dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
13
share rss forum feed


f0rtys3ven
47

join:2011-09-01
Lansing, MI
reply to Krisnatharok

Re: [Game] Riot tells pro LoL players they can't stream competing games

They didn't have the contract so they didn't know exactly what the players agreed to.

Edit: This is obvious because they had to make edits to the article and afterwards consult magnus to cover their butts over the blow back. If it was a big big deal the Pros would be bitching but they got paid so its not a big deal.


Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
said by f0rtys3ven:

They didn't have the contract so they didn't know exactly what the players agreed to.

Edit: This is obvious because they had to make edits to the article and afterwards consult magnus to cover their butts over the blow back. If it was a big big deal the Pros would be bitching but they got paid so its not a big deal.

Yeah, you're clearly not writing that from the pro-Riot POV at all. The initial story had the leaked of page of co-streaming another game "during or adjacent to" an LCS match. The reality, which has since been confirmed, is that LCS gamers are barred completely from streaming any of the listed games while they are on contract with Riot, which is way more restrictive than what the initial story indicated.

The update including Rozelle's comments on Reddit was not CYA on the writer's part, but simply the party line from Riot hyping the benefits of changing the contract, without mentioning the hurt in Twitch views.

The actual Reddit thread, with over 6000 replies (in a sub that rarely has a thread break 100 replies), is available here: »www.reddit.com/r/leagueoflegends···_cannot/

said by f0rtys3ven:

Edit: This is obvious because they had to make edits to the article and afterwards consult magnus to cover their butts over the blow back. If it was a big big deal the Pros would be bitching but they got paid so its not a big deal.

Again, you make it sounds as if the original article was inaccurate or false and the writers had to backtrack. The reality appears to be that the contract is more restrictive that it seemed at first glance, and the community has blown up about it.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.