame's Bigfile MSL, Kyung-Nam STX cup and PDPOP MSL. 48. KeSPA said they will pay 300million Won per year when they've requested 1.7billion won per 3 years to the broadcasters, (Read point 3). This is obviously out of logic and an unfair business. (I'd just say Greedy) 49. While negotiating they are continuously spitting out new suggestions and delaying its completion 50. 'SC2 to be handles by KeSPA' was the main topic of KeSPA's opinions in the negotiation period.
51. Complete ignorance towards the viewers and fans and only focusing on their own profit. Typical bully style.
OP of this post wanted to stay quiet but as the situation had gotten this far, he was trying to emphasize the wrong doings of KeSPA's thoughts of 'Even though we made many mistakes, there HAS TO BE an association'. OP Clearly hates this idea and also he had made replies for Gretech's selfish doing as well. But it had came down to his decision that KeSPA is the root of all evil in this case and is positive that this is the case. An organisation trying to earn profits without communicating with its fans or community is always the wrong way to go and should not even be negotiated. Basically saying 'They are not worth it'.
OP Also wishes to see great matches between players and thus providing the entertainment purely for the fans and supporters. Happy Ending is always good. ======================================================================
Please do not hesitate to PM me if u have questions on anything posted here. -Pizzapie
EDIT: I reckon the title should have been "KeSPA hating Korean summarizes situation" or something similar lol. I'm posting as if all Koreans hate KeSPA.
On November 14 2010 14:26 Pizzapie wrote:32. KeSPA pays online media/journalism organisations to start making articles dissing SC2..
O.O? To what extent, and what examples other than the bit involving Nada that you mentioned?
I'll actually list the article titles as shown in the bottom section of the screenshot. They're some online news website article, typically done by the same jouranlist over and over hating SC2.
I dunno why they're so up in arms about KeSPA "Paying" journalists to write negative things, especially when there is zero evidence of that matter. What's amusing is that there is actual evidence that Blizzard has been paying off Korean journalists to not write anything remotely negative about SC2, but hey, "no one cares about that" right?
pgr21 is pretty much anti kespa trash, they're so anti kespa down there that they will paint them as the devil however they can. meanwhile the "list" has been originating for a while and it's kind of a very skewed way of looking at everything
EDIT: Basically, it's really easy to look at why you dislike something if you're actively looking for why you dislike something. No need to take anything that takes such an extreme interpretation so seriously :|
Yeah as I was saying a few pages ago, these are just one side's interpretation of the events that have happened. Yet this thread is filled with people taking the entire list as 100% fact and becoming as fanatic as the "BW fanatics" they keep mentioning.
Thank you for stepping into this thread and clearing up everything. You're like our link to what's going on in Korea/the Korean SC Community.
As for said evidence about Blizzard paying off journalists, has that been posted before? I must have missed it.
Thank you so much for this article. You informed me in the current situation in a matter of minutes. Before, I knew that Blizzard was trying to protect their rights but I thought it was just Blizzard being greedy. Now I know. TY for informing me.
On November 16 2010 09:50 hinnolinn wrote: Zemiron, I feel that's a bad analogy. It's much more like writing a book in Windows Word. Which is Microsoft's IP. You are using their IP to create your own.
That's a terrible analogy. It is impossible to play Starcraft without using Blizzard's IP. Just as it's impossible to write in Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" world without using Martin's IP. There are plenty of ways to write a book that don't use Word. I think my analogy holds.
well actually, its a fallacy, more specifically a false analogy.
The situations are altogether different, and you can’t make an analogy between them.
You should qualify what ties the ip of a book to be similar to the ip of a game, when reading your post it appears you have flaws in your argument that appear subjective if not irrelevant.
edit:book*
I would argue that a false analogy is still a terrible analogy, but at this point, we're just splitting hairs.
My analogy might not be perfect (and no analogy ever is, that's why Arguments from Analogies can never be valid only strong), but I'm not sure exactly how it appears subjective. The person I responded to made the argument that players created IP by playing the game. I was making the argument by using my analogy that when you use IP to create your own IP (if it can actually be considered IP), it won't be protected by law. You can't write fanfiction and make money off of it without the authors permission. That's my point.
I'd be interested why you think the way you do though.
Really sobering read after all the blizzard hate for being greedy, when in fact when looking back into the history of it, seems like Kespa was the one being greedy.
And for all those people claiming esports players have no IP rights under law; no kidding! What country has an esports law? IP was an idea that grow out of a certain moral view and only later on it was turned into law by the corporations themselves as they went along and it became beneficial. If you are going to protect IP rights why do it only for the big shot corporations and not for the small man. It's immoral. I never claimed that it was already legally so or not. I only claimed that about EULA's which has many cases associated.
listen to this man.
I listened.
It doesn't make sense.
Play the "victim card" or "conspricy card" in an argument only makes you look stupid.
And the person originally quoted has the wrong definition of IP anyway...it's all big corporations because they're the ones that file for it. If you want you can file for rights of an IP, but you'd have to prove you came up with it and it's original/has value/innovative. there's just no point because all it does is give you rights over a specific title or idea; it has nothing to do with personal rights.
... 6 posts later, there are still people reading the OP and then taking it as pure fact.
On November 16 2010 11:06 aztrorisk wrote: Thank you so much for this article. You informed me in the current situation in a matter of minutes. Before, I knew that Blizzard was trying to protect their rights but I thought it was just Blizzard being greedy. Now I know. TY for informing me.
On November 16 2010 11:30 ZlaSHeR wrote: Really sobering read after all the blizzard hate for being greedy, when in fact when looking back into the history of it, seems like Kespa was the one being greedy.
Can we get Milki's post linked on the OP? I mean we all love a bit of gossip/drama but...
Otherwise it's just going to cause more misinformed posters joining the Blizzard vs KeSPA debate...
Not that I doubt your interpretation Milkis (as always many thanks for your translations as well!) but many of the things listed in the OP actually happened in the past few years, and I quite remember how the community was when they first heard of it. I don't think a year or two later really changes what actually happened back then, so a lot of it is indeed true. Reading around Teamliquid before the SC2 forums existed and the majority of people hated KeSPA for such things, yet some people somehow forgot all that and attempt to demonize Blizzard based off of a lot of speculation and statements from the entity they used to hate.
It seems like a lot of foreigners have a short term memory, (hell just look at the recent American elections) but I definitely didn't forget. I dislike KeSPA for the things they've done in the past few years, and I don't trust that they've changed their ways at all. One of the most disheartening things out of them recently were the articles that trashed NaDa's name, and you can't deny that happened. There are very valid reasons to dislike them.
I'm actually quite interested in what made people all of a sudden like them again. What have they done to redeem themselves? Or are people just riding on the fact that they think the only way BW can survive (true or not) is through KeSPA?
On November 16 2010 09:50 hinnolinn wrote: Zemiron, I feel that's a bad analogy. It's much more like writing a book in Windows Word. Which is Microsoft's IP. You are using their IP to create your own.
That's a terrible analogy. It is impossible to play Starcraft without using Blizzard's IP. Just as it's impossible to write in Martin's "A Song of Ice and Fire" world without using Martin's IP. There are plenty of ways to write a book that don't use Word. I think my analogy holds.
well actually, its a fallacy, more specifically a false analogy.
The situations are altogether different, and you can’t make an analogy between them.
You should qualify what ties the ip of a book to be similar to the ip of a game, when reading your post it appears you have flaws in your argument that appear subjective if not irrelevant.
edit:book*
I would argue that a false analogy is still a terrible analogy, but at this point, we're just splitting hairs.
My analogy might not be perfect (and no analogy ever is, that's why Arguments from Analogies can never be valid only strong), but I'm not sure exactly how it appears subjective. The person I responded to made the argument that players created IP by playing the game. I was making the argument by using my analogy that when you use IP to create your own IP (if it can actually be considered IP), it won't be protected by law. You can't write fanfiction and make money off of it without the authors permission. That's my point.
I'd be interested why you think the way you do though.
book ip and the ip your talking about are different.
subjective is the view of what ip means and what you can and cannot do.
I understand where you were going, but with what you were saying i could say:
Fan fiction is a derivative work under United States copyright law, but what law are you refering to? fanfiction porn in the US is not allowed and usually taken to court, but unsure of the outcome, but i think this has moe to do with moral rights than ip. In art "campbell soup- andy warhol"?
see how it can easily be derailed?
"You can't write fanfiction and make money off of it without the authors permission." Is off topic from: "players created IP by playing the game"
i never really commented on this whole gretech kespa issue because of my lack of knowledge. but after reading all that, i'm now sided with blizzard after reading how they made gomtv pay to broadcast starcraft when they got permission from the creators in the first place. and its not like football where there really isn't an owner. starcraft is clearly blizz's property and it now it seems to me that kespa is the one on the un-negotiable side. blizz clearly seems as if they were in a good stature to come to a bargain but kespa wasn't.
On November 16 2010 11:55 xBillehx wrote: ... Or are people just riding on the fact that they think the only way BW can survive (true or not) is through KeSPA?
Pretty much. KeSPA threatened to disband all teams and stop proleague before, should Blizzard gets their way. Secondly, Blizzard is not yet "proven" if they can actually manage (or have Gretech manage) progame teams and players.
So yes, BW fans believe only way BW can survive is to let KeSPA live (and let them have their way) and not be affected by anything Blizzard might want.
I just don't see how Kespa can tell Blizzard that StarCraft is public property and then turn around and force other people to pay money to watch their events etc. Wtf is wrong with their logic? So hypocritical...
On November 16 2010 11:55 xBillehx wrote: Not that I doubt your interpretation Milkis (as always many thanks for your translations as well!) but many of the things listed in the OP actually happened in the past few years, and I quite remember how the community was when they first heard of it. I don't think a year or two later really changes what actually happened back then, so a lot of it is indeed true. Reading around Teamliquid before the SC2 forums existed and the majority of people hated KeSPA for such things, yet some people somehow forgot all that and attempt to demonize Blizzard based off of a lot of speculation and statements from the entity they used to hate.
It seems like a lot of foreigners have a short term memory, (hell just look at the recent American elections) but I definitely didn't forget. I dislike KeSPA for the things they've done in the past few years, and I don't trust that they've changed their ways at all. One of the most disheartening things out of them recently were the articles that trashed NaDa's name, and you can't deny that happened. There are very valid reasons to dislike them.
I'm actually quite interested in what made people all of a sudden like them again. What have they done to redeem themselves? Or are people just riding on the fact that they think the only way BW can survive (true or not) is through KeSPA?
There is no doubt some of the stuff actually happened.
But when you only list one side's mistakes in the process, you're of course going to interpret everything as if it was one side's fault.
Of course, I wasn't actually around for many of these "events", but I dunno, the interpretation of what supposedly happened "behind the scenes" feel very exaggerated and outlandish to the point of disbelief.
england made football (soccer), usa made basketball...
imagine what would happen if everyone should pay them fees because of that..
e-sports is like sports and blizzard should be happy to be promoted through it and that is it..
every country has its own organization/association in every sport.. imagine expansion of e-sport and imagine if every country will make their own kespa... imagine how much money would that be for blizzard..
blizzard is wrong.. does they pay fees because they use tools for making games? no! why should e-sport association do same thing?
if kespa will lose than e-sport has no chance in near future
On December 07 2010 22:15 purgerinho wrote: england made football (soccer), usa made basketball...
imagine what would happen if everyone should pay them fees because of that..
e-sports is like sports and blizzard should be happy to be promoted through it and that is it..
every country has its own organization/association in every sport.. imagine expansion of e-sport and imagine if every country will make their own kespa... imagine how much money would that be for blizzard..
blizzard is wrong.. does they pay fees because they use tools for making games? no! why should e-sport association do same thing?
if kespa will lose than e-sport has no chance in near future
if we want to call e-sport exactly like that "e" and "sport" than there is no blizzard, konami etc. there are tool developers (whole computer or console), there are game developers, there are e-sport associations, there are gamers and there are events.
it's not right to control everything...
but i would really be happy if tools developers would say to blizzard: look, you must give us a fee because you are using our product to make your own.
blizzard isn't creator of e-sport in korea. and that is it.
although i agree with the posts they are from a bias point of view. Makes Kespa look terrible. they really screwed themselves over tho. How much would everyone have gained from a smooth integration as opposed to this bw vs sc2 business. and its becomming more and more clear that it was kespa that stopped it from happening. i thought i hated blizzard for a while when these whole shenanigans started but rele kespa was the ones holding on too tight and suffocating the pro scene by failing to be adaptive and being greedy with something that is not theirs.
On December 07 2010 22:15 purgerinho wrote: england made football (soccer), usa made basketball...
imagine what would happen if everyone should pay them fees because of that..
e-sports is like sports and blizzard should be happy to be promoted through it and that is it..
every country has its own organization/association in every sport.. imagine expansion of e-sport and imagine if every country will make their own kespa... imagine how much money would that be for blizzard..
blizzard is wrong.. does they pay fees because they use tools for making games? no! why should e-sport association do same thing?
if kespa will lose than e-sport has no chance in near future
The fundamental problem is that there has been no precedent like this so who is "right" is a very vague question.
You can't make comparisons to football because there isn't a legal entity that could claim the IP rights to football. Football is in the public domain. Blizzard, on the other hand, does clearly own Starcraft and therefore has every right to license it to you in whatever way they see fit.
If you buy Photoshop or 3D Studio Max they don't claim rights over any works that you produce with their tools because that's how it has historically been, but I guess they technically could and you couldn't do much except stop using their software. Which everyone would, because there's plenty of competing software without such restrictions.
But Blizzard being effectively a monopolist can include a clause in their license agreement that says that you must get their consent before broadcasting any tournaments, and there is not much you can do. You either buy the game and therefore agree to their license or don't buy the game and don't do any tournaments. You could also try to prove in court that their license agreement is invalid according to the laws of the country, which is what KeSPA hopes to achieve as far as I understand.
And of course Blizzard doesn't have to be "happy" with what you think they should be. They provide their product, and as long as there is sufficient demand they can do whatever they feel like doing with it. The only thing that could realistically punish them for being unethical is people switching to other games instead. Only there are no other games to switch to.
I now understand why we do not have LAN capabilities. Blizzard now has complete control over their product and could shut it down at any moment, not saying they would but it's nice to have that power when fighting KeSPA. KeSPA seems like a money hungry organization who does not care about players, only money. Not saying GOM is better, aka why idra could not attend dreamhack, but still forcing Nada to gg in a show match AND not letting players touch sc2 even in thier own time sounds like communism. KeSPA = North Korea anyone?
On December 08 2010 03:08 brutality wrote: I now understand why we do not have LAN capabilities. Blizzard now has complete control over their product and could shut it down at any moment, not saying they would but it's nice to have that power when fighting KeSPA. KeSPA seems like a money hungry organization who does not care about players, only money. Not saying GOM is better, aka why idra could not attend dreamhack, but still forcing Nada to gg in a show match AND not letting players touch sc2 even in thier own time sounds like communism. KeSPA = North Korea anyone?
Wait, what happened? GOM stopped Idra from going to Dreamhack?
On December 08 2010 03:08 brutality wrote: I now understand why we do not have LAN capabilities. Blizzard now has complete control over their product and could shut it down at any moment, not saying they would but it's nice to have that power when fighting KeSPA. KeSPA seems like a money hungry organization who does not care about players, only money. Not saying GOM is better, aka why idra could not attend dreamhack, but still forcing Nada to gg in a show match AND not letting players touch sc2 even in thier own time sounds like communism. KeSPA = North Korea anyone?
Wait, what happened? GOM stopped Idra from going to Dreamhack?
Not directly. It was a scheduling issue with GSL. They shafted him by not moving his match date even though he requested it in advance. He talked about it in a state of the game.
On December 08 2010 03:08 brutality wrote: I now understand why we do not have LAN capabilities. Blizzard now has complete control over their product and could shut it down at any moment, not saying they would but it's nice to have that power when fighting KeSPA. KeSPA seems like a money hungry organization who does not care about players, only money. Not saying GOM is better, aka why idra could not attend dreamhack, but still forcing Nada to gg in a show match AND not letting players touch sc2 even in thier own time sounds like communism. KeSPA = North Korea anyone?
Great point, I never thought of any reason why they wanted to not have LAN besides fighting pirates but now that I see how much conflict they were having with KeSPA it makes sense that they wanted control. I think the argument of BW being public domain is BS. As far as I know there hasn't been any protection of intellectual property for videogames but I know graphics like sprites, music and sound effects are protected under copyright law. There is limitations like you can have a short portion of a song on tv (something like 5 seconds) but I'm fairly sure the broadcasting of broodwar violates many intellectual property rights of the various assets that blizzard has created.
I wonder if it happend to somebody else, or its only me. I bought the copy, installed it, put in the cd key....played, logged out, tried to log in again and it didnt work. When i was creating a new account the cd key didnt work obviously, but i have no idea where it went, cause i wasnt using another account. So the best guess is that somebody stole my cd key under a different account. Dont ask me how, I really dont know. I made UBISOFT aware of that, asked them to reset my cd key or if possible give me the account information it was registered to. They are not able to provide me the account information to "my own" account and the wont reset my cd key because apparently its not possible. I have sent them the receit, my old cd- key, all that is required, but still they wont assist me in this. Dont get me wrong, its not about the money, its about the principle. I bought a game, i payed for it, and i cant play it, and the company ist helpfull at all. Iam really considering to take this one to court. Any advice ? cause apparently iam not the only one having this kind of a problem. A guy from france started already a petition against ubisoft. Iam just really surprised that paying customers get treated like robber or even worse. I really think there is something wrong with the company management. How am I not entitled to use a product I payed for ? can somebody explain me ubisoft's logic, because i can see it, Iam sorry. Oh and the game was HAWX 2
On December 08 2010 05:49 p14c wrote: At least KESPA doesn't ban people on youtube casting proleague games...Just saying...
If KESPA provided a legal, for-pay way for non-Koreans to watch, they would close down BW Youtube channels. GOM is 100% justified in this.
You have Kespa and MBC/OGN confused. It's the broadcasters that request for videos to be taken down from youtube. If MBC/OGN wanted to they would have done it years go. But their videos are all over Korean sites as well. It doesn't matter whether non-Koreans pay to watch or not. Mnet requests for videos to be pulled from youtube all the time.
I wonder if it happend to somebody else, or its only me. I bought the copy, installed it, put in the cd key....played, logged out, tried to log in again and it didnt work. When i was creating a new account the cd key didnt work obviously, but i have no idea where it went, cause i wasnt using another account. So the best guess is that somebody stole my cd key under a different account. Dont ask me how, I really dont know. I made UBISOFT aware of that, asked them to reset my cd key or if possible give me the account information it was registered to. They are not able to provide me the account information to "my own" account and the wont reset my cd key because apparently its not possible. I have sent them the receit, my old cd- key, all that is required, but still they wont assist me in this. Dont get me wrong, its not about the money, its about the principle. I bought a game, i payed for it, and i cant play it, and the company ist helpfull at all. Iam really considering to take this one to court. Any advice ? cause apparently iam not the only one having this kind of a problem. A guy from france started already a petition against ubisoft. Iam just really surprised that paying customers get treated like robber or even worse. I really think there is something wrong with the company management. How am I not entitled to use a product I payed for ? can somebody explain me ubisoft's logic, because i can see it, Iam sorry. Oh and the game was HAWX 2
It took a long while from when I registered to when I could first log in. It took a while before the registration took hold around 24 hours or so if I remember correctly. But that was all.
What would be of interest to you is "43 The Law Commission indicated that at least eight European jurisdictions currently recognise an initial right to a refund for faulty goods: United Kingdom, France, Ireland, Greece, Portugal, Latvia, Lithuania and Slovenia.".
Here in the UK we have the sale of goods act that means basically that anything sold has to be fit for the purpose it was sold for. So for example a game you cant play through no fault of your own due to a cd activation not working (as long as you meet hardware requirements etc) would definitely come under that. It sounds like you have a similar law in Slovenia too or it wouldnt be mentioned in that article I would find out what rights you have and take it from there. Also if you paid by credit card, sometimes they will take the money back on your behalf if you have a valid complaint too. Sadly that only applies to credit cards though as far as I know. I would try and get a refund from the place you bought the game from. If it was a download purchase its going to be harder to pursue because nothing beats standing in a shop and being a (polite) pain in the arse.
As to their logic. They are trying to protect against someone ringing up pretending they have purchased the game or trying to get a key belonging to someone else. Also sometimes pirated copies of games and keys are sold as if they are geniune.
On December 07 2010 22:15 purgerinho wrote: england made football (soccer), usa made basketball...
imagine what would happen if everyone should pay them fees because of that..
e-sports is like sports and blizzard should be happy to be promoted through it and that is it..
every country has its own organization/association in every sport.. imagine expansion of e-sport and imagine if every country will make their own kespa... imagine how much money would that be for blizzard..
blizzard is wrong.. does they pay fees because they use tools for making games? no! why should e-sport association do same thing?
if kespa will lose than e-sport has no chance in near future
I see your point but I have to disagree. Was football and basketball being sold as a commercial product to the people? Starcraft is a copyrighted and registered game developed by a company. If you want to make money out of it, you need to pay the licence. It makes perfect sense to me. And you are completely right that they could (abuse) every version of kespa. As multinational companies do that.
do soccer players pay the soccer ball manufacturers for a match
isn't this actually a good argument though?
No...correct me if I'm wrong but Soccer ball manufacturers didn't create the game of Soccer. Most likely, soccer ball manufacturers STARTED after the game was created. So you see why that argument is a bit histrionic/sophistic. The creator has the rights to the creation, the manufacturers are accessories to the creation.
I'm sure KesPA needs to be credited for widening the publicity of the game but its core popularity belongs to Blizz because for heaven's sake, they're the one who put their minds into creating it.
On November 14 2010 14:48 doothegee wrote: Koreans love to hate on anything that is Korean (e.g. Kespa) and love to worship anything that's foreign (Blizzard). I wouldn't be too surprised by any of this.
I completely disagree. I believe Korea is probably one of the fervent, nationalistic cultures in the world.
I think from a resident, a native, or an outsider this view can be seen of all most countries.
edit: oh crap, double posted, sorry, meant to add this to previous post. And I know this was answered/replied to but My main post was to thank the OP and to add my response as a secondary point. Sorry for double post
If you support pro-BW, you should be against Kespa. Kespa is pretty much holding BW ransom just so it doesn't have to pay Blizzard money for liscensing.
Precedent has been set for using software for financial gain. If you're a coorporation using Excel, Oracle Database, or even ninite.com, you're legally obligated to pay for licensing fees (generally MUCH higher than the end-user has to pay) even if you don't make a profit. Obviously that also depends on the licensing terms for the particular software (i.e. if it's open-source), but for BW and SC2, that is the case. The soccer ball argument is childish and only appeals to those who are ignorant of the law, or on Kespa's side.
At this point, the only people who have a good reason to be on Kespa's side are Kespa employees. The players certainly don't like them. MBC and OGN certainly would jump at broadcasting BW without Kespa if the players and teams could somehow get out of their contracts.