|
Czech Republic12134 Posts
On October 20 2015 18:53 opisska wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2015 18:29 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 20 2015 18:02 opisska wrote:
I don't really know shit about korean law, but in Europe, this would likely not fly. Afreeca is a business and businesses are explicitly NOT allowed to pick customers, that's a big part of what anti-discrimination laws are about. They might refuse service to someone they are in a direct dispute with or in similar cases when they have a good reason to protect their own assets, but I can't see how other organisations' problems with someone qualifies. The same then comes for Blizzard - they can't just choose that they will allow the use of their product in a specific way only for some people (no matter what is written in some "agreement", in Europe, the any agreement that puts the customer into a worse position that is quaranteeed by law is automatically void).
Personally, I also disagree. If they want them to be banned from some activity, they should get a court order for that. "Justice" performed by a bunch of private companies is very bad concept that should not be supported. Actually this is a misunderstanding, I don't know which "european laws" you are referring to but discrimination laws do not work the way you think they do. They do not in Sweden anyway and I have a ahrd time believing we have different ones than what EU has across its members. The way it works is you are not allowed to discriminate certain groups, in essence a company or a store is allowed to deny/ban any customer they wish. Companies don't do this because its usually bad reputation(obviously) and because the stores/companies are free to do this the law against discrimination was made. This made it so that you are not allowed to systematically discriminate certain Groups. In sweden these Groups constitutes "gender, gender identity or expression, ethnicity , religion or other belief , disability, sexual orientation or age" So unless the person/Group that is denied or banned can prove it was because of any of these reasons the companies can do what the hell they want. They can refuse to sell to some people if they feel like it, its their right. I thought this is an European concept, but maybe it isn't. However I was under the impression that in Czech Republic you can't just refuse service to a random individual because you could always hide your discrimination against a group by just picking individuals (and then the group motivation would be much harder to prove). But maybe that's the case of us being stricter than neccessary, it happens a lot.
We have it the same way  You can refuse anyone you like but in, ehm, "some" cases you have to have a good reason(you know who is the case  )
The reason why is this not happening is that it damages the public image. You never know who you are refusing and usually there's no way to refuse a customer who wants to pay you money. It is usually applied to drunks and thieves caught in the shop before.
Right now the only one who can ban them is Blizzard. Afreeca isn't affected by them. They haven't damaged their brand nor their streaming service. They damaged the SC2 image which could be a reason for Blizzard to ban their accounts but they can buy new accounts and that would meant for Blizzard to either ban them again and return their money or do nothing. Both actions would be viewed as bad because in western countries is the thing that you cannot be punished twice for the same crime(meaning new account should be OK). And if they do nothing some people will go bat shit crazy as they are doing now
|
I hardly have any sympathy for these matchfixers if they are going to get banned from touching StarCraft ever again.
|
The real problem with those matchfixers is that they are constantly insulting current pro-gamers and making stupid rumors about them. Progamers may not take matchfixing as a big deal if Kespa does not strictly punish matchfixers. We don't want any more progamers becoming matchfixer.
|
On October 20 2015 17:32 NEEDZMOAR wrote:and this is the company that will host GSL in the future? The way I see it the new hosts of GSL are okay with matchfixing and ruining the community.
They should ban all convicted criminals from their streaming service lest they be seen as an organisation that approves of criminal activity?
|
On October 20 2015 18:30 Rekrul wrote:
kespa should ban more than 3% of the matchfixers from their own leagues before they make these demands
I would like so much from you to eleborate. Unfortunately you never do..
|
Didn't these players violate Blizzard's terms anyway by matchfixing? Shouldn't Blizzard ban them from playing any Blizzard games?
Edit: I guess KeSPA wants to ban them from streaming any game, like LoL for example, too.
|
On October 20 2015 19:29 Musicus wrote:
Didn't these players violate Blizzard's terms anyway by matchfixing? Shouldn't Blizzard ban them from playing any Blizzard games?
Maybe, if it's in BW's EULA.
|
On October 20 2015 18:30 Rekrul wrote:
kespa should ban more than 3% of the matchfixers from their own leagues before they make these demands
If you know something then you should probably say it instead of making random cryptic messages on a board that Kespa doesn't even check.
|
On October 20 2015 14:40 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2015 14:33 StarStruck wrote:On October 20 2015 12:15 Waxangel wrote:
It's totally enforceable if they get Blizzard to tell Afreeca to kill those streams.
You remember that time like six years ago, when KeSPA tried to argue that broadcast rights belonged to anyone BUT the developer of the game? Remember how that shit ended? Yep :/ I'm all for it. Need to have something enforceable anywhere to try and make people think twice before doing it. So they are forcing young kids to stay in a house whole day playing video games for more than 12 hours in many cases without salary and no promise of getting any reward,they wasted their young there,no studies ,then they turn 22 and see how they have nothing to construct their life and loss one game can gave them 3k.usd.i dont support it but i kind of understand their situation.and it is kespa fault at the end.
I agree with you man. i remember on stream larva talking about b-teamer life, its like 10+ hour of gaming and in between you have to clean, cook, dishes, laundry and all sorts of manual labor. they only get paid like 0~500$ a month and only select few who are good enough get to go to A-teamer house where they are again treated like servants/practice dummy. shit is rough, its like legal slavery and they really are wasting time if they don't make it while their peers are graduating high school and going to unis and shit.
what they needed was some kind of progamer's union, but never happened. industry stayed top heavy, teams sponsored by corporate giants but all the money is going elsewhere. they were so busy marketing a good image of progaming with the top players as if its something worth pursuing while probably 90% of kids just wasted a good chunk of their youth. its such a shady business if you think about it, not surprising matchfixing and other criminal activities keep happening lol
|
On October 20 2015 19:07 deacon.frost wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2015 18:53 opisska wrote:On October 20 2015 18:29 Shuffleblade wrote:On October 20 2015 18:02 opisska wrote:
I don't really know shit about korean law, but in Europe, this would likely not fly. Afreeca is a business and businesses are explicitly NOT allowed to pick customers, that's a big part of what anti-discrimination laws are about. They might refuse service to someone they are in a direct dispute with or in similar cases when they have a good reason to protect their own assets, but I can't see how other organisations' problems with someone qualifies. The same then comes for Blizzard - they can't just choose that they will allow the use of their product in a specific way only for some people (no matter what is written in some "agreement", in Europe, the any agreement that puts the customer into a worse position that is quaranteeed by law is automatically void).
Personally, I also disagree. If they want them to be banned from some activity, they should get a court order for that. "Justice" performed by a bunch of private companies is very bad concept that should not be supported. Actually this is a misunderstanding, I don't know which "european laws" you are referring to but discrimination laws do not work the way you think they do. They do not in Sweden anyway and I have a ahrd time believing we have different ones than what EU has across its members. The way it works is you are not allowed to discriminate certain groups, in essence a company or a store is allowed to deny/ban any customer they wish. Companies don't do this because its usually bad reputation(obviously) and because the stores/companies are free to do this the law against discrimination was made. This made it so that you are not allowed to systematically discriminate certain Groups. In sweden these Groups constitutes "gender, gender identity or expression, ethnicity , religion or other belief , disability, sexual orientation or age" So unless the person/Group that is denied or banned can prove it was because of any of these reasons the companies can do what the hell they want. They can refuse to sell to some people if they feel like it, its their right. I thought this is an European concept, but maybe it isn't. However I was under the impression that in Czech Republic you can't just refuse service to a random individual because you could always hide your discrimination against a group by just picking individuals (and then the group motivation would be much harder to prove). But maybe that's the case of us being stricter than neccessary, it happens a lot. We have it the same way You can refuse anyone you like but in, ehm, "some" cases you have to have a good reason(you know who is the case ) The reason why is this not happening is that it damages the public image. You never know who you are refusing and usually there's no way to refuse a customer who wants to pay you money. It is usually applied to drunks and thieves caught in the shop before. Right now the only one who can ban them is Blizzard. Afreeca isn't affected by them. They haven't damaged their brand nor their streaming service. They damaged the SC2 image which could be a reason for Blizzard to ban their accounts but they can buy new accounts and that would meant for Blizzard to either ban them again and return their money or do nothing. Both actions would be viewed as bad because in western countries is the thing that you cannot be punished twice for the same crime(meaning new account should be OK). And if they do nothing some people will go bat shit crazy as they are doing now
It all depends on the EULA, if you're banned from a service but didn't break any rules in the EULA, a request at the european court of human rights would protect you, in this case for the sheer fact that you can't be punished twice for the same crime. And I agree with the initial statement, things should be enforced by law, not by companies agreement.
That said, Korean law is indeed fucked up and companies have much more power than the legal governenment (see Samsung vs Unions for example...)
|
On October 20 2015 19:35 jinyung2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2015 14:40 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:On October 20 2015 14:33 StarStruck wrote:On October 20 2015 12:15 Waxangel wrote:
It's totally enforceable if they get Blizzard to tell Afreeca to kill those streams.
You remember that time like six years ago, when KeSPA tried to argue that broadcast rights belonged to anyone BUT the developer of the game? Remember how that shit ended? Yep :/ I'm all for it. Need to have something enforceable anywhere to try and make people think twice before doing it. So they are forcing young kids to stay in a house whole day playing video games for more than 12 hours in many cases without salary and no promise of getting any reward,they wasted their young there,no studies ,then they turn 22 and see how they have nothing to construct their life and loss one game can gave them 3k.usd.i dont support it but i kind of understand their situation.and it is kespa fault at the end. what they needed was some kind of progamer's union, but never happened.
Boxer tried to make one and asked a gamer to lead the campaign, whose nick is sAviOr
LMAO
|
On October 20 2015 19:35 jinyung2 wrote:Show nested quote +On October 20 2015 14:40 [sc1f]eonzerg wrote:On October 20 2015 14:33 StarStruck wrote:On October 20 2015 12:15 Waxangel wrote:
It's totally enforceable if they get Blizzard to tell Afreeca to kill those streams.
You remember that time like six years ago, when KeSPA tried to argue that broadcast rights belonged to anyone BUT the developer of the game? Remember how that shit ended? Yep :/ I'm all for it. Need to have something enforceable anywhere to try and make people think twice before doing it. So they are forcing young kids to stay in a house whole day playing video games for more than 12 hours in many cases without salary and no promise of getting any reward,they wasted their young there,no studies ,then they turn 22 and see how they have nothing to construct their life and loss one game can gave them 3k.usd.i dont support it but i kind of understand their situation.and it is kespa fault at the end. I agree with you man. i remember on stream larva talking about b-teamer life, its like 10+ hour of gaming and in between you have to clean, cook, dishes, laundry and all sorts of manual labor. they only get paid like 0~500$ a month and only select few who are good enough get to go to A-teamer house where they are again treated like servants/practice dummy. shit is rough, its like legal slavery and they really are wasting time if they don't make it while their peers are graduating high school and going to unis and shit. what they needed was some kind of progamer's union, but never happened. industry stayed top heavy, teams sponsored by corporate giants but all the money is going elsewhere. they were so busy marketing a good image of progaming with the top players as if its something worth pursuing while probably 90% of kids just wasted a good chunk of their youth. its such a shady business if you think about it, not surprising matchfixing and other criminal activities keep happening lol
This is problem of all pro-scenes. Same thing happens in other pro-sports scenes such as baseball and football.
|
Stop being fucking silly kespa. What's next, contact their ISPs to demand they turn their internet access off so they can't play games?
|
this is why I really don't like kespa. Sure, clean the mess up within your organization but don't tell other businesses who they can or can not have as clients/customers.
|
Dominican Republic627 Posts
On October 20 2015 19:47 sumsaR wrote:
Stop being fucking silly kespa. What's next, contact their ISPs to demand they turn their internet access off so they can't play games?
lol
|
Kespa is not a private corporation; it is a government agency, especifically, it is a part of the State Administration.
So, if they order or request a private corporation to prohibit someone for use their services (which is the case):
1.- Kespa should have that prerrogative: by an explicit act (Congress act, specifically, not government regulation of any sort), stated previously to the misdemeanor.
2.- If they lack legal authorisation, they should occur to the nearest Court, to get the order from the judge.
Why is that? Because otherwise, Kespa will be infinging the following fundamental rights (or human rights):
1.- Afreeca's right to freely do business (economic liberty), that comprehends the capacity of giving his own terms of use, as long as they respect the law. And mainly, the liberty of selling any kind of goods and services to any individual, regardless of his gender, race, etc.
2.- Accused's right to not be punished twice for the same facts (non bis in idem). So, if the law says that a given crime will get a determinate punishment, the State can't add another negative consequence to that unless is the law that allows it (which is the case of accesory sentences like, in addition to jail time, prohibition of exerting a given activity).
3.- Administration's principle of legality, that is, basically, the submission of all the public organs to the law. Anything that the Adminsitration does or don't do should be stated previously in the law, and they can't do anything past the law. This is a guarantee to the particulars at the same time it is a limit to the State.
well, that's it (sorry for my bad english, i'm a lawyer in my origin country and I lack the specific terms for some words in English)
|
I started to watch starcraft1 since 2002 when I was in elementary school and when I was in high school, I became a fan of Wemade Fox. I used to went to esports stadiums for watch their live playing and had so much fun with it that is almost like I grew up with it.
Everyone already know about this, But after Match fixing scandal 2010 happened, well, everything changed. My favorite team was gone and lots of teams were also gone. Many players retired, sponsors were gone, one of TV broadcasting channel was gone..
Yeap. I disappointed and I stopped to watch game for a while.
I heard that those match fixers now streaming on the internet and they got a-lot-of money than other ex-progamers who lost jobs because of someone's greed.. This might be the reason I started to hate them. But sad thing was, nobody could stop them. Cuz it's not illegal, and they seems like they does not care about everything what they've done. The phrase that one of them said was, 'oh we didn't get that much money from it, so please forgive us' something like that. And you guys should know that one was the top gamer who earn 10 times more then others.
After starcraft 2 came out, seems like everything started to get better. Big leagues held around the world and new teams were came out. I was having a little hope that maybe my favorite players can play on the stage again.
But now these thing happened again, and we should start to think from basic. We have bad example from few years ago. Someone did match fixing, and they kicked out of progaming scene. but they use their name value from Starcraft and earn extreme money than others who were honest. Then, Does others who need money can do it, too? Well why not? It's that easy.
Soon everything gonna break down if nobody stop those match fixers earning money from Starcraft.
I support KESPA and also I wish Blizzard make a move for this, too. For their game, and for the fans like me
|
On October 20 2015 18:59 Ragnarork wrote:
This is completely uncalled for. They are banned from pro-gaming. That's enough. they won't be able to ever do that again. That's the point.
Now if they want to stream, and they still got fans after being convicted, that is because they're doing something right, be it skill-wise or entertainment-wise, something that appeal to these fans, and they deserve to keep these fans and w/e money they can make out of that stream. This is bullshit, seriously...
Heh, well I know the precedence here is bad. But I know there have been certain cyber crime cases, they can sentence you not even touch a computer.
Maybe that's that's where Kespa will go with next if they falter. Lobby to make convictions for these type of crimes include a part where they're not allowed to play online games again. Although that probably wouldnt be retroactive...
|
On October 20 2015 20:04 Apoteosis wrote:
Kespa is not a private corporation; it is a government agency, especifically, it is a part of the State Administration.
So, if they order or request a private corporation to prohibit someone for use their services (which is the case):
1.- Kespa should have that prerrogative: by an explicit act (Congress act, specifically, not government regulation of any sort), stated previously to the misdemeanor.
2.- If they lack legal authorisation, they should occur to the nearest Court, to get the order from the judge.
Why is that? Because otherwise, Kespa will be infinging the following fundamental rights (or human rights):
1.- Afreeca's right to freely do business (economic liberty), that comprehends the capacity of giving his own terms of use, as long as they respect the law. And mainly, the liberty of selling any kind of goods and services to any individual, regardless of his gender, race, etc.
2.- Accused's right to not be punished twice for the same facts (non bis in idem). So, if the law says that a given crime will get a determinate punishment, the State can't add another negative consequence to that unless is the law that allows it (which is the case of accesory sentences like, in addition to jail time, prohibition of exerting a given activity).
3.- Administration's principle of legality, that is, basically, the submission of all the public organs to the law. Anything that the Adminsitration does or don't do should be stated previously in the law, and they can't do anything past the law. This is a guarantee to the particulars at the same time it is a limit to the State.
well, that's it (sorry for my bad english, i'm a lawyer in my origin country and I lack the specific terms for some words in English)
Thanks, this is a really good post. Much better than when us laymen are trying to comprehend the law behind.
|
On October 20 2015 19:47 sumsaR wrote:
Stop being fucking silly kespa. What's next, contact their ISPs to demand they turn their internet access off so they can't play games?
That's not enough, they could still play the game with friends, so everybody who is seen with a matchfixer needs their internet access turned off too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
