Karaoke Forums

With all due respect... I've never taken a shot at you mrmarog.

I loathe the KaraoQ concept.

I also know that their software doesn't stand a chance of multiplying my income.

I'd also tell you that my wealth is not "new found". I have busted my (@$%&#!) for 10 years to get where I am now. I earned every penny I have. No one gave me anything for free and I am not paying anyone a dime to "help" me run my shows.

To be fair, this acquisition is not for "IP they had no part in creating". This acquisition is for a tangible, valuable trademark.

I have no problem with them protecting their interests.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

You are right, I apologize.

I agree, but they don't agree with you... or me. Their favorite word is "preponderance."

They don't care about you... you've signed their license.

Yep.

[quote="MtnKaraoke]If this acquisition provides further deterrent for piracy and that pushes more thieves out... then more power to them.
[/quote]
as of now, not only have law suits not deterred pirates, they are growing in numbers. how can doing more of the same change anything?
I said it before, if I bought the MM trademark and began requiring audits, I would be immediately labeled a trademark troll. I would NOT be supported here, but another company IS NOT a troll for doing so and worthy of support? double standard again and I hate it.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

Yep.

Mr. Harrington,

My question was still not answered and I would like some clarity over this issue. I have the 6 Super CD+G discs that Chartbuster made for CAVS. They have been changing their systems over to a hard drive player only but I was told a long time ago that it is ok to media-shift the 6 ESP packs 1-6 but to always keep the original pressed discs. There are also some Chartbuster NEO+G discs I have and SD Cards.

Towards the end of CB's run just as SoundChoice does and other companies such as PHM, ASK, and a few others, they started doing their own CD duplication "in house" to avoid the high cost of a glass master. It was a disc burnt with a white label and a barcode.

The Chartbuster CAVS and NEO as well as SD cards and CD+G's are still out there and when I got a chance to speak to Norbert, he told me it was ok to have the music on hard drive as long as I have the 1:1 ratio.

Earlier on in this post I wrote about my concerns but they were overlooked. I appreciate your time and would appreciate an answer back so I know what I should do.

I don't buy burnt discs, but if the company such as CB/PHM and SC and other companies are doing the in house burning then what are we supposed to do if one is bought in the shrink wrap with the logo and when opened it is not a pressed disc? Some of the CB and PHM discs I have were burnt but bought from either a wholesaler or the company directly and I called right away with questions. The glass master subject came up and I do understand the high cost of having to pay for so many masters pressed from the companies.

I stand behind the anti-piracy law as I own a publishing company and studio. Many years ago I could make a decent living hiring out a KJ to run my old system and was out bid by pirates. I sold my system and in the last year and a half I have been buying brand new discs as I can find them because karaoke is now almost impossible to find on CD+G disc anymore.

I'm sorry to have seemed to overlook your questions, but we are still working out a lot of the details regarding the implementation of this deal.

We are aware that in-house burning became the norm at the end of what I'll call "the CD+G era," as the quality of in-house burning equipment rose and sales volumes dropped (making pressing discs with glass masters economically impractical). As long as your discs bear indicia that make it likely that they are legitimate, I don't see a problem accepting those as legitimate originals.

We have had some discussions about how to deal with the CB certification issue. I expect that our program, once implemented, will look somewhat different from the SC Certified KJ program; it will likely be less rigorous and more of a registration system than a certification system with full audits. Our main need from that program is information about who legitimately has original media so that we can avoid wasting time investigating and suing them and devote those resources to pursuing the people who have not paid for the products they're using.

I know that it's fashionable to be concerned about the future and about changes that are coming, and I recognize the need for a "wait and see" approach on your part. I would therefore ask for your patience as we figure out the best way to accomplish the purposes of this acquisition while respecting and supporting the loyal customers who have bought these products over the years, with whom we have no gripe at all. We will be as fair as possible.

This is so wrong on so many levels...

There are consumer protection avenues.

The fact that you have a problem with us taking affirmative steps to engage with people so that we can avoid suing people who bought the discs just demonstrates the depths of your sickness. Why anyone ascribes any credibility to your views is beyond me.

I think Chips problem with this (and mine as well) isn't that you are trying to engage people so you don't sue them over Chartbuster. I think its because you bought a trademark, not a product, and plan to use it to open up a revenue stream through audits, certification, and lawsuits.

Tell me... what is PEP's plan to make sure every karaoke host in America knows that PEP/SC now have the right to sue them for using Chartbuster product? I say that because I had no clue about PEP/SC until September, after I Googled something and you came up in the search dealing with a lawsuit.

There is a lot more to the CB acquisition than making money through lawsuits. The financial aspect of it is not anywhere near as important as preventing the brand from becoming de facto freeware.

If that came to pass, it would be game over for the industry.

I'd be somewhat surprised if the direct revenues we realize from the acquisition ever amount to more than 2% of our overall revenues. It's just not that significant, except that having robust enforcement that confines use of the brand to legitimate owners of the product is one of many enabling factors for the industry.

As for the second part of your inquiry... We haven't finalized our plans yet. But there will be a significant effort.

I can understand that CB being potential freeware might of forced your hand to buy the trademark. But I think if you announced that PEP/SC was assisting whoever owned the trademark with the enforcement rather then doing it yourself, it might have come off better for me, and I would prob said, "go for it" shut my mouth and move on.



Let's hope. I consider myself lucky to know its in the works so I can be looking out for it when it happens. I hope other legal hosts are that fortunate as well.

I've never asked anyone for "credibility" to my views... ever.

I have a problem with your "Trolling Model" where you sue venues and KJ's for a product you did not make, did not own the trademark when it was created and all you do is sue for a commission of the settlements all the while spewing some altruistic concern for "the industry." An industry that PEP is not in, and the "captive licensees" are not even willing to place enough loyalty, value or confidence on to toss $30 into your tin cup.

And in typical fashion, rather than return their money and come up with a new plan, you want to tap dance and "change the rules" in an offer to keep their money. Which was NOT part of your original agreement. But, "changing the rules" (especially when you already have their money) is no real surprise either. You should just give them back their money... just as your original agreement that they signed and you authored and agreed to states:

You've already exercised your extension option and it looks to me like the only options you have is to fund it yourself and stick to the terms of your agreement or refund them all within 30 days. Anything else including an unsigned modification is a breach of the contract you authored.

So let's just see how well PEP is willing to stick by their own contract with their subscribers and licensees.... that will be interesting because you can either pony-up your own bucks to make up the difference, or do what you said you would do and issue refunds... within 30 days.
It's your contract, you wrote it and I'm just pointing out your terms.


Let's see if you stick by your own agreement. I have my doubts and I can only hope you disappoint me... (so far, you haven't but I can call that "being consistent.")

Otherwise, you're welcome to continue to poison the karaoke industry in the U.S. by expanding your lawsuit business. You truly are (now) just a parasite on the industry - suing venues and KJ's not to "recover" anything but an opportunistic and slimy way to make money. Suing venues can never "help the industry" no matter what you say, it can only serve to shrink the opportunities by creating an atmosphere so guarded, venues won't even consider as a viable entertainment option anymore.

But why am I not surprised?

Seems like they will do just that, yes it's not a cut check tomorrow ASAP, but they will not hold your money any more... if you don't want them too



That's an option, not a implied contract to keep you money longer. They will give it to you anytime you want up, until they produce something. It's up to the purchaser if he is going to stick around or not.

Sorry, I got to go with Jim on this one.

(edited: fixed quotes)

Well, there's nothing in the contract that Harrington authored that states in paragraph #7 that you "have to ask for or request your money back."

It set the terms quite clearly and option (c) has already been exercised, he has claimed that there will be no production at this time - effectively nullifying option (b) leaving only option (a):

I would expect that the word "prompt" would mean not be longer than 30 days. It's not an open-ended contract.

Here is a perfect example (with my emphasis) of how Harrington will not do what he claims is "policy" to the disadvantage to the rest of the "loyal licensees":

The Gem series license agreement clearly states:

Now, keep in mind that this is not any kind of slam to jclaydon but rather simply an illustration of how the "rules change" if it means more money for PEP:

Jclaydon is starting over; he's said so himself (and I wish him the best) however, he has also stated that he currently has no gigs. I don't believe that would be the definition of "Professional" if you're not actually currently engaged in the business. It would fit the category of "General Public" because he's working on it.... but he's not currently doing it.

"Professionals" are actively practicing their craft as a commercial business and the agreement even defines what a commercial business is:

And currently, jclaydon is not engaged in any of these (that I'm aware of) even though he is working on it and while I applaud him for that, there has to be a defined line somewhere between "qualified" and "not qualified."

So, can anyone in the "general public" who just intends to be a professional be eligible? Apparently so. PEP was fully aware that before they shipped the product. Ultimately, did they "breach the trust" of all the other licensees by allowing this to happen? You have to decide that for yourself.

Harrington is happy to "ignore the rules" regarding his own contract - which is supposed to limit access to professionals only and not the general public to protect his other licensees - as long as there's a dollar in it. He'll even make special financing terms, erase the defined line and call it "helping" if he can whitewash it in that light and make it more palatable. But I'll bet that the contract jclaydon signed matches the one on their website.

And even now, the "Advance" program... which was supposed to be limited, may be going to crowdfunding... so the money anyone put in thinking they were going to get something "no one else has" as an advantage, goes right out the window. And when it come to your money he's holding, he'd like you to just "let it ride for awhile."
Words mean things remember? You have to decide also how long "awhile" means.

I don't believe that for a second. Almost no one would ever know if CB content slipped into freeware. Those who want to gain access to CB content without paying will do so regardless. Those that do the right thing will buy from Digitrax or ebay regardless. Sometimes you people over complicate and over cloud things to a point where the truth just lays there on the top for all to see.

Good Morning Campers! Sorry I was busy living life to be on here all night Anyway with a cup of coffee here I go

Let's assume a few things:
1) The Advance series will not meet its goals today.
2) Sound Choice has some money from people who believe SC will release a product "at some point".
3) Sound Choice also has some money from people who want it back.
4) That neither you nor I will have any direct communication from Sound Choice in regards to the Advanced program, because we are NOT people who have given them money, and therefore are not required to be notified.

I agree to:
That PEP/SC will INDEED try to retain as much money as possible from the people who bought into the Advanced program. They are a business, money kept is money earned.

I expect:
That PEP/SC will send out a notification in the (hopefully near) future to those parties who after 2 months of waiting are still without any product.
That in order for the parties who "let it ride" there WILL be some form "new rules"/contract to agree to the replaces the "old rules"/contract, and if they do not agree to the new terms, then the contract they signed at the beginning remains valid and they will get their money ASAP.

In whatever form the "New Rules" will take, it will not be the Advanced program in it's current state. Let's call it "Advanced 2.0". That means, they will do a total reboot of the program, as write up whatever want to try and do, let people view the new terms, and dole out refunds as requested. It is again up to the customer to agree to the terms or not. The people who signed up for Advanced 1.0 might have a slightly different contract that would/should explain any 'benefits' that PEP/SC gives them for sticking around. Only the people who bought in to the original program will know unless someone posts that new contract for Advanced 1.0 parties.

If the customer blindly goes into the next option without looking over whatever SC posts, that is on them. Let the buyer beware.

As for jclayton and others like him, He seems to be in a unique position. Someone who is not active business wise, but is active in the community. As I didn't sign on for the Advanced program, I don't know how much of a requirement is needed to be considered "professional". Maybe saying you have done a paid gig or two in the last year is enough. Maybe less. I'm not gonna argue that point.

I agree about crowd funding, its a bad idea. PEP/SC wants control over the product that would make the general public a bigger part of the equation, and I haven't seen anything that would make them want to open that up. I don't think they will get people to spend $30 for a thank you, a t-shirt and no product.

There is a lot in a state of flux right now in regards to new music. We will see how it plays out.

It's one thing for a karaoke company to make mistakes, it's entirely another when a karaoke host poisons the industry from within.

Since we are hounding on things unrelated to the topics at hand..... Why should anyone believe anything you say at all?

Instead of implementing an actual security feature that could be useful in the karaoke world (serialized watermarking of the Red Peters tracks), you instead lied about it and gave a false sense of security to people who purchase the tracks. You may have lied to your client as well.

Just like most of what you say.......Saying it is so, doesn't actually make it so. Your ruminations mean nothing.

_________________
-Chris

Crowdfunding is just another means of accomplishing a goal. It is wildly successful for a lot of projects. Why not producing karaoke?

Just because it doesn't fit the traditional model, doesn't make it bad or wrong.

_________________
-Chris