Izento
2022-04-05 08:00:41
Out of the 11 talent agencies investigated, we come to the most perfidious talent agency, ICON (ICON Media Talent being their business registered name). ICON is owned by Swift Media Entertainment, the parent company of popular esports organization TSM. TSM is owned by Andy “Reginald” Dinh. Swift Media Entertainment’s CEO is none other than Andy Dinh. TSM and Swift Media Entertainment even have the same address under their business registration. Out of the 34 esports players/personalities represented by ICON, 17 play for or represent the esports organization TSM. That’s 50% of ICON’s clientele, based upon their website listing; here are their gamer tags:
This seems to be the most predatory agency in all of esports that operates today. They have several young players from such titles as Fortnite, Rainbow6, and Apex Legends to represent them through TSM, yet ICON is owned by Swift Media Entertainment, the parent company of TSM. To spell it out for you, there is no policy stopping ICON from talking to TSM to configure a deal which is most favorable to TSM and ultimately the parent company Swift Media Entertainment.
Negotiations between a player and an esports organization should have as little conflict of interest as possible. TSM are the largest perpetrators of going against this fundamental element of negotiation, and they have shown a lack of respect towards this axiom in the past, with former President Leena Xu acting as a negotiator for contracts on behalf of TSM while also being the girlfriend of then TSM’s superstar League of Legends AD Carry Yiliang “Doublelift” Peng, all the while living in the same apartment as this player and negotiating contracts in earshot of Doublelift. Just as if things couldn’t get more confusing, Doublelift would later have ICON represent him as his talent agency in August of 2021. In January of 2022, Doublelift dropped his relationship with ICON and he signed with esports talent agency Loaded.gg. Fiduciary duties–which is just a fancy way of saying that an entity has the responsibility to keep their client’s monetary benefit always in mind– extend to the talent agency world, and that is feasibly impossible if an agency represents a team and player at the same time.
A fiduciary, as defined by media lawyer Thomas Vidal, is that the talent agent “ has broad authority to act on behalf of [someone], but cannot violate four express duties owed to the [client]: loyalty; the avoidance of conflicts of interest; not to undertake actions adverse to the [client]; and not to commingle property of the [client’s]. See Civ. Code Section 2322”.
It’s not just ICON and TSM which currently violates several ethics of business, but they have been the most blatant of all companies. Their dealings with player contracts may even be considered illegal.
California law (which most esports companies operate within) subsection 1700.40(b) states that “No talent agency may refer an artist to any person, firm, or corporation in which the talent agency has a direct or indirect financial interest for other services to be rendered to the artist, including, but not limited to, photography, audition tapes, demonstration reels or similar materials, business management, personal management, coaching, dramatic school, casting or talent brochures, agency-client directories, or other printing”.
Additionally, teams and talent agencies are taking advantage of player contracts by creating package deals. This means that a team will not release a player to another team unless they buy that player along with another player. Package deals are considered illegal by the California Cartwright Act, which considers the act of “tying” to be, “selling a product or service on the condition that the buyer agrees to also buy a different product or service”. This means that for the famous package deals we’ve always heard in esports, about teams selling a couple of players to another team, that transaction may very well have been illegal, particularly if one of those players is adverse to the package deal. The WGA also attempted to sue WMA (Weller Media Agency), with the judge citing that the WGA could sue WMA over the California Cartwright Act, so there is already some legal precedent if players choose to sue their talent agency or teams over package deals.
There is one large piece that must be stated about ICON, in that they could have a player sign a waivable conflict of interest, which would probably state that ICON is a Swift Media Entertainment company and therefore the player understands the degree into which there can be conflicts that may arise due to this relationship. Basically, a get out of jail free card, buried in legal jargon, similar to a terms of service agreement, and also one that is predatory because the agent is the one giving them this information, and is unlikely to be reviewed by the actual player themselves.
There are several young players that are currently being taken advantage of, and this is something which they themselves may not realize, but also the broader esports community may not have been aware of and the grander detriment it can have to esports as a whole. I’m no lawyer, but I do understand the English language to a high degree, and this certainly sounds like an indictment of ICON talent agency in particular. Their relationship with the players they represent while also being owned by TSM’s parent company Swift Media Entertainment has opposing fiduciary duties. Yes, it’s important to read your contract, but it’s also important to know who is helping you read said contract. If we don’t take the time to point out things like this, players may continue to be stuck in Plato’s Cave.
After reaching out for comment from ICON, we did not receive a response within 24 hours within the publishing window of this article, but will update based on new information and conversation.