Karaoke Forums

The "Get a grip" came out because I keep hearing about how great they are. Guess what? They are out of the Karaoke pruduction business, and have been for years. Done. Kaput. Finished. Been a long time. They AREN"T anything in regard to karaoke. Not a player in the industry, not a name that has been current in years, NOTHING. They were a producer of decent karaoke tracks years ago. Now they are merely a company that makes it's money scaring settlements out of uneducated KJs that happens to have the same name. Why keep glorifying something that is over with?

Also, why won't anyone say what they are using for current tracks (2007-2011) that SC hasn't made?

Your "just the way it is" may be your personal opinion of what SC used to produce, but it doesn't match everyone's, including in MY opinion, the majority. "If they took a vote of every singer and every host SC would come out on top."? I'm thinkin' - since no such vote has ever been taken- that you just may be basing your prediction of the results on your own personal preferences.....

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

including Henley & Frye....how about Garth, Taylor Swift? no.....the GEM does not have the blessing of the publishers.

SC is an off shore supplier. they license the music in the U.K., produce it in the U.K., distribute it from the U.K.........
so SC has somehow magically managed to do what no other company in the world can do.....make it, press it, and sell it from the U.K. without publisher blessings and be legal?

What license is SC paying that Zoom and Sunfly, SBI, Tropical Zone, Music Factory, Sundown, Mr. Entertainer, Pocket Karaoke, Abraxa, Pocket Songs, Just Tracks, Karaoke Channel not paying? if we know what license is not being payed, we can check to see if someone is paying them before buying their tracks.

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

NO.
In most cases, the music publishers don't even know it's happening. Did the Eagles suddenly have a change of heart?... I doubt it. Take a close(er) look at the Gem when you play them, they do not say "in the style of..." because they are not allowed to display the name of the original artist as part of the licensing.

So the answer is simply no, the music publishers haven't given any blessing whatsoever, the only blessing given comes from the MCPRS who has theoretically collected the fees (and their commission) for licensing it in the U.K.



You are correct, the answer is "no" again....

For clairification, my responses are in red.

_________________
No venue to big or too small. From your den to the local club or event, we have the music most requested. Great sounding system!

Two points. First, how would you know that? You've been pretty vocal on here about not becoming SC's "partner," and legal acquisition of the GEM series requires, among other things, agreement to the language that you say requires you to become SC's "partner."

Second, there were other songwriters for the Eagles besides Henley and Frey. For example, Hotel California is credited to Don Felder (plus Henley and Frey). Jack Tempchin wrote or co-wrote a number of their songs, including Already Gone and Peaceful Easy Feeling.



For licensing it in the UK for worldwide distribution. The last part is pretty important.

Thank you for your response, that should clear up any doubt since you are directly involved with the licensing and release of their music.

_________________
No venue to big or too small. From your den to the local club or event, we have the music most requested. Great sounding system!

Ok so the stock they have NOW is licensed for worldwide distribution. What is soundchoice/ your firm *i don't know if u handle their licensing issues or not* going to do when they run out of current stock? As far as i am understanding you can't get worldwide licensing thru the MCPRS anymore.

And I'm not any kind of legal expert here so this is pure conjecture on my part , but since the product is leased, wouldn't soundchoice have to have a current valid license to be able to re-lease it in five years?

I'm not knocking the actual product, it just seems to me that some things haven't been very well thought through. If I am mistaken, please elighten me.

-James

I don't care if they are done. I stick with my opinion! First of all, the majority of songs sung at my shows are more than 4 years old! And yes, I do have newer songs, I get them every month! You obviously don't know me very well. I don't let bias get in the way of my reasoning. I'm basing my opinion on the hundreds of comments on this forum, comments on other forums, and personal conversations with other hosts and singers. And I'm not basing it on one genre, one region, or age of singers. The key word again is overall!

If such a ballot could take place, I'd bet a lot of money on my horse!

If SC continues to NOT make music, of course they willl slowly fall down the ranks.

_________________
KingBing Entertainment C'mon Up! I have a song for you!!! [font=MS Sans Serif][/font]

There seems to be some eagerness and joy at the thought of dancing on SCs grave for some that I have decided has to do with personal reasons as some get so upset that other people continue to like their tracks.

Really? Do you think SC has done something horribly wrong in the last 2 years that would garner such fierce resentment in some folk? What could that possibly be?

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

To be clear, although I am familiar with the licensing aspect of the business, I am not responsible for it, directly or indirectly. That being said, my understanding is that that will not be a problem for a long time.



The product is not "leased." It is licensed. There is a difference between the two, which probably doesn't matter too much. Aside from that, the material has already been the subject of a first sale, which extinguishes the copyright with respect to that particular item. In five years, when the license is up for renewal, we will still be talking about the same physical articles, which remain licensed.

correct, but Henley and Frye do not give permission for songs they are involved in eg. Hotel California. this is what happened with 8125, plus SC has no,0, none of Eagles songs available on disc unless you get custom from overseas. if one of the writers says ok, can that over-ride the others denying permission?



i thought MCPS license covers worldwide EXCLUDING THE U.S. AND CANADA. how are they getting past that?

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

It does now. SC would have us believe that they stockpiled a quadrillion gem sets before the deadline...

I'd like to know from MCPRS exactly how many they did license....

Nor would we want to knowingly purchase/lease/license any product that is not really licensed by the publisher or MCPRS would we???

Or support a karaoke show that we might think..... never mind....

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

Yes. Co-authors of a joint work can each license the whole work. All they have to do is share the profits.

I disagree. If that were true, then Henley wouldn't matter if Frey agreed.
AND....

Was there "specific consent?"

What exactly is it that you think we're selling, Wall? Pictures of discs?

Hey Cue -- did you get your discs that you bought? Are they real? Diafel -- weigh in when you get yours, okay?

_________________
Birdofsong

Not sure why I would bother. He thinks I don't really own any discs, either. Apparently it's all just some big sham we're putting on, probably for his benefit, because he seems to think he matters that much to us. How self centered!