Karaoke Forums

The Boogie Man, of course.

You never know.......

Well Lone if you asked a question in a polite way, you might have gotten a polite answer, ie, James could you tell us if there is a relationship between DTE and PR. Chances are you would have gotten a well written, polite reply.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

what doesnt make sense with that relationship is if the CB logo has been licensed by PR to DT, why change the opening logo? if it is licensed just leave the tracks as they were. not having all the logos removed was the reason I had been given as to why the DT tracks were pulled from SAT.

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

It's a simple fact timberlea neither James or the SC supporters are always polite, if being a little rude helps gain information then so be it. James continues to come on these forums acting like anyone who questions SC is a dolt, or spreading misinformation, or worse. Sometimes the information given out by James is in my opinion meant to mislead or put a spin on things to help his client, which in turn helps his bottom line. It stands to reason that this legal process is not working that effectively and SC has not resumed new production of material, it makes one wonder how close they are to going the way of CB. If they do then we will be wondering if some other company like PR will be protecting that logo as well. Have a blessed day.

That is the question rick who is really serious about protecting the CB trademark? PR is supposed to be assigned that task and where are they? If they are serious about doing their job the first step would be to setup some kind of auditing program, wouldn't it? At least they would know who to go after and who not to waste their resources on. If they don't do something soon, and if DTE will be making product under their own logo, there is a danger that CB could drift into the the freeware status zone like so many other defunct labels. Have a blessed day.

You obviously haven't been reading what I write.

If my statements make you feel like a dolt, so be it.

But there are people who come on here spreading misinformation. You are one of the prime purveyors of that, because of your tendency to engage in speculation.



If you want an answer from me, all you have to do is ask the question. I may not give the answer you like, or I may not be able to answer the question at all. But I don't come here to "mislead or put a spin on things."

I am hopeful that we will be able to resolve the problems regarding new material this week. The legal process is working very effectively. Money is not the issue regarding new material. I cannot discuss it any further, but I am hoping to have it resolved one way or another by the end of the week.

Chartbuster was making similar statements right before they went belly up and became Digitrax....allegedly.

Yes there is a pattern developing isn't there. James never did say whether PR was a client of his, if he is giving answers. Have a blessed day.

I still think speculation does serve a useful purpose in gathering information, one has to remember sometimes misinformation can also be used by the opposing side, in order to make their position seem stronger than it really is.

Well now....isn't our kettle just as black....

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

That's precisely what happened. When you're converting and re-rendering literally thousands of video files, sometimes a machine gaks, or a file doesn't get properly written, and somehow QC misses it. Thanks for the heads-up on the Bellamy Bros. tune - we'll get that fixed ASAP.

He did say DT was not his client and has said he couldn't speak for either DT or PR, so I would say neither of them are his clients. As a matter of fact since his client (SC) and DT/PR are competitors, I highly doubt he represents them as it could be a conflict of interest.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

That pretty much covers it I'd say!

_________________
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!

also show them to me by rodney carrington has the CB logo.

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

Actually, PR is my client. I have stated that previously. Any conflicts of interest have been voluntarily waived by the affected parties. But I don't speak for PR, except in court.

Thanks James for the clarification.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Are you saying that there is no such thing as a conflict of interest toward POTENTIAL DEFENDANTS???

I represent PR in a single case in which it is a co-plaintiff with SC. We may do other joint actions in the future, but there is only one for now.

But, to answer your question, "the people suing me are competitors and they have the same lawyer" is not something that will yield any traction for a defendant, no. SC's and PR's interests are perfectly aligned in this case.

However, it would stand to reason that if you have information about Defendant A from SC's pursuit, and you go up against Defendant A again as PR's representative, that that might present the conflict. Just doesn't seem the "I won't use the privileged information about Defendant A for PR, I PWOMISE!!!" mentality would work...

What privileged information would you be referring to?

If information is privileged in the hands of a defendant, I won't have my hands on it in the first place.