Karaoke Forums

I know nothing of the law..


I've not even been to jail..

"yet." ( you forgot to add "yet." Don't worry though, if you try really hard, there's still time. Just sayin' )

Barrytone: I think what has some on here so incensed is that some of the manufacturers are going after pirates, but in so doing have caught innocent people in the net on several occasions. One manufacturer posted on here quite some time ago and was quite vehement in his approach when called out on his investigative methods. He also appeared to be quite vindictive to some of those innocent parties when they posted on here, upset at what was being done to them, threatening them with having to pay more if they continued to post (I'm paraphrasing here). Those posters are long gone now. Those who did post on here but changed their opinions to support that manufacturer were not bothered in this way. He also appeared to be very uncaring about those who were innocent, caught in his net, basically denying that such a thing happened and that they were ALL guilty. Time has proven quite differently and I believe it will continue to do so. Several on here took what he posted and they way he posted to be quite hypocritical and now we have the above scenario of the pot calling the kettle black.
I personally disagree with the methods of investigation, or lack thereof.
It appears to me that little to no real investigative work has been done. Instead, what appears to happen is that someone (maybe not even a licensed investigator) walks into a venue, sees a computer, sees karaoke on the screen and calls it a day, without further inquiry. One case I know of is still ongoing and even though the accused has all the discs (I've seen a video he produced showing walls and walls of all his discs), because he did not "co-operate" with that manufacturer and instead asserted his rights and refused to have his privacy invaded, he has been dragged though the mud by said manufacturer. The case itself has been delayed and underhanded things have happened, like the manu's lawyer telling the defendant not to file certain documents because it isn't necessary, when in fact they did need to be filed; holding a court ordered scheduling conference without informing the pro se defendants and then telling the judge that all parties were in agreement; neglecting to serve documents on the defendant; and the list goes on. In one case, the manu pretty much extorted someone into agreeing to buy the discs when they knew full well that at the time, the case against that defendant had already been dismissed. Despite this they didn't inform the defendant about the court decision and took his money anyway. Why did the defendant agree to settle? He was worried about the cost and figured it would be cheaper than hiring a lawyer. And he was right about that. It was a clear case of trademark extortion and it continues to this day, just a little more subtly, since apparently the backlash from the public and the bad press has made him rethink his methods, but only a little. The first copy of the settlement agreement is really what got many of us going here. People were being "forced" (read: extorted) to sign away many of their legal rights. It's underhanded things like this and the spiteful way he came across in posting here when questioned about such things that turned my opinion of him. And it all started with the way he went about "investigating", infringing on others' rights and it just snowballed from there, mainly due to his own efforts.
As for Stellar, I'm glad that they are not taking part in any of that and are taking the high road in realizing that some have unwittingly become pirates (having compassion, instead of venom for those who were duped into buying illegal HDs) and are not putting the onus on those of us who have been loyal customers.
As my father always said, "you attract far more flies with honey than you do with vinegar"!
BTW, Just a question on Stellar's "payment plan" for the CAP program. Not sure if you can get this information of not, But earlier, I saw someone on here mention that they only do a few shows a year, and it got me to thinking. What about the KJ that doesn't do very many shows or doesn't make a lot with his or her weekly gigs and can't make enough to make the 6 monthly payments of $533.33? Do you think Stellar would consider "easier" terms for people like them?
Also, is it like others here were suggesting, that once you pay, you can have ALL of the songs listed, no matter how you get them, even after you've paid - ie: go download them after paying?
Just curious on that one.

[Have you ever been in a position where you've had to decide to pull a music production three quarters of the way through its completion due to an approval that didn't come thru as anticipated, because your licensing department just discovered another publisher who doesn't want the song on karaoke?

If you’re interested, there is an interesting book written by Stephan Kinsella titled “Against Intellectual Property”. Personally I don’t agree entirely with his conclusions but it is extremely well reasoned and a good read that offers a different perspective on the subject. I think he actually released a free audio book of that title as well which you can probably get from his website.

I find it hard to swallow that someone in this digital age could have been “duped” into purchasing a loaded hard drive. Even if they were, once they had realized that these devices were illegal, they had an obligation to immediately discontinue the use of those drives.

The thing I'm wondering is will they do an audit every year or just expect you to pay the fee's and they will send you a certificate saying you are OK to use the stuff they have on file.

Now compound this by having to get a certificate from all brands, along with audits and fees. Your book of certificates would be larger than most pirates song books, if they have any.

If they don't do a yearly audit then the whole thing is a waste of time.

Not only a waste of time, also expensive if a host must travel any great distance, just for the audit, and of course pay the fees.

And as Joe, (not picking on ya Joe because I agree with you), would say "If they are not going to pay me for my time the forget it."

You can bet that they are not going to pay any host, for any part of this process, since they now look at the host as their prime source of revenue. So indeed the innocent will be charged right along with the pirate.

While I'm all for the manu's trying to recoup some of the monies that have been stolen from them, I think they are really going to find these yearly audits more hassle then they are worth. Although I did see something somewhere that SC wants to train people across the states to become Audit Professionals for them which might alleviate the problem I hope they will pay them well.

Unfortunately you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs. The problem is the eggs in question are going to end up on the hosts faces. You can bet if there are Audit Professionals this might alleviate the problem, but you can guess any added cost, will be passed on the the customer, after all the manus are in business to make money. Since the hosts is the only real viable segment of the market left you know where they are going to look for the money.

That's an excellent book! One of my favorites concerning Intellectual Property Rights. My only disappointment was that Stephan Kinsella didn't reserve the right to remember the content.

Ah, the old SC predicamicky...

The answer, though in other fields ( Electronic Engineering Design) is NO, because I'm simply not DUMB enough to attempt production of IP licensed product until I have the COMPLETED PAPERWORK giving me permission to do so, because VERBAL or HANDSHAKE agreements are not legal, and I KNOW IT. Anyone who doesn't have the business acumen to realize this deserves every single shred of problems that they get.... They produced product without written permission-period. They didn't feel like waiting.

Diafel and I agree on something else- the fact that Stellar and CB do not use the same actionable techniques as SC. A plus for those two mfrs.

No, not much time left.. But that's another story..

Not sure if you are the high exhalting llama overseeing this discussion, but if so maybe you can help me with the PM thing. I just received a couple of PMs (one from you) and entered a reply. However both of the replies seem to be stuck in the Outbox. Am I doing something wrong or is this a quirk in the software?

Unfortunately you can't make an omelet without breaking some eggs. The problem is the eggs in question are going to end up on the hosts faces. You can bet if there are Audit Professionals this might alleviate the problem, but you can guess any added cost, will be passed on the the customer, after all the manus are in business to make money. Since the hosts is the only real viable segment of the market left you know where they are going to look for the money.

They stay in the outbox until the recipient reads them, BarryTone.

Birdofsong

1) I would never suggest that someone is DUMB as you put it. Ignorant perhaps but never dumb or stupid. People who truly are DUMB or stupid are amazingly capable of making that case all by themselves.

2) Now onto your comments . . . it would appear that you have a perspective on contract law that the rest of us who studied it have not yet been exposed. You see when I studied contract law, parol (oral or verbal agreements) contracts between two or more parties are legally binding with remedies in both law and equity. There are numerous other parts to contract law for sure but this in essence illustrates a perspective different than yours to VERBAL agreements.

With that being said, I suspect you are more than capable of applying that thought process to the rest of your comments. Incidentally, I think it would be reasonable to assume that the incentive for both Stellar and CB to be less aggressive than SC might be due to the fact that they are both still releasing new products.

3) I wonder if their techniques would be less “actionable” if they were in a similar position as SC. Just a thought.

"It ain't what you don't know that gets you into trouble. It's what you know for sure that just ain't so." ~ Mark Twain

I see nothing wrong with that. They sold a product which is perfectly useable in the format it was sold. If a KJ wants to copy that product to enhance their business, then they need the permission of the manu to do so. Why would a manu grant permission to use a copy if they have no way of knowing how that copy was obtained?


And that is fine. Just don't use copies of their product in your business. Why should the manu have to foot the bill for enhancing your business?

If you want to better your business by using copied product, it is your responsibility to gain permission to use those copies. And if you require an audit in order to gain that permission, then it is your business expense, not that of the permission granter.

Under your logic, I should be heading to the DMV to put my claim in for compensation for the time I spent getting my drivers licence and car registration!

1) You are right, and I would normally never use the word "dumb", nor any of the other agressive negative descriptions- my apologies to all. Two days without sleep ( Private event-bar show-private event-bar show) left me with addled brains. Not an excuse, but an explaination...

2) Maybe I phrased my statement badly. To clarify: A verbal agreement creates no legal proof of it's existance, leaving either party the opportunity to renege at a later date. basing the use of time, energy, and resources to create and market a product on such an agreement is simply bad business, the results of which have been experienced by several karaoke producers.


3) Though I agree with your assessment of SC's actions, I have yet to see a reason why Tom, Debi, or Norbert would follow the same course. Though I have yet to be able to be able to reach and speak to Debi or Norbert, and have not yet tried for Tom, I have no evidence that these are the same sort of people as Kurt.

For one thing, they must have better managerial skills, as they are still in the karaoke production business.

I choose to assume that peopleare generally decent until proven otherwise. Therefore- at least at this point- I don't believe they would go down the same road as Kurt.

Sound Choice wrote:

I don't know who you are Murray C (many of the posters I do know despite the use of an Alias), but your explanation and analogy is right on. I couldn't have said it better. We have a lot of costs in doing all this and most of it is to benefit legitimate hosts to help identify and separate you from the illegal ones. And since more and more venues are going to be requiring proof of being legitimate, it might just have to be a "cost of doing business". But certainly one that is easily paid for by being able to charge $25 or $50 more each show because the venue understands that they won't be at risk for being sued. With lawsuit costs of $15,000 or more, it would take them a long time to amortize their $50 a night "savings" by hiring pirates.

Venues will also know that they can save $300-$600 dollars per year AND rest assured that they will "understand that they won't be at risk for being sued" if they drop karaoke entertainment altogether.

Sound Choice wrote:

We understand the desire to have a better working solution for YOUR business (i.e., running off computers from media shifted files), but because we don't yet have a satisfactory solution to identify the pirates who run laptops loaded with illegally obtained files, doing periodic audits verifying that you are 1:1 is the only solution for now. Unfortunately, it is taking a substantial amount of money and resources for us to provide this service to you.

And this problem you have with a "working solution" is simply alleviated by suing everyone in order to gather evidence you don't have? That simply sucks as a working solution and you know it. Your actions are actually no different than a copyright troll in my opinion.

Sound Choice wrote:

The hoped for result is that in areas that we are able to focus on, the combination of suing pirate hosts and venues who continue to hire them (which drives down prices for legitimate hosts and oversaturates the market in an area) as well as having local groups of Legitimate and Certified hosts (whether formal or informal organizations) will make it too difficult for the pirate hosts to operate or infringing venues to continue with Karaoke. We have already seen some evidence of this happening in some areas and we (SC, CB and Stellar and our legal teams) are committed to building on these early success.

"hoped for result?" In my opinion, your only hoped for result is to have a small group of cheerleaders that will send you "sales leads you can sue" to force sales of your outdated product. Many of us on this forum are wondering why --after 2 years-- you have not completed a single suit. We see stalling tactics again and again with no "legitimate" conclusion to a single suit after hundreds have been sued. Playing "hide 'n go seek" with the possibility of having to explain your tactics to a jury really isn't helping your position nor does it strengthen your case with anyone. The name of the artist escapes me but the title "Take The Money And Run" seems somehow more than appropriate.

Sound Choice wrote:

Sound Choice is not opposed to "trading" audit costs for other helpful services by legitimate hosts after the first audit. And hopefully in key areas where the risk of being a pirate outweighs the advantages of stealing we won't have to do audits very frequently.

What "other helpful services" (other than simply purchasing your product) could you possibly be talking about that would be performed by "legitimate hosts?" It must be weekly or monthly "reporting" of venues and other KJ's right? With the exception of a few songs --that are now becoming available via other sources-- your label is no longer a source of ongoing product for KJ's. You're not producing anything but lawsuits for your income and even your KIAA has announced that it will no longer do squat.... because you're focusing on suing people. Did you refund those that purchased "memberships?"