Karaoke Forums

Chartbuster has started suing a couple months ago just like SC.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

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

Ranger, you post to not feed the beast. Personally I found him to be a quite friendly and personal "beast".

_________________
My first choice IS Sound Choice.

Stay tuned Lone Ranger...more to follow soon

_________________
"Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain."
Unknown
"if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters."
Lee McGuffey

Uh... kjathena.... I think you just contradicted yourself in your answer to The Lone Ranger. If the "Legal Hosts" are not paying the cost of the lawsuits, then try to explain why the costs to prove you're legal have risen. IMO. I'm pretty sure the procedures on the Manufacturer's part haven't changed.

Cueball...I guess in a way the costs for legal KJ's are increasing so you are correct I did kind of contradict myself...however the benefits are also increasing and no-one here can say "I didn't know any of this has been going on" Up on soapbox
To me the choice is quite simple...if you are legit ask for your audits...if you are not...get legit or quit.
If you want to be pissed because you have to pay for the audits put the blame where it belongs right on the backs of the pirates not on SC or CB (our audits took over 6 hrs in the audit room now add the prep hours to that).
We don't hear of all those that try different methods of trying to "beat the audits" and are caught but from what I understand 2 out of 3 don't pass and are caught
Off soapbox now

_________________
"Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain."
Unknown
"if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters."
Lee McGuffey

So let me get this straight, Athena...you're saying the pirates are forcing the manufacturers to charge for audits? You can blame a lot of things on pirates, but I don't think that's one of them.

I can see that the choice is simple for you, but those of us that are legit and have no interest in being strongarmed into going through a manufacturer's audit and to top it off, having to pay for it, there is another choice. We choose not to support companies that, in our opinion, would sue legitimate KJs and scare them into paying them anyway for discs they already purchased. Thanks, but no thanks.

Birdofsong

_________________
Birdofsong

Actually the cost of a preemptive audit requested by a KJ is for the time and preparation it takes the manufacturer to conduct them as well as permission to copy the trademark. Remember, it is by copying the trademark that is in question. A disc based KJ would have nothing to audit for.

Of course for those who decide to copy the trademarks, without permission, do risk getting named in a lawsuit whether they have the discs or not. The original discs clearly state that "unauthorized duplication is prohibited".

Sounds pretty straight forward to me.

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

Not really...it is the copying of trademark that the manufacturers are using as the hook to bleed more money out of their previous customers. I don't ever recall Sound Choice even mentioning there might be an issue with copying their trademark when I purchased their discs in the first place, or for that matter that I might be charged to do it later, or sued if I didn't bend over. And as far as unauthorized duplication, Kurt Slep authorized that many times, in many forums.

Nope. Not straightforward at all. As a matter of fact, it's pretty muddled.

_________________
Birdofsong

It's only muddled in the unfocused eyes.

No one should have ever had to tell you that copying a trademark without permission is an act of infringement. That is an established fact.

The key point, as I see it, is that Kurt & Derek did indeed state that you could use a copy of their product. They also, very clearly, stated that you must own the original CD+G in order to do that.

The fact is that technology became the enemy. The reality of essentially cost-free duplication of karaoke tracks brought this untenable situation about.

I am disappointed by the fact that nearly every karaoke show I have attended in the last 5 years has been produced by computer (or used burns) and there is simply no way to know whether or not the host paid for their tracks.

When I made the decision to go with a laptop and CompuHost to run my shows, I did so with careful consideration of the consequences. Long before I contacted SC or CB, I noticed them and/or their agents lurking about my website and facebook pages. I made the decision to go to them before they came to me. The difference is that I was/am willing to acknowledge the FACT that unauthorized duplication of their product puts me squarely in the middle of trademark infringement.

I am now in a position to produce my shows without concern for action from these manufacturers.

It really is as simple as that.

And for the record, despite your frequent references to sexual assault, not one single entity has ever attempted to engage in acts of sodomy with me or my company.

Sweet dreams...

_________________
Never the same show twice!

now i did go through a voluntary audit with Kurt, but i also started business well after he made the statement that using a copy while keeping the original was ok. permission to copy was given, and i accepted. should i have to now pay to follow what the owner of the company said i could do?

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

Are you insinuating that I don't?! The point, as I see it, is that Chip and I bought discs for years, used them according to the manufacturer's specifications (in public for Karaoke shows -- as their inserts promoted), maintained 1 to 1 ratio, and yet we and any venue we play at are now at risk for a whole new set of dangers that were never disclosed by Sound Choice at the time we purchased the discs if we use them without jumping through a whole new set of hoops. Again, thanks, but no thanks.



This is nothing new. It didn't happen overnight. We knew of KJs making multiple copies of discs for years before a computer was ever able to run a show. Sound Choice and the other manufacturers had at least 10 years to do something about it, but did not. Now it's my responsibility to pay for their apathy? Again, thanks, but no thanks.




Me, too. I just don't use their products anymore. It's really as simple as that.The only shame is that I ever bought them to begin with.

Birdofsong

_________________
Birdofsong

I think you're not being entirely truthful either with us or yourself ... or both.

You claim you have no concerns, but when a strange disc is brought in to your show, you photograph it, document it and keep this information "handy, just in case" there might be some action from these manufacturers.

These are not the actions of one that is "without concern" and they are actually quite the opposite - it speaks louder than you would have us believe of a deeply-rooted fear.

MtnKaraoke wrote:

And for the record, despite your frequent references to sexual assault, not one single entity has ever attempted to engage in acts of sodomy with me or my company.

Get over it. Birdofsong's reference to "bend over" was in regard to an illegal search, that's all it was and you're fully aware of that. Whining that it is something else is simply that... whining. Your method of twisting every comment into some sort of sexual reference that is somehow directed at you is tiresome.

Don't get your feathers ruffled. You can read anything you want into my statement but as I am loathe to read your squawking, I did not accuse you of anything. Give it a rest.

My statement was made in an effort to demonstrate the obvious. You (as I) are not in any danger if you own the original disc. The only way to use a copy without being considered as an infringer is to maintain possession of the original. THAT NEVER CHANGED.

What changed is that stealing those tracks in the form of digital copies became practically effortless.
As a result, a company that did not produce their product in digital format was left with no way to tell who was stealing from them. The "hook" as you call it is a valid, legally sound, response to thieves. If you don't have the original, you certainly don't have any legal standing with regard to copying and displaying a registered trademark.

Which leads us to today, as the game has changed.
The game changes, the rules change. That's life. Honestly, if their sales hadn't been decimated by thieves, you'd have never been effected by any of this and you'd still be buying and using their product.



So essentially, you witnessed others committing the crime that has had serious consequences for this industry and you did nothing. Sounds like you had opportunities to be something other than apathetic as well.



Your self inflicted liability (business) based on an indignant reaction to the realities of this industry as it stands in 2011 is the real shame here. As long time "pro's" in this business you and c. staley actually had the opportunity to lead with principle, integrity and constructive action. Instead, you chose to vilify and condemn the manufacturers while you admittedly sat by and did nothing.

You were never named in a lawsuit by Sound Choice or their attorneys. Now, you couldn't get permission to copy their trademark even if you wanted it. Seems to me that you've cut off your nose to spite your face. I can only assume you are going to do the same when CB and Stellar come calling.

Yeah, that's a shame.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

And what opportunities would those have been, exactly? Are you saying that somehow I had a bigger responsibility than the manufacturers to stop pirates? How would you propose I should have done that? If the manufacturers had their heads in the sand (and I don't think they did -- I think they didn't really care that much because they were still making money and breaking into the home market) what exactly should I have been responsible for doing? Call law enforcement? Right. Tell the venues? Some of these KJ companies had some very far-reaching friends. I don't think I would have felt incredibly safe doing that.

If the manufacturers had developed a better propriety method back then (and I believe they were capable of doing so), they wouldn't be in this mess right now. You can't put that on my shoulders. I paid my money.



My business is just fine, thank you very much for your concern. And I am not condemning the manufacturers. I am condemning the manufacturer's actions. At least one in particular. There's a difference. The end does not justify the means. And it appears that you're now the spokesman for Sound Choice and are unequivocally saying that if I presented my discs that Kurt would have such a grudge to hold against me that he would intentionally withhold permission to shift despite the thousands of dollars I've spent on his products over the years? I'm glad we've got that straight. Thank you for reaffirming that my decision to pull the brand was absolutely the right one.

BTW, blind obedience and blind faithfulness are no more attractive qualities than blind disdain. My eyes are wide open. Are yours?

Birdofsong

_________________
Birdofsong

Before you cast dispersion upon my honesty (which the mods on this board will allow you the privilege), please grasp the following concept:

Comprehension, c. staley. Understanding what you are reading is paramount when discussing any subject with intelligence.

I stated that I have no concerns from THESE MANUFACTURERS. I suppose I could have been more specific and wrote the names: Chartbuster & Sound Choice.

I also dealt with the "strange" disc that had been produced by Just Tracks, that I did not own, in a manner that would demonstrate by transparency, that I did not COPY their material or the tracks that Dell (the singer) had asked me to play from the disc that he, not I, possessed.



These are the actions of one that is with integrity. Integrity must be maintained and demonstrated. It must also be defended when necessary. What better defense than documentation? I do not have any agreement in place with Just Tracks or Pocket songs. They are a viable manufacturer who is currently producing karaoke music. They have my respect and I would be happy to demonstrate that by the fact that I am 1:1 compliant with every track of theirs that resides on my HDD.

I'm not the one who has dormant CD+G's of "fear" that make me angry whenever I walk by them.



Nobody is whining here. You and Birdofsong are attempting to equate business and legal matters with acts of pulling down your pants, bending over, being snookered up the wazoo, and or getting a bug up your rear end. You are both capable of making your point without these blatant, disparaging in their intent, references. If you politely refrain from using these offensive, idiomatic expressions when replying directly to me, I'll not mention your strange pre-occupation again.


Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

MtnKaraoke wrote:

Which leads us to today, as the game has changed.
The game changes, the rules change. That's life. Honestly, if their sales hadn't been decimated by thieves, you'd have never been effected by any of this and you'd still be buying and using their product.

Moot point isn't it since it appears SC has simply decided that everyone is a thief unless you pay them?

And exactly what product would that be that I would be buying? Their "catalog" is daily becoming nothing more than a collection of oldies.

(At least we can still get $20/disc for DK. Can you say the same for SC that currently run an average of $13.50 on Ebay?)

MtnKaraoke wrote:

I also dealt with the "strange" disc that had been produced by Just Tracks, that I did not own, in a manner that would demonstrate by transparency, that I did not COPY their material or the tracks that Dell (the singer) had asked me to play from the disc that he, not I, possessed.

"Demonstrate by transparency" is the long spelling of "fear." I have no desire and no need to operate my business (if I have one, ask Athena) as though I'm preparing to defend myself against a demanded search out of the fear you label as "transparency."

MtnKaraoke wrote:

Comprehension, c. staley. Understanding what you are reading is paramount when discussing any subject with intelligence.

Man up MtnKaraoke. If you're going to call me stupid, just do it. No need to play "Thunder Games." I can comprehend just fine. It's the truck-sized holes in your argument you continually try to deflect by using your veiled name-calling tricks like this.

MtnKaraoke wrote:

Nobody is whining here. You and Birdofsong are attempting to equate business and legal matters with acts of pulling down your pants, bending over, being snookered up the wazoo, and or getting a bug up your rear end. You are both capable of making your point without these blatant, disparaging in their intent, references. If you politely refrain from using these offensive, idiomatic expressions when replying directly to me, I'll not mention your strange pre-occupation again.

Now we're talking about a failure to comprehend. For some strange reason, you're constantly thinking that any such reference is somehow directed specifically to you in your situation. Don't overinflate your ego on my behalf. If you didn't feel that you were already -to use YOUR terminology - "being snookered up the wazoo" you wouldn't "get a bug up your rear end" every time you read it.

The pesticide is free.

Mtn, I wouldn't worry about it. I'm sure that in the past couple of weeks the members of this board are mature enough to see what's what and who's who.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

I couldn't agree more Sandman. You put it very well. I can not understand why professional KJs could be so indignant, as you put it, against the efforts to try to rid karaoke piracy.

The costs for the amount of time & effort these two put into refuting the efforts of SC & CB in their anti-piracy policies, would probably amount monetarily to much more than audit fees assessed by CB & SC combined.

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

You have a habit of asking me if I am saying something other than what I said. I am not saying you had a "bigger" responsibility. I am saying that you had "some" responsibility to be something other than apathetic. The possibilities are endless... I understand the fear of retribution. You seem to "not feel safe" with frequency. Fear is apparently the primary factor that motivates you to act or not to act. That realization contributes mightily to my understanding of your stance on these issues.



Really? I'm not putting copy protection on your shoulders. Mediacloc failed miserably. You're blaming the victim here. "Hey, they wouldn't have been able to steal it if you'd had a better lock."





You severely underestimate me if you believe that I am blindly obedient or faithful. My eyes are wide open and if you were able to look into them, you'd find absolutely no trace of fear. I'm not particularly concerned with your business, but the fact that it is just fine is well... just fine.

Birdofsong, I sincerely understand your point of view. Your issues stem from the mfr's actions. You have stated that their methods, their means are what bothers you. I'm disgusted by the means that thieves utilize to attain their ends.

I am not a spokesperson for Sound Choice. I am telling you, that in my opinion, based on my interaction with SC as well as yours and c. staley's posts on this and "the other" forum, that no, I don't believe Kurt would grant you any additional rights, nor indemnify you from acts of infringement.

At the risk of being criticized again, I'll restate: When I heard about SC's first round in Florida, I realized that I could very well be exposed to liability because I was running shows from a computer. The difference between our reactions is that I decided to be assertive and pro-active where you decided to be defensive and reactive.

It baffles me how you could believe I was reaffirming your action(s) when I was in fact, trying to explain that it is only through your actions that you have the brand and it remains unused.

_________________
Never the same show twice!