What do you call selling the building that the center relies upon, a pleasant Christmas card?

_________________
Occupy Babel!

Ed, I definitely overstated in one way: whether or not it makes sense to sue today depends on whether the Ki-in has given any indication of when it plans to sell. If the sale is not imminent, then discussion is better.

One point I'll throw out there while I'm thinking about it: we shouldn't confuse the situation of the SGC with the situation of go in the US. As a whole, we have benefited a great deal from the support of the Ki-in, and for that reason it may seem ungrateful to sue them over something like this. But the go players of Seattle are losing quite a bit more, and (again depending on the facts) may feel that they are not being ungrateful to a benefactor, since that supposed benefactor is taking what was given to them by Iwamoto.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

That's right, focus on the card instead of the present that lasted 16 years.

I dont think there is anything new to add to this saga until we get some disclosure from the accusing party.

I'm sure SGC members will be popular when all the other go centers have to close as the Kiin diverts funding to a legal case...

Destroying an established cultural center to scrounge money to divert to a center that was less successful and has already closed is a bad idea.

Destroying Iwamoto-sensei's legacy in doing so is a worse one. I'm not sure where your wellspring of faith in the good intentions of the Nihon Kiin comes from, but I think it's obscuring your objectivity.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

I highly doubt this is the kind of case that stretches over years and exhausts that kind of funding.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

Digging around google brought about these interesting links
http://www.lbloom.net/zzky.html
2003 King County Assessor List of 4,856 property owners Y to Yzaguirre and the assessed value of their property
[Find "Seattle Go Center" shows the owner listed as YOSHIDA TAKAO] so as of 2003 the owner listed with the government is Takao Yoshida.

Digging for Takao Yoshida bought a link to a page which leads to a dead page
http://pipl.com/directory/name/Katsuhisa/Hikojiro/
[Find "Takao Yoshida"] Takao Yoshida is listed as Nihon-Kiin Representative

Conclusion is that as of 2003, The Nihon-Kiin owns the building with Takao Yoshida as it's representative.

Not sure what the current situation is though.

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

Again, they may own the building, but depending on how Iwamoto sensei set up the arrangement, it can still be complicated.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

I borrow a book from you, you ask for the book back. I say no because you will lend the book to someone else and thats a bad idea.
It holds no water, ultimately it is your book and your choice.



Yep, supporting go players for eternity is the only way to complete the legacy. Bull -cough-. [MOD edit]



How about in their generosity in the promotion of go worldwide. What has the SGC done for anyone else besides themselves?

These are all things that have been mentioned previously. As stated before, the accusers need to release real information about why this action HAD to take place as it is extreme.They need to justify themselves before anyone will be inclined to accept the scenario. So far its just heavy accusations.

edit: also typos

I would caution against making judgments without details--or the harm to the go community could be a self-fulfilling prophecy. I know enough to be confident that this situation is not simple. And I'm not talking about the legal issues. Regardless of which "side" you are on (if you have chosen one), the legal details are far less important than the relational/political implications. And this is coming from a lawyer.

But, keeping in mind their insignificance in the big picture, here are a few clarifications on legal points being discussed. These are just general statements of the law (and U.S. oriented--because that's the law I know), and in no way suggest how this case would turn out.

- Under U.S. law (and many other jurisdictions), it is actually very difficult for a donor to control his/her donation after it has been made. I'm not saying it is impossible--just difficult. Generally, if Bob donates $10 million to a university to name a building after him, the university will not have to return the money regardless of whether/when the building is built or for how long it stands. But usually donors trust those they donate money to, and universities will want to adhere to donors' wishes--otherwise, they could lose future donors. Of course, sometimes bad things happen because of misunderstandings of intent. (I don't know Japanese law on this issue, which is probably more relevant. And again, this is just a general hypothetical--I'm not saying it is analogous or includes the similar details.) For further reading, see the "consideration" element of a contract.

- Actions/statements that cause someone to act to their detriment in reliance on those statements can create legal obligations that don't otherwise exist. Before I give the following example, I want to be clear that I'm not saying it is or is not the case here. That said, consider the following: I have a spare house. I let Bob live there for free. Bob lives there for a few months, and then I promise him he can stay there for at least 2 years. A month later, I see Bob making general repairs to the house. After 12 months, I kick him out and sell the house--which is now more valuable than it was when he moved in, because of the repairs. Depending on additional details, it is entirely possible that I will owe Bob something--perhaps the market value of his handiwork. But little details affect this analysis: what if I knew Bob was a carpenter and worked on homes for a living? But what if I asked Bob about the repairs, and he said he was just bored and didn't expect anything in return? It could come out either way. For further reading, see promissory estoppel.

(edit: typos)

No, this is not an accurate analogy. The center is not a piece of property that is easily traded around. If you sell the building, you then lose something that you do not get back at the new location.
A center like this is built on a community, you don't suddenly get that community at a new location.



Supporting go players for eternity? Have you ever been to one of the centers? They're expected to make ends meet. Which is WHY the NY go center closed, and the Seattle one didn't.



This is a really ugly statement. For one, you have no idea what the SGC has or has not done (Or you wouldn't be so ready to throw them into an obvious "straw man" role). As far as their generosity worldwide. I trust a bureaucracy about as far as I can throw a paper airplane bearing a memo. This is an accountant's decision, not the decision of the idealist philanthropists.



They have revealed information. And many of us have said we need more, but at the moment, there is no more reason to back the Nihon Kiin than the SGC.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

Ok, several problems here. Your book analogy is not apt, because first of all as shapenaji said the SGC is something that cannot be recreated somewhere else. More importantly, it is inaccurate because it was never the Kiin's "book" in the first place; it was iwamoto's, who (perhaps naively) decided to give the building through the Kiin, trusting that they wouldn't destroy a self-sufficient institution to help solve their own monetary problems.

Supporting go players for eternity? What are you talking about? The Kiin has again and again shown their reluctance to give any support in any form to either center, see the case of the NYGC.

As for the doing things for others, I'm not really sure what you're trying to say here. The SGC was founded in order to spread go in seattle by giving players a reliable space to play, and that is what it has accomplished.

Wether or not the SGC actually has any legal ground to stand on is hard to say, but I don't see how you can argue that the Kiin's actions do not directly go against Iwamoto's stated wishes. If only he had given the buildings directly to the american go community instead of trusting the Kiin, we would not be in this situation.

_________________
"There are no limits. There are plateaus, but you must not stay there, you must go beyond them. If it kills you, it kills you. A man must constantly exceed his level." -- Bruce Lee

Probably a good idea for everyone to read an article from around the time of the founding of the SGC.
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ug=2142108

According to the article Iwamoto's wanted to "Develop Go centers worldwide to promote the game he loved and to improve international understanding."

Unfortunately the current situation isn't exactly improving international understanding.

Maybe the Nihon Kiin is very concerned about how "Many people have dropped out of grad school after getting hooked on Go" lol. Just joking.

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

It can't??! Why not? Upon receiving the NK's eviction letter, my first thought would have been: "how can we recreate the center somewhere else?" (and not "whom do we sue?")

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

First of all, innocent until proven guilty. At least make it clear as to what fraud has occured and where the breach of contract resides.

@Jedo and shapenaji: The SGC is not self-sufficient then, if is is reliant on the building it doesnt hold ownership over.

Supporting go players for eternity was in reference to, you cant expect the circumstances to always remain the same. Things change and it can be sad, but nothing in life stays exactly the same.

The Nihon Kiin has done a lot more for go and go players than the SGC has ever done, dont even try to compare the two.

With the information we have at the moment, the SGC is appearing in a darker light than the Nihon Kiin.

This applies to both sides. See earlier in the thread for what the SGC has said regarding the breach of contract... it's there...



by this logic, neither is any small business that has a landlord. I would hope you believe that small businesses have rights and cannot be simply tossed out because the landlord heard about this really sweet deal involving selling the land to make room for a strip mall. Tenants have rights.




I believe SGC's argument was that this was a trust, held by the Nihon Kiin, for the benefit of the SGC.

There are a few pieces to consider here:

A) It is a bad idea to throw good money after bad. NYGC (despite the fact that I have been to that go center and had a great time there) was not as successful as SGC, and if the Nihon Kiin is being absurd and routing money poorly, it's immoral to let a venerable institution like the Nihon Kiin make mistakes.

B) EVEN if the Nihon Kiin owns the property, if the property was held in trust for the sake of the continued existence of go in America, there is a chance the Nihon Kiin breached the contract. Now, the solution to that breach of contract may not be litigation (See C.)

C) The existence of an announcement declaring their intention to file suit does not imply that other methods to seek a resolution were skipped. In fact, the only parties of this dispute that have responded here (the SGC) have said the opposite is true.




A matter of scale here. This argument only holds water if the outcome of the litigation was the demise of one or the other. The SGC and the Nihon Kiin are not mutually exclusive. Just because the Nihon Kiin has done positive things for go does not give it free reign to take steps in the opposite direction.

If I save 1000 people, it doesn't give me the right to kill 1. Nor does it give me a free hand to ignore my contractual obligations when dealing with a party that has only helped a few people




Seeing as the Nihon Kiin has not released a public statement that we have access to. I can't see how we can see the Nihon Kiin in any light but the one the evidence suggests. Which currently comes from one side of the lawsuit...

Based on the evidence alone, your current position (Assuming you apply the scientific method) should be positive toward the SGC (At the very least, it should be neutral). Any negative opinion of the SGC at this stage is necessarily biased.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

Um, Given that this thread was started via an announcement by the SGC, and that SGC members have been responding in order to attempt to clarify the situation, I can't see how you would believe this was their stance...

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

The first post in the thread appeared to be the official statement. I would be extremely surprised if they didn't have some paperwork to back up their claim. Otherwise the court date is not going to be pleasant for them. I don't know why you need to see the "Long form birth certificate".

The ownership has not been explained completely, though over the course of the thread, we have had replies from Redbeard and Wessanoctopus (Who helped take care of the NYGC, I assume the situation there was similar). Wessanoctopus responses contained some clues to the relationship here.

However, nothing I've seen suggests that the SGC is trying to hide the lawsuit... Or that they're particularly happy about having to bring it. Redbeard gives us a look at the thought process on their end, and it's pretty compelling.

My biggest issue with this whole mess is that the Nihon Kiin is being shortsighted and destructive. (Even if what they are doing IS legal, I'd be more than willing to make a fuss about it on here)

If the Nihon Kiin shut out the opinions of the SGC and didn't allow for an appeals process here to weigh the merits of closing, then I'm afraid they deserve some bad publicity for that alone.

_________________
Tactics yes, Tact no...

Yet your country believes otherwise. Bin laden, Muammar Al-Gaddafi ...

I am done with parroting against your repitious points. If it entertains you so much just keep re-reading my old posts.

The rest of us will happily wait for the information we need.

No. Hitler.

_________________
Occupy Babel!