|
Knock off the SC2 vs BW vs LoL vs whatever crap please. |
Australia7535 Posts
On March 26 2012 20:07 shaftofpleasure wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 19:37 Lysenko wrote:On March 26 2012 17:47 ShadeR wrote:On March 26 2012 17:23 Lysenko wrote:That is ridiculous... nobody "owns" football.. nobody "owns" soccer. You've identified a significant difference between competitive video games and traditional sports. Thing is, Blizzard's rights to control broadcast of their games rests on the elements of the games that traditional games don't have -- story elements, characters, music, sound effects, graphic artwork that are inseparable from the game. Are these elements barriers to video games taking on the cultural significance of sports like soccer and American football? Possibly. However, Blizzard's intellectual property rights to their game can't be made to go away just by declaring them "ridiculous." Did you by chance follow the IP lawsuits? When Acti-Blizzard sued MBC and OGN, the Korean court asked them to define IP and how it was being infringed upon. Blizzard had no response and that was the end of that. Actually, it wasn't the end. Blizzard never abandoned their argument that they owned the intellectual property rights to the graphics and sound in the game. What happened to end the case was that they negotiated a settlement that resulted in Blizzard granting KESPA, OGN, and MBC a license to their intellectual property. Regardless, intellectual property rights and legitimate exceptions to them vary from country to country. In Korea, the Blizzard Brood War case didn't yield any kind of precedential court ruling; instead it yielded a settlement. A case in any other country might go another way. All that said, there's no question that Blizzard has strong IP rights in the graphics and sound for their games. The limits of those rights might vary from country to country, but the only way that gets resolved is through a lawsuit and either a court ruling or a settlement. Did you follow it to the end? Because Blizzard lost the the case. They were just trying to bully Kespa and they thought they can extort money out of them. Kespa fought back and Blizzard lost their heat and raised the white flag. lol
Actually, it wasn't the end. Blizzard never abandoned their argument
We all know the type. That idiot that lost the fight (though in this case ran away from is more apt) and continues to talk shit afterwards.
|
On March 26 2012 20:07 shaftofpleasure wrote:
Did you follow it to the end? Because Blizzard lost the the case. They were just trying to bully Kespa and they thought they can extort money out of them. Kespa fought back and Blizzard lost their heat and raised the white flag. lol
KESPA and Blizzard reached a settlement before the trial concluded. That's not "raising a white flag." The only thing I could imagine in a court case that would amount to that would be a plaintiff asking for dismissal.
|
On March 26 2012 20:12 ShadeR wrote:
We all know the type. That idiot that lost the fight (though in this case ran away from is more apt) and continues to talk shit afterwards.
I asked this in my previous post, but if that were really the outcome, why would OGN and KESPA involve Blizzard in discussing where to go with their future broadcasts?
Edit: I'll answer that for you: they wouldn't. They'd just broadcast whatever they wanted if they'd won as soundly as you are saying. Broadcasting an audiovisual work like a video game without a license is pretty difficult in all the countries we're discussing. It might get complicated in some countries if an IP owner fails to try to enforce their rights, or if there were some prior license of some kind, or if there were some statutory exception like "fair use" in the U.S. that the broadcaster felt they fell within, but honestly the arguments here against Blizzard's position are mostly just uninformed wishful thinking.
|
Australia7535 Posts
A settlement in which they get none of their demands certainly is raising the white flag to me.
As for current nego? NO LAN BRAH!
|
On March 26 2012 20:19 ShadeR wrote:
A settlement in which they get none of their demands certainly is raising the white flag to me.
As for current nego? NO LAN BRAH!
Since sc2 is getting into PL they got what they want...
|
On March 26 2012 20:19 ShadeR wrote:
A settlement in which they get none of their demands certainly is raising the white flag to me.
As for current nego? NO LAN BRAH!
I think your understanding of the settlement isn't accurate. MBC, OGN, and KESPA got a license in exchange for a license fee to be paid to Blizzard.
|
Cool. Hope things turn out well.
|
the world will never be like before.. we will remember sc bw
|
Australia7535 Posts
On March 26 2012 20:23 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 20:19 ShadeR wrote:
A settlement in which they get none of their demands certainly is raising the white flag to me.
As for current nego? NO LAN BRAH! I think your understanding of the settlement isn't accurate. MBC, OGN, and KESPA got a license in exchange for a license fee to be paid to Blizzard.
Hardly, Blizzard wanted control of the proBW scene and all they got was E-billboards on space tile-set maps.
1. Set the contract term for using its games to 1 year
2. Prior approvals about all league operations such as contracting sponsorship, marketing materials, broadcasting plan
3. License fee for running of league and all license fee of sponsorship inducement
4. Ownership of all broadcasted programs, program videos
5. Right to audit KeSPA
|
On March 26 2012 20:31 ShadeR wrote:
Hardly, Blizzard wanted control of the proBW scene and all they got was E-billboards on space tile-set maps.
Sorry, but you're wrong. They received a license fee, like I said before.
http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221124
Edit: It's the norm in lawsuits to demand everything imaginable and settle for less. Part of this (at least in the U.S. and countries with similar legal systems) is that failing to make a claim at the start can close it off as a possibility later. However, in a case like this, the licensing fee is really the key outcome.
|
On March 26 2012 20:12 ShadeR wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 20:07 shaftofpleasure wrote:On March 26 2012 19:37 Lysenko wrote:On March 26 2012 17:47 ShadeR wrote:On March 26 2012 17:23 Lysenko wrote:That is ridiculous... nobody "owns" football.. nobody "owns" soccer. You've identified a significant difference between competitive video games and traditional sports. Thing is, Blizzard's rights to control broadcast of their games rests on the elements of the games that traditional games don't have -- story elements, characters, music, sound effects, graphic artwork that are inseparable from the game. Are these elements barriers to video games taking on the cultural significance of sports like soccer and American football? Possibly. However, Blizzard's intellectual property rights to their game can't be made to go away just by declaring them "ridiculous." Did you by chance follow the IP lawsuits? When Acti-Blizzard sued MBC and OGN, the Korean court asked them to define IP and how it was being infringed upon. Blizzard had no response and that was the end of that. Actually, it wasn't the end. Blizzard never abandoned their argument that they owned the intellectual property rights to the graphics and sound in the game. What happened to end the case was that they negotiated a settlement that resulted in Blizzard granting KESPA, OGN, and MBC a license to their intellectual property. Regardless, intellectual property rights and legitimate exceptions to them vary from country to country. In Korea, the Blizzard Brood War case didn't yield any kind of precedential court ruling; instead it yielded a settlement. A case in any other country might go another way. All that said, there's no question that Blizzard has strong IP rights in the graphics and sound for their games. The limits of those rights might vary from country to country, but the only way that gets resolved is through a lawsuit and either a court ruling or a settlement. Did you follow it to the end? Because Blizzard lost the the case. They were just trying to bully Kespa and they thought they can extort money out of them. Kespa fought back and Blizzard lost their heat and raised the white flag. lol We all know the type. That idiot that lost the fight (though in this case ran away from is more apt) and continues to talk shit afterwards.
You have no idea how lawsuits work, do you?
|
Australia7535 Posts
On March 26 2012 20:39 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 20:31 ShadeR wrote:
Hardly, Blizzard wanted control of the proBW scene and all they got was E-billboards on space tile-set maps. Sorry, but you're wrong. They received a license fee, like I said before. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221124Edit: It's the norm in lawsuits to demand everything imaginable and settle for less. Part of this (at least in the U.S. and countries with similar legal systems) is that failing to make a claim at the start can close it off as a possibility later. However, in a case like this, the licensing fee is really the key outcome.
My beef was with Blizzard claiming IP rights infringement and their disproportionate demands. A license contract is merely a return to the status quo. Previously with (IEG?) Korean distributor now with directly Blizzard. I say Blizzard 'lost' because most of their demands were not satisfied and only disagree with you if it is your postion that Blizzard's IP rights would have justifiably granted them their demands.
|
If this shit happens then I'm done. That will be the last of esports for me. Maybe it's time to grow up.
bw has been good to me though...
|
5003 Posts
On March 26 2012 20:39 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 20:31 ShadeR wrote:
Hardly, Blizzard wanted control of the proBW scene and all they got was E-billboards on space tile-set maps. Sorry, but you're wrong. They received a license fee, like I said before. http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=221124Edit: It's the norm in lawsuits to demand everything imaginable and settle for less. Part of this (at least in the U.S. and countries with similar legal systems) is that failing to make a claim at the start can close it off as a possibility later. However, in a case like this, the licensing fee is really the key outcome.
Nothing anywhere says Blizzard received a license fee. It could be as "symbolic" as the 1 Won contract they signed with GOM -- did they receive a fee? Yes. Did they really? No.
They didn't just "settle". Blizzard was going to win the case. Why would Blizzard suddenly completely change their attitude? Why would KeSPA go to Blizzard HQ a month after they reached an agreement? There are a lot of things that went on and honestly you can say "YEAH BLIZZARD WON" but not really since Blizzard also got a new head of esports at the same time (hint hint).
|
5003 Posts
On March 26 2012 14:18 dgwow wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 14:11 BrosephBrostar wrote:
It's pretty sad that most people clamoring "for esports" don't realize they've basically been bought and paid for. Has anyone really thought about why SC2 is such a big deal? It's all about the money. I'm willing to bet Blizzard spent more money promoting SC2 the year it came out than it has in the last 10 years on BW. Blizzard tried to monetize BW as an esport back in 2008 and when they failed they tried to kill it. Now that BW is dying on it's own they're is ready to swoop in like vultures.
Blizzard doesn't care about esports at all. They don't care about BW, they don't care about Counter Strike, they don't care about League of Legends, or Street Fighter, or shitty games like Kart Rider. All they care about is their bottom line and they have teams of marketers ready to make you care just as much. You just won't notice it. I think Blizzard before it was bought out by Activision cared about this, but with the new CEO and board of directors it is all business. See: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=128252
To be fair Blizzard never cared until KeSPA sold licensing fees to another company. It's actually quite fair (and correct move) for Blizzard to step in at that point, IMO anyway. It's just how they did their market research after and how they approached everything after...
|
On March 26 2012 22:51 Milkis wrote:
Nothing anywhere says Blizzard received a license fee. It could be as "symbolic" as the 1 Won contract they signed with GOM -- did they receive a fee? Yes. Did they really? No.
I'd presume the terms were confidential. Do you have any specifics about the details?
I don't think it's usually possible in these cases to talk about who "won" or "lost" unless a trial runs to completion. I'm certainly not saying either side "won," but I am disagreeing that either side necessarily "lost," which was the other guy's argument. The question is whether Blizzard got something like what they were really hoping to get at the start. I'd say that the fact that KESPA and OGN are talking with them right now suggests that they were in a good position, otherwise why would they?
|
No. 
|
5003 Posts
On March 26 2012 23:09 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 22:51 Milkis wrote:
Nothing anywhere says Blizzard received a license fee. It could be as "symbolic" as the 1 Won contract they signed with GOM -- did they receive a fee? Yes. Did they really? No. I'd presume the terms were confidential. Do you have any specifics about the details? I don't think it's usually possible in these cases to talk about who "won" or "lost" unless a trial runs to completion. I'm certainly not saying either side "won," but I am disagreeing that either side necessarily "lost," which was the other guy's argument. The question is whether Blizzard got something like what they were really hoping to get at the start. I'd say that the fact that KESPA and OGN are talking with them right now suggests that they were in a good position, otherwise why would they?
The terms were confidential that's why I'm saying it's weird to assume that KeSPA paid anything significant. I mean, the terms were something like 100K per tournament for the negotiations before.
Blizzard originally went into it because they wanted money, simple as that. They didn't. Right now they're now going to KeSPA because it's the only thing they can do to try and save SC2 in Korea. Blizzard's policies on esports literally changed during this entire IP rights ordeal. Take that as you will.
|
On March 26 2012 23:15 Milkis wrote:
Blizzard's policies on esports literally changed during this entire IP rights ordeal. Take that as you will.
I think a lot of people right now, Blizzard included, are coming to terms with the fact that there's not as much money to be made in the esports business worldwide as maybe people thought in late 2010. In any case, regardless of the law, there's very little benefit to be had suing another company over IP when there's not much actual money there. You can't get blood from a stone.
|
5003 Posts
On March 26 2012 23:22 Lysenko wrote:Show nested quote +On March 26 2012 23:15 Milkis wrote:
Blizzard's policies on esports literally changed during this entire IP rights ordeal. Take that as you will. I think a lot of people right now, Blizzard included, are coming to terms with the fact that there's not as much money to be made in the esports business worldwide as maybe people thought in late 2010. In any case, regardless of the law, there's very little benefit to be had suing another company over IP when there's not much actual money there. You can't get blood from a stone.
Pretty much.
But in doing so, they literally killed BW by doing all of that. It'll also probably affect any sponsorships for SC2 too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
