|
On December 30 2010 04:44 GambleVII wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 04:38 [White]NaDa wrote:On December 30 2010 04:34 GambleVII wrote:On December 30 2010 04:22 decemberTV wrote:
I strongly dissagree with Common Law. We like to do things differently in the civilized world.
The Photoshop Analogy actually works against you and against Blizzard.
Morally, Blizzard should get nothing, and Laws and Legal systems have always been based on Morals.
Moreover Kespa added to the game before it became "such a great game", when they fine-tuned the balance using maps which as you can see Blizzard is unable to do themselves.
BroodWar would be imbalanced on the current SC2 maps just like SC2 is and thus a bad game. Photoshop sells its product for over 500 dollars in many cases higher then 1000. To allow the users free reign over its item. Blizzard does not offer their product for 1000 saying ok do whatever u want. No they have a TOS and thats their obligations for you to use their game. Do u see Blizzard suing valve for dota2? because thats based on something created in their map editor on WC3. Because see Valve is making their own game. Like i said, moraly Kespa owes blizzard, no matter how much kespa pays blizzard as long as they have some profits left they are posotive. because withought blizzard there would be no kespa. If u lose a waller and i return it with all its money; moraly you should give me a reward right. Well blizzard provided the waller for kespa to fill with money. Some of that money deserves to be in Blizzards hand. p.s i apologize for lack of capitalization and spelling errors. you are making a lot of errors simply based on blind support to blizzard you know? its not like KeSPA does not pay anything to Blizzard Im supporting blizzard in a sense that they own the game and anything they are entitled too. If kespa doesnt like paying them, then go do this same thing in another game? How did people make maps for bw? oh yeah BLIZZARD put in a map editor, so again they provided them with the means of creating those maps. So if blizzard never provided a Map editor, kespa again woulda done shit all. Everythign kespa did was because of blizzard. I dont care how much they pay them, if blizzard wants more they owe them more. Thats just how it is. the pro scene wouldnt have been popular if not for Blizzard simple. No game no pro scene, no map editor, no new map pools. If Kespa doesnt like it, let them make a pro league with a different game? Why dont they? because they cant thats why.
You are just blindly following a greedy corporation. At least in the case of the Map Editor you should see that the maps themselves are a creation of the map-maker and the intensive balance testing that has gone into it and it belongs to the creator and not to the maker of the software REGARDLESS of what the maker of the software claims.
Blizzard lawyers do not make law.
|
On December 30 2010 04:49 decemberTV wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 04:44 GambleVII wrote:On December 30 2010 04:38 [White]NaDa wrote:On December 30 2010 04:34 GambleVII wrote:On December 30 2010 04:22 decemberTV wrote:
I strongly dissagree with Common Law. We like to do things differently in the civilized world.
The Photoshop Analogy actually works against you and against Blizzard.
Morally, Blizzard should get nothing, and Laws and Legal systems have always been based on Morals.
Moreover Kespa added to the game before it became "such a great game", when they fine-tuned the balance using maps which as you can see Blizzard is unable to do themselves.
BroodWar would be imbalanced on the current SC2 maps just like SC2 is and thus a bad game. Photoshop sells its product for over 500 dollars in many cases higher then 1000. To allow the users free reign over its item. Blizzard does not offer their product for 1000 saying ok do whatever u want. No they have a TOS and thats their obligations for you to use their game. Do u see Blizzard suing valve for dota2? because thats based on something created in their map editor on WC3. Because see Valve is making their own game. Like i said, moraly Kespa owes blizzard, no matter how much kespa pays blizzard as long as they have some profits left they are posotive. because withought blizzard there would be no kespa. If u lose a waller and i return it with all its money; moraly you should give me a reward right. Well blizzard provided the waller for kespa to fill with money. Some of that money deserves to be in Blizzards hand. p.s i apologize for lack of capitalization and spelling errors. you are making a lot of errors simply based on blind support to blizzard you know? its not like KeSPA does not pay anything to Blizzard Im supporting blizzard in a sense that they own the game and anything they are entitled too. If kespa doesnt like paying them, then go do this same thing in another game? How did people make maps for bw? oh yeah BLIZZARD put in a map editor, so again they provided them with the means of creating those maps. So if blizzard never provided a Map editor, kespa again woulda done shit all. Everythign kespa did was because of blizzard. I dont care how much they pay them, if blizzard wants more they owe them more. Thats just how it is. the pro scene wouldnt have been popular if not for Blizzard simple. No game no pro scene, no map editor, no new map pools. If Kespa doesnt like it, let them make a pro league with a different game? Why dont they? because they cant thats why. You are just blindly following a greedy corporation. At least in the case of the Map Editor you should see that the maps themselves are a creation of the map-maker and the intensive balance testing that has gone into it and it belongs to the creator and not to the maker of the software REGARDLESS of what the maker of the software claims. Blizzard lawyers do not make law.
So Kespa is innocent? in extorting other companies so that they control all broadcasts of bw in korea, or strong holding all their pros? because there are no other option?
Blizzard put in alot of hard work creating starcraft and sc2. If Kespa thinks that they are soo great and could do this with any game, why dont they use another rts for a pro-league.
kespa owes itself to Blizzard. Withought blizzard kespa would have made 0 dollars. Thats all there is too it. All money it gives blizzard as restitution still leaves them in a posotive. As withought BW there would be no kespa. With no Blizzard there would be no BW,
|
I'm done arguing  However i am blown away how you, who are i assume an american thinks and how quickly you blindly follow greedy shallow corporations.
Have a nice day, and please excuse my spelling mistakes i didn't know i would come under criticism for not speaking english fluently like a native speaker, on an international website. I hope the same thing happens to you 20 years from now when you misspell some chinese words.
|
On December 30 2010 05:10 decemberTV wrote:I'm done arguing However i am blown away how you, who are i assume an american thinks and how quickly you blindly follow greedy shallow corporations. Have a nice day, and please excuse my spelling mistakes i didn't know i would come under criticism for not speaking english fluently like a native speaker, on an international website. I hope the same thing happens to you 20 years from now when you misspell some chinese words.
Im european.
also i never criticized your spelling? as i was apologizing for mine, as I tend to make a few here or there that i could fix but choose not to. So i dont see why that last part was needed.
I can make the same statment about you however.
Im done arguing however i am blown away how you, who are i assume asian thinks and how quickly you blindly follow a greedy, extorting, shallow company.
KeSpa has had terrible buisness practices when it came to how they treated other companies and their own pro players, so please dont blame blizzard whos protecting their property.
I support blizzard but i also go with whats moraly right.
Moraly Blizzard created everythign kespa has utilized to make itself a sucess, and therefore should provide restitution payment to blizzard in any amount they ask. Thats how it is.
|
Nice post! Very straight forward and seemingly unbiased post, which makes it's easy to follow your points.
I'm not gonna argue any points, since I don't think I know enough specifics to even do that. Instead, I'd just like to mention that brood war is the an amazing game and I hope the proscene doesn't end because of something like IP rights. Same goes for chess and I wonder who owns the IP rights for that game...
|
In that case i appologize.
Nevertheless, the progaming matches and the maps belong to Kespa and they can sell them to whomever they please. In return, Blizzard can ban the CD keys from Battle.net ^_^;
Luckily, SCBW has LAN... I wonder why they didn't put LAN into SC2... 
|
On December 30 2010 01:22 Adeeler wrote:
SC1 and SC2 are like a hammer and saw. That doesn't mean blizzard should own any house or street built with said hammer and saw; especially when a building company or person makes something with them.
But the building company shouldn't be allowed to stop other people buildings houses.
Kespa isn't good in practice, but blizzard shouldn't own derivitive works either imo as it sets a bad precident for esports imo.
This is a different thing from what you're saying. Kespa hasn't just built a house with said tools, they use a brand name, a specific IP to earn revenue in a public and broadcasted manner. If I were to advertise said house and sell it based on the brand of the tools used, and it made a difference on whether it was finally sold or not, I'd be using a registered brand to make a profit, and as such, I'd have to recognize the IP and pay to the owner for its usage.
This would be different if Kespa used, for example, a different game, with a different name, different units, music, etc, which played exactly the same and as such had a different registered IP, then they'd have the right to use it as they wished, as making an RTS isn't an IP, but "Starcraft" is.
IMO blizz can and should enforce IP rights over starcraft, otherwise other sources can use starcraft and future videogames however they please, creating a bad precedent for videogame companies around the world. The fee is excessive at this time though, but I'm sure they could negotiate a different type of contract.
|
This isn't relevant to SC2.
|
I can't believe people are actually getting trolled this way again.
Are EULAs law? No. They are contractual terms. Are contractual terms such as EULAs binding? Since ProCD, 86 F.3d 1447 (7th Cir. 1996), generally such "shrinkwrap agreements" are binding, though it can depend on jurisdiction and judge. (Disagreement over them almost caused a schism in the ABA, actually).
So sure, you may have some wiggle room depending on how the EULAs are presented within the given product and other factors such as how absurd the terms of the contract are. But insofar as the terms are viewed as necessary to allow businesses ex ante to make the initial investments to make products (generally what EULAs, and patent law as a general field is meant to allow), they will be held as binding.
True terms of a contract are not "laws" that someone can enforce against you. But that doesn't mean you can break them without consequences, e.g. damages or injunctive relief.
Also I am a bit astonished that people are allowed to call entire legal systems on TL uncivilized. The Common Law has done us pretty well in the US, and in the UK, insofar as it's still adhered to there. But I would reckon that if an entire country's legal system declared EULAs invalid, most software companies would stop doing business there, at least those that depend on heavy initial investments to make their products. So the issue here, in my estimation, is less whether EULAs writ large are enforceable, but the extent to which Blizzard's EULA is enforceable here.
|
For KeSPA, the popularity of eSports in their country is unique, so they could attempt to present that their product isn't infringing on Blizzard's IP. Should they succeed, this has huge legal implications when it comes to the video game industry, not just in Korea, but in the world, due to this legal precedent.
A few others have mentioned this, but it's a fairly important distinction to make. Any legal decisions made in this case carry precedent solely in S. Korea. We still lack a decent regime for IP arbitration across international borders. This sort of case, in which a company in one country profits from a product developed in another country, is going to be common place in the next few decades. I think we'll see a lot more complicated licensing agreements built into ToS contracts (like with SC2), since contract agreements are sacrosanct across virtually all borders. Whatever the outcome, this conflict will/has produced some interesting questions in international law.
This would be different if Kespa used, for example, a different game, with a different name, different units, music, etc, which played exactly the same and as such had a different registered IP, then they'd have the right to use it as they wished, as making an RTS isn't an IP, but "Starcraft" is.
I think you're confusing a trademarked brand name with IP. If KESPA created their own RTS which, while visually unique, played exactly the same as BW, they would very clearly be violating IP rights. In fact, this would be a far more egregious violation than any licensing issues currently at hand. IP includes all unique aspects of an idea, not simply a brand name.
Disney, for example, has very strict IP ownership rights built into every contract they make. If, while working for them, you come up with an idea for a unique story, they own IP rights to that work. If you stop working for them, and try to produce a book or film using a variation on that unique story (similar story with a new title, place names, and character names), Disney can and will claim IP rights over that book or film (assuming it's profitable). You'll still get to make money from it, but they're going to want a chunk.
|
On December 04 2010 14:36 Spenguin wrote:
Very nice ideas and write-up, definitely has changed my perception on the situation, this needs to be spotlighted so everyone can read it.
Well done
yes spotlight this.... this isn't just SC2 specific....
|
On December 30 2010 02:39 myIRE wrote:Show nested quote +On December 30 2010 02:22 goldfishs wrote:charlesatan wrote:
Here's an analogy: For Blizzard, they own a hamburger retail shop (the hamburger is Broodwar in its entirety). KeSPA suddenly got their hamburgers, and started selling pieces (the bread, the hamburger) individually or even repacking them, but claiming it as their own. Blizzard wants acknowledgment that whatever KeSPA is selling belongs to them since it can all be traced to their hamburger (Broodwar).
For KeSPA, Broodwar is a tree in Blizzard's backyard. They acknowledge that the tree belongs to Blizzard. However, occasionally, fruit (derivative works) from the tree will fall on public property or KeSPA's property, such as the street. Thus KeSPA claims that Blizzard has no claims over the fallen fruit, since it fell on public property/KeSPA's property, and that they appropriated it (worked on it, refined it, etc.).
ion. Those analogy's make them sound like two squibbling sevenyearolds... And both are ridiculously full of shit. Well why don't you present us with your analogy, I'm sure you can clear things up just perfectly. Get off your horse sir, stop complaining just because this is the interwebs [/i]
Analogys can be interpreted in a billion different ways. Add to the fact that they are trying to compare 2 analogys with differen't settings. One is about hamburgers and the other about fallfruit, There is no way we can interpret that ---> we don't understand what they mean and that good sir is why they are full of shit. Now so if I wanted to make a point I promise you I would be clear and not go invent a bloody analogy about hamburgers so the people I was trying to reach wouldn't get all confused and wonder why I'm standing on the podium shouting muster.
|
On December 29 2010 18:53 Ferago wrote:
I stopped reading when you said "irregardless". But everything up to that point was pretty good.
=.= troll.
good writeup, thanks for clarifying the issue, i think blizzard's approach might be a little off, since they are stepping on korean pride in doing business, which from what i gather is a big deal. In that they are demanding a large fee up front, but is willing to re-negotiate after kespa "bows down" and accepts it. Maybe approaching it from this angle rubs kespa in the wrong way.
|
There are a lot of terrible analogies in this thread. A video game is a form of media and entertainment similar to a movie or book. When you purchase a movie you agree to the terms to not broadcast it with permission and to use it only for personal use. Similar for books. Basically when you buy starcraft (1 or 2) you agree that you will only use it for certain means. Some uses are specifically not allowed such as broadcasting or relicensing. Blizzard didn't have much of a case before 2007. Before 2007, it can be said that kespa was using the game in a fair use manner. Blizzard probably wanted for them to get permission to broadcast, but didn't care too much since it was so popular. Then kespa began relicensing the game and selling it to broadcasting companies. Now blizzard has a real case that they've been trying to negotiate for 3 years. The moment kespa began profiting from their work without their permission is when they started caring. If kespa never charged for broadcasting or licensing, I really doubt we are in the same spot we are today.
|
well we all talked about this things long ago , and it's clear we don't like blizzard
p.s i enjoy how illogical people are , saying hm this is my opinion and it's right cause it's my opinion , so u all midgets have to agree, so much stupidity in this world 
|
This is a good post clearly sets out the different perspectives that are being put forward by both sides.
For myself i see the games used in esports as engines which are used then to create commercially avaliable entertainment. for example lets say im making a game useing the unreal engine i would have to pay the creator of the engine a fee or give them a percentage of my profits in order to use the engine that they have created.
I think this is more of wat blizzard is saying that becuase they own starcraft ( the engine) any creations produced for commercial reasons i.e. competitive esports game entitles them to economic compensation.
Kespa is saying that starcraft does beloing to blizzard but that it is just a game not an engine and thus though kespa will respect blizzards right to sell the game for a profit and release patches any competitive matches are classed as the same as non-competitive matches i.e. free and laking in subscription and license fees. therefore no economic compensation is required
(by compensation i mean it in the sense party A gives party B money in order to cover the oppurtunity cost of party B that arises from party A providing a service that party B has a legal monoply over)
|
great post charlesatan, this should spotlighted
|
On December 30 2010 08:40 darmousseh wrote:
There are a lot of terrible analogies in this thread. A video game is a form of media and entertainment similar to a movie or book. When you purchase a movie you agree to the terms to not broadcast it with permission and to use it only for personal use. Similar for books. Basically when you buy starcraft (1 or 2) you agree that you will only use it for certain means. Some uses are specifically not allowed such as broadcasting or relicensing. Blizzard didn't have much of a case before 2007. Before 2007, it can be said that kespa was using the game in a fair use manner. Blizzard probably wanted for them to get permission to broadcast, but didn't care too much since it was so popular. Then kespa began relicensing the game and selling it to broadcasting companies. Now blizzard has a real case that they've been trying to negotiate for 3 years. The moment kespa began profiting from their work without their permission is when they started caring. If kespa never charged for broadcasting or licensing, I really doubt we are in the same spot we are today.
I don't know which side I agree with, but even the book/movie analogies aren't perfect... One could argue Starcraft is more like Adobe Photoshop, windows 7, or any other software that allows for the creation of works. Starcraft produces replays...
Books and movies don't "produce" additional works.
|
On December 30 2010 06:56 Omnipresent wrote:Show nested quote +For KeSPA, the popularity of eSports in their country is unique, so they could attempt to present that their product isn't infringing on Blizzard's IP. Should they succeed, this has huge legal implications when it comes to the video game industry, not just in Korea, but in the world, due to this legal precedent. A few others have mentioned this, but it's a fairly important distinction to make. Any legal decisions made in this case carry precedent solely in S. Korea. We still lack a decent regime for IP arbitration across international borders. This sort of case, in which a company in one country profits from a product developed in another country, is going to be common place in the next few decades. I think we'll see a lot more complicated licensing agreements built into ToS contracts (like with SC2), since contract agreements are sacrosanct across virtually all borders. Whatever the outcome, this conflict will/has produced some interesting questions in international law. Show nested quote +This would be different if Kespa used, for example, a different game, with a different name, different units, music, etc, which played exactly the same and as such had a different registered IP, then they'd have the right to use it as they wished, as making an RTS isn't an IP, but "Starcraft" is. I think you're confusing a trademarked brand name with IP. If KESPA created their own RTS which, while visually unique, played exactly the same as BW, they would very clearly be violating IP rights. In fact, this would be a far more egregious violation than any licensing issues currently at hand. IP includes all unique aspects of an idea, not simply a brand name. Disney, for example, has very strict IP ownership rights built into every contract they make. If, while working for them, you come up with an idea for a unique story, they own IP rights to that work. If you stop working for them, and try to produce a book or film using a variation on that unique story (similar story with a new title, place names, and character names), Disney can and will claim IP rights over that book or film (assuming it's profitable). You'll still get to make money from it, but they're going to want a chunk.
If Blizzard loses in S.K. then they can sue right here in the US if they can establish personal jurisdiction over KeSPA in US courts, which they probably can given the recent trend in expanding personal jurisdiction.
If this doesn't reach a settlement, the thought that this will be over, and in accordance with one forum's law over the other, seems right out.
|
FUCK BLIZZARD!!
KeSPA has developed starcraft to the sense that blizzard can never do, and now they come to claim for rights for KeSPA to broadcast games. Those stupid people on top of me who mentioned
On December 30 2010 05:00 GambleVII wrote:
So Kespa is innocent? in extorting other companies so that they control all broadcasts of bw in korea, or strong holding all their pros? because there are no other option?
Blizzard put in alot of hard work creating starcraft and sc2. If Kespa thinks that they are soo great and could do this with any game, why dont they use another rts for a pro-league.
kespa owes itself to Blizzard. Withought blizzard kespa would have made 0 dollars. Thats all there is too it. All money it gives blizzard as restitution still leaves them in a posotive. As withought BW there would be no kespa. With no Blizzard there would be no BW,
just clearly have no brains of what he's saying. If there is no KeSPA, there wont be so many people supporting SC2 now. u r obviously not an scbw player, we can see that. it is an chicken and egg issue, Without Blizzard, there would be no BW and KeSPA would not have made that much money, but without KeSPA, SC and Blizzard wont be that recognized by so many now. And now the chicken is blaming the egg it laid for producing more eggs in the future?? and then claiming that the eggs produced should belong to the original chicken too?? wtf is this??
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
