EPTBunny is released by DuSt Gaming - Page 2
| Forum Index > SC2 General |
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
| ||
|
atrox_
United Kingdom1711 Posts
| ||
|
ETisME
12521 Posts
Without much info it's too easy to make assumptions. | ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
As to what specifically he failed to do, that could be almost anything. If the contract was bad for DuSt, it could be something minor. If the contract wasn't bad for DuSt, I suspect it would have to be something more serious. | ||
|
Rehio
United States1718 Posts
| ||
|
Moderas
United States78 Posts
| ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
On April 22 2017 23:21 Rehio wrote: And all of the information regarding any potential breaches are going to be private unless the parties involved feel like making them public. Until one of them does so, it's kinda useless to speculate on which one is in the wrong, cause we just don't have anything. Unless Bunny talks about litigation (be it plans to do so or an explanation of why he won't), we can safely assume he was in the wrong. If he failed to perform even one duty, no matter how minor, as spelled out in his contract, he's in the wrong. | ||
|
nighcol
298 Posts
On April 22 2017 23:09 Boggyb wrote: A lot of people here don't seem to understand how contracts work. DuSt can't just claim he was failing to meet his obligations and end his contract without any reason unless they want to open themselves up to potential litigation. (libel being a possibility on top of the broken contract) I suppose they could be banking on the fact that any such litigation might not be financially worth it on his end (does Korea have the equivalent of a small claims court?), but that's not how reputable organizations operate. As to what specifically he failed to do, that could be almost anything. If the contract was bad for DuSt, it could be something minor. If the contract wasn't bad for DuSt, I suspect it would have to be something more serious. Yeah, many smaller esports teams have turned out to not be reputable operations and there have been virtually no cases where it has led to any litigation so that's kind of where people are coming when they don't give that much weight on potential for litigation. | ||
|
Boggyb
2855 Posts
On April 23 2017 00:09 nighcol wrote: Yeah, many smaller esports teams have turned out to not be reputable operations and there have been virtually no cases where it has led to any litigation so that's kind of where people are coming when they don't give that much weight on potential for litigation. DuSt gaming has been around for years. If they were a disreputable fly-by-night operation, they'd have folded long ago. If this were some new or questionable team, that line of reasoning would be more valid, but even then, don't those organizations just stop paying people rather than (possibly) erroneously terminating contracts? | ||
|
207aicila
1237 Posts
On April 22 2017 23:33 Boggyb wrote: Unless Bunny talks about litigation (be it plans to do so or an explanation of why he won't), we can safely assume he was in the wrong. If he failed to perform even one duty, no matter how minor, as spelled out in his contract, he's in the wrong. This is 100% correct and sadly a lot of people in this thread seem to be glossing over it. I guess they're too young to have had a work contract? | ||
|
nighcol
298 Posts
On April 23 2017 00:21 Boggyb wrote: DuSt gaming has been around for years. If they were a disreputable fly-by-night operation, they'd have folded long ago. If this were some new or questionable team, that line of reasoning would be more valid, but even then, don't those organizations just stop paying people rather than (possibly) erroneously terminating contracts? They may well be but this stuff has happened after an organisation has been around for a few years previously so the initial reaction from people is entirely understandable in context... Comparing it to a work contract is also pretty naive since things have demonstrably often worked very differently in esports... | ||
|
Charoisaur
Germany16008 Posts
On April 22 2017 23:33 Boggyb wrote: Unless Bunny talks about litigation (be it plans to do so or an explanation of why he won't), we can safely assume he was in the wrong. If he failed to perform even one duty, no matter how minor, as spelled out in his contract, he's in the wrong. Bunny being in the wrong and Dust not acting reasonable don't exclude each other. Even if he failed to perform a certain duty it might be harsh from Dust to release him for it depending on the significance of it. Just because they are legally eligible to release him doesn't mean it's reasonable. Personally I can't think of a reason justifying firing someone who presents the team as well as Bunny that's why I criticized Dust. But without further information it's all just guessing. | ||
|
Shield
Bulgaria4824 Posts
On April 23 2017 04:59 Charoisaur wrote: Bunny being in the wrong and Dust not acting reasonable don't exclude each other. Even if he failed to perform a certain duty it might be harsh from Dust to release him for it depending on the significance of it. Just because they are legally eligible to release him doesn't mean it's reasonable. Personally I can't think of a reason justifying firing someone who presents the team as well as Bunny that's why I criticized Dust. But without further information it's all just guessing. I think it's better for someone from TL to ask Bunny for his point of view. If there are 'e-sports' journalists, of course.  | ||
|
Apoteosis
Chile820 Posts
| ||
|
thePunGun
598 Posts
 Joking aside, hope he finds a new team soon.. (once the.. Dust settles *da dum tss*). | ||
|
Lexender
Mexico2655 Posts
On April 23 2017 06:11 Apoteosis wrote: This smells like quantic or lygf, another scam that is so common in this unregulated e-sports scene. Terminating a contract and not paying someone and then dissapearing are not remotely the same. If a team wants to let go of a player they are in their right if said player did breached the contract he signed. | ||
|
felisconcolori
United States6168 Posts
On April 22 2017 23:33 Boggyb wrote: Unless Bunny talks about litigation (be it plans to do so or an explanation of why he won't), we can safely assume he was in the wrong. If he failed to perform even one duty, no matter how minor, as spelled out in his contract, he's in the wrong. ... alternately, and far FAR more common in the esports space, if someone doesn't talk about litigation it's most likely because the cost of initiating what would be international civil litigation, or simply obtaining a legal team, or retaining legal counsel to discuss if a case should be pursued, is more expensive than any remedy likely to be gained. While I firmly believe there need to be more lawyers involved in many aspects of esports (both for players, teams, and tournament organizations) the international nature of the industry and the financial difficulties in simply pursuing litigation are extremely difficult to overcome for the average individual. The possibility of poor or negative returns on litigation, even if the case is won, and the negative image that can develop, are poor motivators for individual players (many of whom also sign poorly worded contracts, if they in fact actually sign any written contract). There is no "if this then this" or "if not this, then this" comparison to be made here. It's a false choice. We can safely assume nothing, and should assume nothing. The only factual assertion to be made is "Dust claims that Bunny has failed to meet some requirement of his contract, and has terminated their association." The validity of that statement cannot be assessed without additional information that we do not have, and may never have. To date, I can think of not one case being brought by a player against any team or organization, even when relatively significant sums are involved simply because the associated financial costs of initiating and then seeing legal actions to their conclusion are beyond most players and even quite a few teams. On April 23 2017 00:29 207aicila wrote: This is 100% correct and sadly a lot of people in this thread seem to be glossing over it. I guess they're too young to have had a work contract? I guess you've never attempted to litigate a contractual dispute? | ||
|
ChristianS
United States3249 Posts
-they don't have the resources to get a lawyer -the contract was vague enough about his "duties" that it would be difficult to prove whether he was performing them or not -he knows enough about the company internals to know he couldn't get much money from them even if he won -he still cares about the organization and wants to part amicably -he's worried it would hurt his prospects with other teams if he was seen as the type to sue them later down the line -he's not a lawyer and doesn't understand his situation well enough to realize he has a case I have known multiple people in my relatively brief career to be fired for what everyone knew were bullshit reasons. Only one considered suing, and even he decided against it. Cases like that can drag on for years, and the company usually has more resources than you do. And if they go out of business at any point during those years of litigation, you've got years of legal fees and nothing to show for it. "You didn't sue your former employer for firing you so you must be admitting they were right to fire you" is just such shitty reasoning, I can't even imagine how anyone could know enough about the legal system to know that suing for wrongful termination is a thing without also knowing enough about it to understand how wrong that assumption is. | ||
|
-Kyo-
Japan1926 Posts
just some general info... DuSt is not a top tier team and, as far as i know, is not sponsor driven. (their partners don't pay for the majority of whatever "sponsorships" the players receive aka the manager does) my guess would be that this was originally something like a 2011-2012 NA/EU contract deal where DuSt is using good tier koreans who are not on teams, with any incentive at all, to join their team so that DuSt can "build" their "brand" (if you could even say those two things for dust...?) Bunny probably thought he could use low effort (tho he did stream and do other things, quite clearly so) and get a small return on just having his name attached to the team. these sorts of small amicable setups were pretty common in mid tier NA/EU teams years ago and to say that he had a "real contract" in the first place... i'd put some serious doubt over... what I mean by that is, a contract that was constructed well and had the actual value for either party to want to go to court over. so, i imagine, bunny probably just had some small clause that they wanted him to do something little which he continually didn't do over his time on the team (this is incredibly common for koreans.. or anyone.. to do either for lack of care do to the aforementioned contract setup, they're lazy, or they just don't understand the language). Eventually they got fed up with him not fulfilling X, and instead of doing anything else, they just ended the contract. which party is largely to blame for whatever happened or what not is probably not of any concern because they were vague in their own post and simply put it up over twitter. like i said, if they had real contracts worth going to court over either party would have taken a much different approach; and moreover, i simply dont think dust has enough funding to provide such a contract to a KR player. thusly, i think pretty much everything in this thread is way over blown. also, in reply to boggyb's post about On April 22 2017 23:09 Boggyb wrote: A lot of people here don't seem to understand how contracts work. DuSt can't just claim he was failing to meet his obligations and end his contract without any reason unless they want to open themselves up to potential litigation. (libel being a possibility on top of the broken contract) clearly u have no idea how little most contracts are worth right now and how absurd this sort of this would be. the only people who have this sort of thing happen are pretty much the matchfixers who got 20k$+ in scams... or like... if jinair just was like yo broooo ima not pay any of my players moneyyy ezzzzzz... if u think dust or bunny would worry about whatever small time contract is being provided.... -_-;;; seriously people, probably not a big deal ~.~ | ||
|
CUTtheCBC
Canada91 Posts
| ||
| ||
