This will take some time because that is only a accusation announcement, thay have not even get dirty in court yet. I will follow up this issue next month.
About SMM Cyber Cafe licensing issues
About SMM Cyber Cafe licensing issues
|
|
Nov 6 2007, 10:36 AM
Return to original view | Post
#1
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
This will take some time because that is only a accusation announcement, thay have not even get dirty in court yet. I will follow up this issue next month.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nov 13 2007, 02:10 AM
Return to original view | Post
#2
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Yes, in a way.
I say 'she' got an D- in spin doctoring. Maybe the company pay 'her' nuts lol |
|
|
Jan 7 2008, 07:16 PM
Return to original view | Post
#3
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
money amount is 1 of the problem, the other one is the money was not properly channeled to the developers aka collecting illegal fees and another one is local distributor themselves are actually promoting piracy for their personal benefit - legalizing private servers and collecting fees from it. I'm applying to those who paid the sum promptly to SMM while your case is totally another story.
|
|
|
Jan 8 2008, 09:23 AM
Return to original view | Post
#4
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
I get your point but in SMM case its an exception because I have black and white proofs to all these claims and now working into deal with Blizzard and Vivendi correspondent. I understand how these distributor licensing works (at least for SMM because I've seen it). The rights granted to the local distributor is actually limited and cc is actually a grey area not covered in the enforcement sector because distributor license and commercial license are 2 totally different things. If follow strictly to the book, there is another company which collects club fees from cc but I'm not going into that lol. The EA/Microsoft/BSA raids are all legal, there is don't need to question their authority. I'll publish the new SMM agreement in a few days for everyone to read.
Oh and btw Hunter is hopeless. We took him for granted that he will bring salvation, now I have to do all the dirty job for myself. |
|
|
Jan 8 2008, 09:40 AM
Return to original view | Post
#5
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Here is a link to SMM's unlawful business conduct for you to grasp the situation that we're trying to discuss in this topic.
http://forum.lowyat.net/topic/472095 |
|
|
Jan 8 2008, 03:39 PM
Return to original view | Post
#6
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(edinhoven @ Jan 8 2008, 01:14 PM) Added on January 8, 2008, 1:57 pmStrace, an Update! Just recd call from a Fren working in game-card company. He says he knows SMM staff who showed him a copy of SMM's Blizzard Agrt. He says it shows that SMM's distrbt right include cybercafe licensing. Is it true? Someone in Cari forum has just posted the REAL VUG cybercafe license agreement which looks like this below:- ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() Take note that the 5th image is 1 of the pages in the distributor license agreement between SMM and VUG. Tell your friend to read carefully and think out of the box. Refer link |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 8 2008, 04:14 PM
Return to original view | Post
#7
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
edinhoven doesn't know before that so its reasonable he responded in that manner. Its ok now that he is trying understand the situation. SMM can raid it because it could be true that the cc owner do not have the original copies of the game. Did I mentioned that even though you have the equal amount of original copies to your PC amount, you are still obligated to sign the agreement and pay the amount according to the fake agreement stated or else face the consequences? So what choices do we have? Buy original and pay or pay only? Which is cheaper?
BTW damn that guy who posted those proofs beat me in first, now I am uncertain whether I want to continue my effort but at least there is some development now. Respect!!! |
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 01:00 AM
Return to original view | Post
#8
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
I still can't let my guards down until the issue is fully resolved. I've just emailed to other international distributor and waiting for reply. I'll mail the whole shit black and white to Blizzard USA via post soon. The commercial exploitation license agreement should be as simple as the Microsoft commercial agreement, it didn't stated royalty fees must be payed, instead it mentioned about other responsibilities which are not covered in end user agreement to protect themselves from stupid legal charges. I'm afraid SMM might twist certain facts which I'm not ready to disclose the ways in a public forum yet. I have to remind myself the purpose is not just to lose from SMM's bind but also to bring down the whole corporation as well.
|
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 07:18 AM
Return to original view | Post
#9
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(edinhoven @ Jan 9 2008, 06:49 AM) Dear Strace, some good news and bad news. Good news, I have passed the print-out to my cyberjaya fren. Bad news is that he says he need to check with his legal dept colleague to help look into it (for free!) and his fren is on holiday and will only be back next week. Hope to received something next week. Since is free service, we have to be patience. Will keep you posted. I am doing all I could to help out. I hope others also help to check with their legal fren or people who know this stuff for some advise. TQ. Thanks for the help! QUOTE Added on January 9, 2008, 6:55 amStrace, btw, a CC owner fren told me that Hunter asked him to pay RM3k to his personal account to settle the SMM issue. DO u know who is this Huinter fella and why is he asking for RM3k? Is he Sendi's spy or something like that? This post has been edited by strace: Jan 9 2008, 07:18 AM |
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 08:55 AM
Return to original view | Post
#10
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
What SMM got from press is still free bad publicity. Lost an uncontrolled number of cc owner who follow what the MCA guy instruction and stop all SMM payment over a free publicity? I don't think that worths the sacrifice. Why go through all that trouble when they can just put more competitions and advertisements or goyang kaki getting their money as usual without putting crazy stunts like that?
Anyway I'll agree Hunter and the MCA guys are unethical for taking advantage by making profit out of this issue, but doesn't mean they have connections with them. So right now I rather take action than to depend on them based on these exposed documents. It is funny you see in cari forums there so many doubts from cc owners but yet most of them know jackshit about their rights on copyright and so on. Those typical chinaman logic and paranoia must set free. Sometimes its these majority people who give SMM, Hunter or even government(MCA) a free entry to their buttholes. Usually when you open a new cybercafe, these license agents will look for you automatically so there is nothing much to worry about getting raid. Warning letter always comes first unless its Ops Tulen season. There is no reason to kill sales opportunity by going through all the legal trouble, right? |
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 12:51 PM
Return to original view | Post
#11
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(edinhoven @ Jan 9 2008, 09:18 AM) Come to think of it, u r right. SMM would not be so stupid to go to the press to sing bad things about themselves. How do these people know when a new CC has started up n for them to come to look for u to pay license agents? Maybe the local govt office informed them or maybe some CC also want to get the new CC in trouble by contacting these money collection company. I think all CC must be united and not back-stab each other. I can't read chinese but going through the cari froum with some english post, sure tell that these people r not as informed as u and the level of discussion u have here. Very good job Strace. Yes TSB don't sell cybercafe license but we have the right to purchase the games from them. What we need is a purchase receipt, game boxes and a counter-signed copy of cybercafe agreement endorsed by Blizzard USA to proof that the cybercafe is legit to install the games. Take that PC Cock and friends!!! Added on January 9, 2008, 10:51 amJust inquire from Software Boutique (tsb.com.my). They said they don't sell cybercafe license and we cannot buy from them and we must contact the local distributor. I guess they are referring to SMM, right? Anyone got any other distributor like in US or Singapore? Care to share their contact? I doubt by writing to Blizzard. They will probably say the same thing or shit. QUOTE(mic1981 @ Jan 9 2008, 11:54 AM) Actually, this have to refer to other country also ... Not true, the CD agreement is directed to end users. Cybercafe operators are not end users so they are subjected to different agreement which stated in CD EULA that commercial use of the games requires to sign the commercial exploitation license agreement. The problem is Blizzard will bounce all the problem to local distributor by default, thats where the local distributor starts playing dirty tricks. So what we need is urgent attention from President Mike Morhaime and if possible get everyone to sign the petition. If we can convinced Blizzard stripping off SMM's distributor right by exposing all their evil deeds and the petition to support the move, we might win the battle.as we know, since I brought the Billzard Ori Copy, and that's is no write down there in the CD Agreement that we cannot put it in the CC. Then we have no right to give SMM the money right. Unless, SMM have the Billazard Authorized and the Warcraft Agreement have write down, only this will be legal right. If singapore, and other country like Korea and China also not need to do so, then SMM should don't have any right to do so. Lastly. what our minister say, all are bullshit.... They will protect the money only, just like our Sami GOD. This post has been edited by strace: Jan 9 2008, 12:54 PM |
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 04:57 PM
Return to original view | Post
#12
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
|
|
|
Jan 9 2008, 06:07 PM
Return to original view | Post
#13
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(edinhoven @ Jan 9 2008, 05:29 PM) Is the lawyer a copyright or software lawyer? Do they know who they are dealing with? I think have to b careful when writing abt them, like NST suing Jeff Ooi for blogging on the net atlhough he has no control over what was said in his blog. I don't want after lowyat.net kena sue. We will attack and finish SMM and direct our focus on SMM. Happy Holidays!!! I don't know which type of lawyer he is but I'll keep on posting. It won't be LYN's 1st time anyway According to 3rd page of agreement, its written that SMM is a limited agent for Blizzard in Malaysia which given non exclusive rights and has granted legal authority against any person or legal entity for the illegal production, modification and distribution in Malaysia. In my interpretation, the realms that SMM can touch is VCD/Game shops that sells the games, factory that produces the games, take down private server for distributing PVPGN connector hacks or take down local website thats distribute full version of the game online. Providing games to end user play for a fee is not a form of distribution but categorize as commercial use of end user product. So what we see here SMM does not have automatic legal authority against cybercafe. If there is any legal charges to accuse, that will be:- 1. SMM is abuse the legal authority [Copyright Act 1987 - SMM is not the copyright owner] 2. cheated cc outlet of their authority by giving their own EUA instead of Blizzard/VUG's CULA 3. collecting illegal fees from cc outlets 4. approving private servers as authorized servers [Copyright Act 1987 - SMM is not the copyright owner] 5. making profit via private servers I'm have no legal knowledge but this is as much bullshit i can make lol Copyright Act 1987 [pdf] Trade Descriptions Act 1972 [pdf] This post has been edited by strace: Jan 9 2008, 06:11 PM |
|
|
|
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 02:31 PM
Return to original view | Post
#14
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(Max7 @ Jan 11 2008, 12:41 PM) SMM is for the DOTA and WC lovers. This is where the problem is. I have been around and kept low not saying anything bcoz there is no way to fight SMM. Why? Sometime back in 2002, I fight with Adspace n SMM. I spent close to $8k of my own money, paying lawyers etc. All wasted and burned. They got this fella call Hubei (VP) from Blizzard to come to Malaysia and screw all cc who refused to pay. I remember I was there in Marriot for the press conference. A lot of us, all cc owner, arguing but Blizzard says that is their position because Adspace n SMM have paid Blizzard for their rights and they have given licensing rights to SMM. Hubei says this is all about business and not personal fight. He even warned all cc owner to pay if not stop playing WC. I install WC because there was no other choice at that time. Have to admit only WC makes money for cc. I stop 2 years ago when other games are also doing well. I have stop using WC and still survive. My answer to all your concern is - Stop Supporting WC and if all stand united = SMM, Blizzard and their gang would all fall and die. Anyway, SMM only got 1 game, that is WC. If WC finish, I am damn sure SMM will die. Your answer is reasonable in a business perspective but the game is not at fault, SMM is. Besides SMM won't die if WC is over. They have already collected a big sum of funds enough to buy over any popular game distributor right. It will be a never ending cycle. AFAIK there was another company called iGames Asia S/B who managed to win Malaysia distributor bid in 2006, thats where some of the true documents disclosed and enough to proof SMM can't collect money in form of royalty from cc according to law but since their version of agreement doesn't mention anything about royalty, SMM can argue that they are doing a legal game rental service. Still they should be blame for not on giving out the real license agreement which doesn't ask for royalty fees at all.Can I have the the full name of the guy so called Hubei? Is he a chinese? I like to inquire Mike about this, thanks. |
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 05:58 PM
Return to original view | Post
#15
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
QUOTE(Max7 @ Jan 11 2008, 04:21 PM) I am no longer playing this game with SMM. As far as I am concerned, SMM is no longer an issue. Since there are still many disgrunted cc about SMM, I will share some info that I know. If that is true, there must be something wrong with their approach when Depsima plead for verification because SMM clearly does not own the copyright as the authority given was distributor licensing and whatever was stated in the agreement between Blizzard and SMM. Legally SMM is right to lease Blizzard games to cybercafe if they do not own a copy of the game per computer according the agreement between cybercafe and SMM.Hubei is a French guy and not chinese. I don't have his full name. You have to check it out yourself. In 2002, there was this cc group called Depsima led by a MCA fella from Cheras MCA called LBK, who was once Pikom chairman. He failed miserably fighting for us. He also got some documents but Blizzard kill all arguments and issues. If you are fighting Blizzard and their business policy, forget it. I still remember what Hubei told LBK in Marriot. Blizzard says "SMM doing a very good job pushing WC in Malaysia and making the game popular here. So, what is the problem? CC must pay if they are all making money from WC. CC cannot buy 1 original box and make thousands of dollars every year from it without paying SMM who has paid Blizzard in advance". We got no answer to that. We gave up. Depisma closed and everyone who forms part of the group went their own way. Like I said earlier, your current approach will not solve cc problem. In fact, you will become a target for SMM to raid. SMM will go after all cc who has not paid them or those who go against them. I took the other way out. Instead of fighting SMM, I stop SMM from attacking me. I stopped using WC. The only way is to make WC unpopular. If this happens, SMM will fall like a dead meat. IGames is SMM's gang. They got the right because of SMM. IGames have closed and SMM took over. Before that, Adspace. Adspace got it from anor Singapore company. Never ending story because SMM would still get the right at the end of the day. SMM is the biggest game distributor in M'sia. You all have to admit it. They have money and muscles. Once you have that kind of money, you can hire any gunslinger to do your dirty job. As for Hubei again, the last time I heard from my Singapore partner is that Hubei left Blizzard to join EA. I also heard Vivendi have left Blizzard and Vivendi has merge with Activision. This leaves Blizzard alone and they are just too busy making biliions with WOW online. For Malaysia, to them it is a god damn small market with backward technology. My advise to all of you is that - stop letting SMM come to you. Stop SMM from having a reason to attack you. Make them a small fry by stop playing WC. Once this happens, SMM will come and beg you and maybe sell you the cybercafe license for $10. Lastly I need to correct 2 misconception you have made:- 1. SMM does not sell cybercafe license. They can only charge you the process fee for processing the agreement between you, SMM and Blizzard. The proof is there in page 3. Why they can collect money? Its because SMM lease games to you. If you notice in the agreement between you and SMM, it does not mention the word royalty fee and licensing fee. 2. Vivendi didn't left Blizzard. In fact Blizzard is a division of Vivendi Games and the new name for Vivendi Games, Activision merger is called Blizzard Activision. You can check all these info in Vivendi website. edit: change rent to lease This post has been edited by strace: Jan 11 2008, 06:16 PM |
|
|
Jan 11 2008, 08:11 PM
Return to original view | Post
#16
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Talk and yapping in the forum doesn't a difference but legal action does. Sorry I don't send petty emails, I send legal letter to him mainly asking for cooperation and verification. So you suggest who I should address this to? Besides the power of attorney given is limited to illegal distribution, they don't have immediate authority on commercial use of their software unless with consent from the copyright owner. Its in black and white anyway so stop spin the facts.
Here is a easy pop quiz for you NewEra who holds a few games distribution rights collects fees monthly from cybercafe in form of:- A) Club membership B) Royalty fees and thanks Max7 for sharing the story. I personally don't expect great results but it should be a worthwhile experience. btw money isn't a problem. This post has been edited by strace: Jan 11 2008, 08:20 PM |
|
|
Jan 12 2008, 12:41 PM
Return to original view | Post
#17
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Anyway thanks for the suggestion, I will look into all possibilities. I'll keep you guys updated of any progress.
|
|
|
Jan 15 2008, 02:33 PM
Return to original view | Post
#18
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Just take a look at Inferno case, they bought original WC3 games and did not pay to SMM. SMM raided it but after that the computers were return. Actually raid doesn't mean they are wrong, it is actually just an investigation trial period. Don't fall for the scare tactic.
|
|
|
Jan 15 2008, 11:55 PM
Return to original view | Post
#19
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Oh its just a Dato'. Thats no real threat then. It just cut down a major list of possible powerful candidates who might be behind the scene. Thanks for the info.
|
|
|
Jan 17 2008, 01:01 PM
Return to original view | Post
#20
|
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]()
Senior Member
700 posts Joined: Aug 2005 |
Updates from cari forum
According from guangming daily, the Selangor cybercafe temp. representative demand SMM to show documents which given them the authority to collect royalty fees or else they will use legal action against them. from the end paragraph: SMM CEO Ricky Lim replied that commercial use of software via normal means of purchasing is not a do-able, it has to pay fees to them monthly. That is why the commercial agreement has to sign and respect copyright or else face the consequences sorry for the bad translation, i skipped the middle part His reply is half true, there no details explained regarding the agreement. The SMM version's agreement didn't touch about royalty fees and endorsement from the publisher but still demand cybercafes to pay monthly fees, for what? Even the real commercial use agreement didn't mention of demanding royalty fees. |
| Change to: | 0.0183sec
1.06
6 queries
GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 23rd December 2025 - 06:58 AM |