|
On August 05 2011 04:08 iCCup.Diamond wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:07 tl55555 wrote:
[quote]
Dude... what kind of white knight business law are you studying... you're going to make a terrible businessman if you think like that. People bend and break contracts ALL the time, and there are middle grounds, all it depends is how good your lawyers are. You keep going by the book and see how long you last.
Whether Lee broke the contract or not this is whats happened: they didn't come to practice and they didn't get paid. If the contract is AMBIGUOUS on practice schedules, there is an argument for both sides. Law is not always fair, law is just law. One lesson for you to learn in your long, hard journey ahead.
So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. Uh you know that these players live in Korea right?
Yeah well he started quoting USLegal not me.
User was temp banned for this post.
|
Quite sad series of events. The biggest lesson to learn from this is to make sure everything is clear and on paper from the start. If anything as a sign of respect for each other as professionals who earn money.
|
UGH! Regardless of the legal jargon that makes my head hurt this is extremely disrespectful to the players and I find morally obtrusive. With all of the problems that have popped up with teams in SC2 I won't be surprised if we see something new pop up in a bit...
|
" the coach and the players decided that there would be no need to give the final payment. That duration was for a month"
no coach would do something like that unless he felt all of his players would be on board, Fruitdealer is fading and will fade (as much as i hate to admit it) and trickster will hang around till he gets passed by eventually or drop based on how much hes into it.. lets face it..
I dont get why anyone really needs to take sides in this issue.. its not anyone's problem. The precedent ofcourse is disconcerting.. but my God all the technical, legal , righteous and god knows what unless just makes this so hard to follow..
As usual blow up a shitstorm to sound smart and anything useful to read gets lost somewhere.. gg
|
On August 05 2011 04:10 Grimsong wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:07 tl55555 wrote:
[quote]
Dude... what kind of white knight business law are you studying... you're going to make a terrible businessman if you think like that. People bend and break contracts ALL the time, and there are middle grounds, all it depends is how good your lawyers are. You keep going by the book and see how long you last.
Whether Lee broke the contract or not this is whats happened: they didn't come to practice and they didn't get paid. If the contract is AMBIGUOUS on practice schedules, there is an argument for both sides. Law is not always fair, law is just law. One lesson for you to learn in your long, hard journey ahead.
So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. That's not even remotely true, don't speak on trials and the US legal system on such a blanket statement, when you likely have no idea about what goes on at the court houses. It's not even about legality at this point. Logically you can't stop paying someone their money due unless they are no longer employed. Both players were still employed under the TSL flag.
You must live under a rock on the moon, or definitely not in the united states, or you definitely don't pay attention to legal cases.
User was warned for this post
|
Maybe I'll get into business law in the future. It sounds mighty interesting, and my mother would be pleased with my about-face re: career choices. Hmm.
In the end, it doesn't matter whether or not the story is skewed or biased. Coach Lee has himself said that he didn't pay the players even though they were salaried. You don't do this. If you are salaried and not performing up to expectations, you get warned and then fired. Lee warned them but then decided not to fire them, instead opting to withhold their payments. This is not right, and it is not how the world works.
Now, I understand his frustration. I do. (I'm a FD fan, and being one of his fans is fucking infuriating and heartbreaking at the same time.) But that doesn't justify his actions.
What a clusterfuck.
|
On August 05 2011 04:14 tl55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:10 Grimsong wrote:On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:
[quote]
So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. That's not even remotely true, don't speak on trials and the US legal system on such a blanket statement, when you likely have no idea about what goes on at the court houses. It's not even about legality at this point. Logically you can't stop paying someone their money due unless they are no longer employed. Both players were still employed under the TSL flag. You must live under a rock on the moon, or definitely not in the united states, or you definitely don't pay attention to legal cases.
Or I work in a courthouse, talk to attorneys all day, and know for a fact that the higher paid lawyer doesn't always win? Are you serious right now? I'm completely baffled right now and quite frankly I can't put together a statement to express how ignorant the things you are saying in regards to law are.
User was warned for this post
|
On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 02:50 FairForever wrote:
[quote]
You are dead wrong here.
"Now maybe if they were winning GSTL and GSL... wouldn't be a problem". That goes contrary to the point. This isn't a results-based discussion. FD and Trickster should be treated the same throughout regardless of whether they won GSL or fell into Code B, unless the "contract" stipulated incentives or had clauses to protect against this (and seeing how there seems to be no written contract, this doesn't hold).
"Decided to enforce the part of the contract that included practice"
You are just making up bs now, what part of the contract stipulated practice time? You're trying to support a position that has no merit unless a written contract allowed for it. Which in this case isn't true. Dude... what kind of white knight business law are you studying... you're going to make a terrible businessman if you think like that. People bend and break contracts ALL the time, and there are middle grounds, all it depends is how good your lawyers are. You keep going by the book and see how long you last. Whether Lee broke the contract or not this is whats happened: they didn't come to practice and they didn't get paid. If the contract is AMBIGUOUS on practice schedules, there is an argument for both sides. Law is not always fair, law is just law. One lesson for you to learn in your long, hard journey ahead. So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins.
Korea has more or less the same contract laws as the US and I was only using that as reference. Ironically, you contradict yourself with your 2nd and 3rd sentences a feat that is quite impressive given you have only written three sentences.
Fair trial =/= more money, better lawyer, wins
Not only are you a cynical person who seems to have no respect for our legal systems you also are quite poor at doing research. Give me a single example in which the courts ruled in favor of the author of an ambiguous contract.
Side note, the more money argument doesn't really have that much to do with better lawyers it has more to do with that a protracted legal battle can last years costing upwards of millions of dollars. The party with the smaller bank is more likely to withdraw and settle rather than waste years in court.
|
1. there is no written contract. only a verbal contract.
2. what the content of that contract was is a question that has to be solved either by a judge or by a settlement. as it stands FD and Trickster are saying that that contract said that they are free to choose their practicing hours while Mr. Lee says otherwise.
3.If you look at the reason why FD and Trickster left ogs though it is hard to believe that FD and Trickster agreed to a strict practice regime
|
Translation of the Startale manager's response:
Hello,
This is Startale's manager, Won Jong-Wook.
First of all, I would like to apologize for having to greet you all with this uncomfortable situation and I would like to explain everything from the perspective of a team manager,
First of all, it is true that Fruitdealer and Trickster's lack of professional attitude was wrong, and both players are admitting and regretting that fact that they were overly lazy.
However, Fruitdealer and Trickster's free practice schedule/lifestyle was something that was agreed upon with TSL's manager Mr. Lee at TSL's creation, and it is petty to bring this up as a problem after all this time. If the two players' behavior really was that problematic, then the manager shares a part of the blame for not getting them under control over the past year. Otherwise, the promise of free practice schedule would only have been a lie to sign these two players.
Next, I will talk about the issue of TSL not giving out salaries to their players.
TSL is the only team that was sponsored by multiple companies from the beginning. To be honest, compare to other teams that are run on money out of the managers' own pockets, TSL's manager Mr. Lee is financially very well off. FD and T received their salaries for only April and May, but a part of FD's May salary, about 500,000 WON ($500) was delayed to June after the manager cited TSL's financial difficulties. TSL have received their appropriate sponsor money including FD and T's wages since March, so I don't understand why Lee lied about not receiving their sponsor money. Lee has said that their sponsor money was reduced, but this is only since July, so it is irrelevant to FD and T's circumstances.
Can you imagine how much FD and T blamed their sponsors because of Lee's lies? There should be no blame placed on those several companies including TIMU that have sponsored TSL from the early days of SC2. It would have been a strange situation in which those companies are badmouthed by the very players they sponsor. Can you imagine the sense of betrayal FD and T must have felt when there is no other conclusion than that the manager they have trusted has been pocketing the sponsor money for himself? When FD and T found out that the sponsor money has been coming in, they approached Lee about it, but Lee continued to lie and made up an excuse that the sponsor money came in very late and was reduced. I was disappointed to observe how this situation was folding out. I don't understand how TSL is in trouble financially when their sponsor money was increased this year, which led them to giving their players salaries in the first place. At the time [of FD and T's departure?] TSL was one of the smallest teams and their maid only came by briefly 3 times a week to make their food [presumably talking about how TSL's expenditure was probably low].
I am still trying to understand how they don't have enough money to run their team. Manager Lee said that they give out 1,000,000 WON ($1000) to their players as snack money each month, and that money is enough to pay for their monthly utility fee and car maintenance. He also claimed their their food expenses are over 5,000,000 WON ($5000) each month, but our team only spends 2,000,000 - 2,500,000 WON for 15 player, and that's including feeding them weekly beef/chicken/fish, so I don't understand why TSL needs that much money for only 8-9 players. I would like to ask TSL's manager if he thinks spending that much on food is wise, and you would have to question if he has the right qualities as a manager. I would like to ask him if thinks withholding player salaries to run his team is the correct decision.
The sponsor money is a very important part of running a team. [Blah, blah, blah, then he further talks about the importance of money in life. Not gonna bother to translate all that] There is an old saying that a lie will lead to another lie. I sincerely hope that TSL's manager will become more honest in the future.
The following section is summarizing F and TD's point of view:
We left oGs when they were becoming more organized as a team, because we preferred a flexible practice scheduling. There are various reasons for us joining up with manager Lee and forming TSL.
At first, we started TSL with our relationship with Manager Lee being that of business partners rather than a manager and a player. He promised us free practice schedule, compensation for the starcraft 2 guide [Not sure what this is about], and salaries. At first, Lee was someone in charge of the sponsors, but he eventually became more of a coach. However, he did not keep his promises with us.
Problems with how Lee was running TSL
1. Lack of involvement
There was a time when Lee would visit the teamhouse 1-2 times during 2 months. No matter how busy he was with his sponsors and running his PC Cafe, he should always put his team as his No.1 priority. I don't understand why we had to check our schedule that Lee never told us about on our own. There were occasions when Lee couldn't be contacted, so the outsiders contacted Trickster instead. This was stressful and we asked the manager to improve this, but nothing was done.
2. Withholding salaries
[This part basically says the same thing ST's manager said above about Lee withholding FD and T's salaries and lying to them about how the sponsor money wasn't coming in]
3. Imagerights
Lee did not take down various ads containing our images and when we asked him for a fee for continuing to use our image, he refused. These ads are still on and I hope they are taken care of ASAP.
4. Trust
FD never informed the team that he was leaving. Lee assumed after his phonecall with T that FD was also leaving and it is unbelievable from FD's perspective. He told us that the team's main sponsor is looking to depart during the team meetings and I remember that we (FD and T) even encouraged the other team members to work harder because the income from prize money is a better way to earn money than through salaries.
We are exhausted physically and mentally from Manager Lee's continuous lies. If what he said about the team's financial circumstances was true, then we would've waited for our salaries. After all, we had been waiting since last August, so there is no reason we can't wait more. If it really was becoming difficult to run the team, he should have just told us the truth and we would have willingly not received our salaries.
From what we understand, our sponsor money has increased since March, but nothing in our food menu has changed, so we don't see how the team was short on money.
[The next two sentences are something about their sponsored equipments, but I don't really understand it, so I'll let someone else do it] (그리고 후원사가 선수들에게 지급한 부품중 교체 이후 반납하지 않는 물품을 우리에게는 반납해야 한다며 부품을 가져갔다.
(확인 결과 후원사에 반납하지 않았다)
In any case, Lee is running a team as its manager as well as a PC cafe. Things have gotten better for him since TSL's creation. However, the same cannot be said for us players who have much spent time and passion. We also need to do our military duty soon. It is frustrating to think that only us players have been taking losses from this. I know that his PC cafe has greatly profited from using TSL's name.
It's true that each team should ultimately aim for profit, but there should be an initial investment. That investment includes money, time, and passion, but Manager Lee only follows money.
We admit that we partially share the blame in this incident. We met up with our personal friends and others more than we did with our teammates and there were drinking occasions. Manager Lee probably didn't like us in that aspect.
Some will say that we were unprofessional in our conduct, but we don't agree with that. We are old enough to take responsibilities for ourselves and we put in efforts that we wouldn't be ashamed of. The current situation is regrettable and I don't know how it got to here. I would just like to tell the truth and hope that there are no more unfortunate victims like us from TSL or other teams.
Finally, we would like to apologize for this incident and will try to become better gamers.
|
I think this indirectly gives credibility to EG as well, though this thread isn't about them. They make it SOUND as though (and I understand TSL have rebutted against such a thing) Coach Lee has been pretty underhanded. Perhaps in more than just this issue... if you get me 
|
On August 05 2011 04:18 wolfe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:07 tl55555 wrote:
[quote]
Dude... what kind of white knight business law are you studying... you're going to make a terrible businessman if you think like that. People bend and break contracts ALL the time, and there are middle grounds, all it depends is how good your lawyers are. You keep going by the book and see how long you last.
Whether Lee broke the contract or not this is whats happened: they didn't come to practice and they didn't get paid. If the contract is AMBIGUOUS on practice schedules, there is an argument for both sides. Law is not always fair, law is just law. One lesson for you to learn in your long, hard journey ahead.
So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. Korea has more or less the same contract laws as the US and I was only using that as reference. Ironically, you contradict yourself with your 2nd and 3rd sentences a feat that is quite impressive given you have only written three sentences. Fair trial =/= more money, better lawyer, wins Not only are you a cynical person who seems to have no respect for our legal systems you also are quite poor at doing research. Give me a single example in which the courts ruled in favor of the author of an ambiguous contract. Side note, the more money argument doesn't really have that much to do with better lawyers it has more to do with that a protracted legal battle can last years costing upwards of millions of dollars. The party with the smaller bank is more likely to withdraw and settle rather than waste years in court.
no the korean contract law is more similar to german law. it has changed and shifted itself a lot to meet the us customs more but in the end its a derivative of the german BGB
|
On the 4th of August, we received a message from Manager Lee saying they would withdraw from the SC2Con, therefore, we were left with no other choice but to announce their forced expulsion.
Maybe Im missing something here, but this reads as: They said they wont come so we wont allow them to come. What?
|
On August 05 2011 04:18 wolfe wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:16 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:07 tl55555 wrote:
[quote]
Dude... what kind of white knight business law are you studying... you're going to make a terrible businessman if you think like that. People bend and break contracts ALL the time, and there are middle grounds, all it depends is how good your lawyers are. You keep going by the book and see how long you last.
Whether Lee broke the contract or not this is whats happened: they didn't come to practice and they didn't get paid. If the contract is AMBIGUOUS on practice schedules, there is an argument for both sides. Law is not always fair, law is just law. One lesson for you to learn in your long, hard journey ahead.
So at least we agree now that what Lee did was wrong and unethical? I personally don't care what you think about business law and whether you feel it means very little. The fact is what Lee did was wrong. Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. Korea has more or less the same contract laws as the US and I was only using that as reference. Ironically, you contradict yourself with your 2nd and 3rd sentences a feat that is quite impressive given you have only written three sentences. Fair trial =/= more money, better lawyer, wins Not only are you a cynical person who seems to have no respect for our legal systems you also are quite poor at doing research. Give me a single example in which the courts ruled in favor of the author of an ambiguous contract. Side note, the more money argument doesn't really have that much to do with better lawyers it has more to do with that a protracted legal battle can last years costing upwards of millions of dollars. The party with the smaller bank is more likely to withdraw and settle rather than waste years in court.
You're on trial for murder. It doesn't matter if you did it or not, but it looks really bad for you.
You have an option:
The one million dollar a day legal team of the best 8 lawyers in the country
or
A court appointed lawyer, who costs nothing to you, and has ~30 cases he is working on at the same time.
Money means a lot.
|
So it finally comes out... given the events it was quite obvious that Manager or coach Lee was a trainwreck. He lacked severe professionalism that a few saw because everyone jumped on the EG hatewagon. From his outburst about Puma to lying and withholding payment to his players. Yikes. No wonder TSL is in such turmoil.. lack of management and professionalism.
|
On August 05 2011 04:17 Grimsong wrote:Show nested quote +On August 05 2011 04:14 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:10 Grimsong wrote:On August 05 2011 04:07 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 04:02 wolfe wrote:On August 05 2011 04:00 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:49 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:45 tl55555 wrote:On August 05 2011 03:35 FairForever wrote:On August 05 2011 03:27 tl55555 wrote:
[quote]
Not anymore wrong and unethical than what FruitDealer and Trickster did, which was violate their contract by not practicing. Don't flaunt your business law when you have no idea wtf is going on, just makes you look like a pompous arrogant child. Read above. I never said that I agree with what FD and Trickster did. But that's not the point. While FD and Trickster may have been morally wrong in not practicing hard to really fully commit to their duties, TSL was legally wrong in refusing to pay them. I'm not sure how it's comparable. EDIT: I forgot to mention again, you keep saying they violated their contract. Again, stop spewing bullshit out of your mouth. To clear up your confusion, TSL was not legally wrong if the contract was ambiguous, that's how its comparable. Actually TSL is still legally wrong. Exemption of a clause does not allow for open interpretation. In fact, it would be construed against the drafter of the contract, presumably TSL (contra preferentem). Again though, stop spewing bullshit, you're trying to defend a position that is clearly indefensible and it is recognized by most of the people here. I'm not going to bother repeating my arguments again... Me stop spewing bullshit? How about you stop spewing mumbo jumbo legal speak. People who try to impress by using legal speak and can't communicate a point in english -> unemployed I don't give a shit what the book says, what REALITY says is ambiguous contract + better lawyer wins. Please don't bother repeating your incorrect arguments again, you will be saving TL valuable bytes. How is that wrong or difficult to understand? "A contract is ambiguous when it is uncertain what the intent of the parties was and the contract is capable of more than one reasonable interpretation. Sometimes ambiguous terms can be explained by the admission of parol evidence. Also, Courts abide by the rule that an ambiguous contract is interpreted against the party who drafted it. In other words, the party who did not draft the contract will be given the benefit of the doubt so to speak. " -USLegal You know what else USLegal says? People are entitled to a fair trial. The person with more money who can hire better lawyers wins. That's not even remotely true, don't speak on trials and the US legal system on such a blanket statement, when you likely have no idea about what goes on at the court houses. It's not even about legality at this point. Logically you can't stop paying someone their money due unless they are no longer employed. Both players were still employed under the TSL flag. You must live under a rock on the moon, or definitely not in the united states, or you definitely don't pay attention to legal cases. Or I work in a courthouse, talk to attorneys all day, and know for a fact that the higher paid lawyer doesn't always win? Are you serious right now? I'm completely baffled right now and quite frankly I can't put together a statement to express how ignorant the things you are saying in regards to law are.
Well, he's from the internet, so of course he knows everything.
There's so little we actually know about how these teams do their finances and their management, but all in all it looks like TSL is collapsing at a pretty rapid rate. As awful as kespa was maybe it's necessary for the Korean system because of how the business culture there works.
|
Whatever you might want to say about FruitDealer and Trickster being lazy or abandoning their struggling team, it's pretty unconscionable to withhold wages.
It's just not something you do unless you're a scumbag.
|
On August 05 2011 04:11 Masil wrote:I just translate that the statement of Startale manager, Jong-Wook Won. Original source is here. http://www.playxp.com/sc2/bbs/view.php?article_id=3254338&page=5The translation is really long so I would put spoiler tag on it If somebody didn't do FD and Trickster, I will work on that too. Translation. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- + Show Spoiler +Greetings,
This is Startale Won, Jong-Wook.
First of all, I apologize that greeting you all at the uncomfortable moment.
As manager of the team, I write this statement for explaining all of this happening without any false info.
For the case of Fruitdealer and Trickster, I admit that their inconsistence attitude is wrong. As the matter of fact, both players admit their attitude and regret that it was far beyond self-free practice routine.
The self-free practice routine of FD and Trickster was on the contract case once they signed the contract with Mr. Lee when TSL is created. And they come to this far, now Mr.Lee, TSL manager argues about their attitude. It is truly unprofessional.
If TSL manager thinks their attitude is problematic, he should have done something about it but he didn't. So I think it is also problem for TSL manager, not managing properly for both players.
Or the promise he made at the beginning was a hypocrisy so that he wanted them to sign TSL.
Next, I will talk about "not receiving the salaries" part.
TSL is the one and only team has several sponsors and support from the beginning, include money and goods.
To be honest, when I compared TSL and other team which didn't have sponsors and it fully funded by manager's personal capital. No manager is better than Mr.Lee in financial term.
FD and Trickster received salaries only for two months, April and May. And FD agreed with Mr.Lee that delaying $500 of his May salary to the next month, June.
Although, the money from sponsors has been deposited to TSL from March.
I have to ask why he lies constantly, telling the players the money has not been deposited.
And he said that the money from sponsors had decreased, it was the case from July. It is nothing related with this issue.
Can you imagine, FD and Trickster didn't know about this truth, just believing the word from Mr. Lee and blaming sponsors.
What is the problem with TIMU and other companies, sponsoring TSL from the difficult situation of early SC2 market.
It's hard for me to understand that one manager created this mess, supporting and blaming players.
Once both players found out the fact that sponsors deposited their money as planned, at the conversation with Mr.Lee, he said that company didn't deposit yet and keep lying. And both players said that they knew the money has been deposited from sponsors. Mr.Lee said that the amount was quite little and it was late, keep hiding the fact he lies.
After I saw this was happening, it was the moment I disappointed with Mr.Lee.
The money from sponsors was increased this year, more money than 2010 when TSL was created. And TSL started "Annual Salaries" system. But the question is why their finance is so low and why didn't give their salaries as Mr.Lee as promised.
At the time, TSL is acquired the least players among all of Korean SC2 progaming team. Also, kitchen woman comes three times a week and cook some side dish.
At this moment, I wonder as a manager how finance can be so low.
Mr.Lee said that players spent over $1,000 per month to buy some at convenience store. That amount, $1,000 is also covered monthly taxes and car maintenance.
Plus, he said that the food cost is over $5,000 per month. For example. my team has 15 people, food cost is most likely $2,000~2,500. This covers meat(cow+pig), fish for every week and several side dishes, ramen, etc. It is not that much but my team eats with no complain. Sometime, we eat outside too.
But how can TSL spent over $5,000 per month for 8~9 people.
And at this situation of team, I want ask Mr.Lee for that food cost is okay.
It is truly the case to seriously think about his abilities as an manager.
He created that flaws. And if he said that he couldn't give salaries and spend for operating money, I will ask you this.
Money from sponsors is the important factor to manage a team.
Money is not everything in this world but for the management of a team, all people would admit that it is very important.
The money is not only for personal self, but for every people in a team.
Manager can get sponsors because players exists.
For both player and manager, we need the mind like family and companionship.
From the people of the past, they said, "lies lead another lies."
My heart is really sad that I see once again the ghastliness of Wormtongue through this issue.
Sincerely, I look forward to seeing the manager who can be more truthful.
Looking at the spoiler text...
If what the StarTale coach Jong-Wook says is true about TSL Coach lee. Then wow.
Coach lee seems like he's stealing money from players. Wonder if he has an off-shore account lol. TSL isn't going to exist anymore if this is true. Lee seems like a scam-er and a compulsive lier.
|
I'm not sure what to think of this.
1. While we acknowledge that disciplining players who negatively affect the team is fair, withholding wages without any prior notification is wrong.
Is definitely bad no matter what. You should always notify.
At the same time, this is coming from ST's manager who just took them in so obviously biased.
And FD and SKS are total slackers and trying to milk whatever money is left, now that their beta fame is waning fast.
I'm not going to question Mr. Lee's managing or coaching. Obviously the rest of the team willingly stayed.
|
People were perhaps too quick to jump on the EG hate train, but EG has also a somewhat notorious history, whereas your average SC2 fan only new of Coach Lee that Tastosis had lots of good things to say about him. Is it any surprise people are still willing to defend him (me included)?
How do two guys who hardly show up to practice even know that Lee wasn't around? Does their casual attitude towards practice extend towards the rest of the team? Their teammates still on TSL who haven't spoken out yet out of fear/honor/etc.? Maybe, maybe not.
I'm guessing Coach Lee tried a little too hard to change TSL from a practice-lite team into something that could compete again. Maybe it's his fault for being ambitious, but that doesn't mean he didn't want the best for his players. Would you want to go on coaching FD and Trickster forever? I wouldn't want to coach people with no ambition. Coaches don't like being cheerleaders for grown ups.
The only questionable thing is the pay, which is a big deal, but I'd want more information before finally agreeing Coach Lee was at fault. It sounds like he stole from the rich to give to the poor, to put it nicely.
Don't forget Coach Lee's last remark, about team TSL being given late notice on the tournament maps. I'm not sure whom he was addressing, but it sounds like SC2con or w/e:
The fact that you always give these information late only to TSL players is very disappointing.
My read into that is that they've probably given TSL a lot of grief for not joining SC2con.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
