Clarifying Blizzard/Gretech vs. KeSPA/OGN/MBC - Page 4

mordk

Chile8385 Posts

December 30 2010 04:06 GMT

#61

On December 30 2010 10:40 chipmunkrage wrote:

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.

The thing is, if you were to use said book's name or whatever to generate profit, then you'd have to pay rights to the owner to do so, it is a different thing altogether. I'm not making a moral statement whether I believe it is right or wrong for Blizzard to do this, since that'd be my opinion and it makes no sense to discuss in those terms since it's rather pointless, what I'm saying is that as far as I understand the regulations and laws behind this whole ordeal, Blizzard is on its right to demand payment for having its IP used to generate profit by a third party (Please excuse me if I use some terms in a somewhat wrong manner, I'm not a law student or anything).

Ursad0n

United States523 Posts

December 30 2010 04:49 GMT

#62

How is what kespa is doing any different from what ICCup did?

charlesatan

Philippines75 Posts

December 30 2010 05:20 GMT

#63

I don't know why this thread got Necro'd but just want to remind everyone not to turn this into a KeSPA vs. Blizzard hate thread (there's some circular arguments going around).

Re: complaints on the hamburger analogy, I'd just like to point out that analogy is representing Blizzard's side. The next paragraph explains KeSPA's side. Why are they 2 different analogies (instead of being 2 different hamburger analogies)? Because each one's paradigm is that different. The analogies are there to give a better perspective of how each side sees itself. (Just look at the posts trying to subvert the hamburger analogy to be pro-KeSPA for example.)

On December 30 2010 06:56 Omnipresent wrote:
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.

Agreed.

On December 30 2010 13:49 Ursad0n wrote:
How is what kespa is doing any different from what ICCup did?

You need to elaborate. ICCup has many projects (ICCup server, competitions, etc.).

But if I were to guess at what you were driving at, it'd be the profit angle. ICCup isn't selling broadcast rights to any of Blizzard's properties.

bkrow

Australia8532 Posts

December 30 2010 05:45 GMT

#64

great write up on the situation so thanks.. i like the use of analogies.. Demonization of the parties involved is pretty ridiculous - people come to conclusions without really understanding the entire situation - so thanks for adding a little perspective to this situation..

Prev 1 2 3 4 All

Please or register to reply.

Clarifying Blizzard/Gretech vs. KeSPA/OGN/MBC - Page 4

Completed

Ongoing

Upcoming