Karaoke Forums

It's unfair to the Karaoke companies that are playing by the rules and operating 1:1.

_________________
The Line Array Experiment is over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Can they Share amps/speakers/mics/wires or lights ? of course not. The discs are no different.

We own 3 soon to be 4 systems and are 1-1 for each system. Due to OOP discs each book is slightly different and yes it does cost a lot more to buy music, however after paying KJ's we make slightly over 2 times what we make in a night running 1 system when all three are being used. When the 4th system is ready that amount will be over 2 1/2 times.

Due to the behind the scenes work we do not want to grow beyond 4 systems.

I believe it is pretty obvious that RLC is calling into question how doing a server relates to the "rules", and in particular how it relates to improvements in technology.

I have no problem with ingenuity, but the rules still apply.

It takes ingenuity to build a car that can safely travel at 100 mph, but that doesn't mean it's legal to drive it that fast on a road with a 40 mph limit.



Operator A runs three simultaneous shows, each 20 miles apart, using three identical hard drives and is 1:1 between each hard drive and a set of discs (total of three sets of discs).

Operator B runs three simultaneous shows, each 20 miles apart, using a central server and three satellite computers that connect to the server and share its contents. Operator B is 1:1 between a single set of discs and the server. All songs in the library are available at each site, but when a song is requested from the library, it is locked out from the other systems for 20 minutes.

Operator C runs three simultaneous shows, each 20 miles apart, using three identical sets of original discs.

Each of these operators, A, B, and C, are capable of putting on exactly the same show, with the trivial exception that patrons at B might have to wait a short time for their song to come available, and probably less than the length of a rotation.

But even though A, B, and C all have the same availability and get the same amount of use out of their investment in karaoke music, B only has to lay out 1/3 of what A and C lay out for music.

That's money out of the manus' pockets, and out of the pockets of their upstream rights holders.

There is no other piece of the show that B could share in this manner among his three shows--not the KJs, not the mics, not the speakers, not the mixing board, and not anything else.

Why on earth is that a fair arrangement to the manufacturers?

And if 3 is OK, how many can it be before it's no longer OK? 10? 100? 1,000? How far apart can they be? 20 miles? 200 miles? 2,000 miles?

The defendants in that case were smart people. I don't think there was any real malice on their part--I think instead that they were trying to find a way to get more out of their investment. If we had thought there was malice, we would have asked the judge for a lot more than we did. The judgment works out to about $18.50 a disc, which is below the retail price, and we didn't ask for attorney fees.

I am not sure I agree with Mr. Harrington on this one.

Here is my angle.....

I don't believe there are any limits to how close a display device must be to it's source nor any limits on what the source is. The source can be from the parking lot, adjacent building, or even my basement.

Today, we can display anything from any computer to any IPTV capable TV. That means I can use IPTV while I am in the club to connect my karaoke computer to a screen or I can use IPTV to connect the same computer to the same screen while I am at home. Playback handled on a central karaoke computer and displayed via IPTV back to multiple displays in the respective venues. One set of music, one karaoke computer, multiple displays. Same thing we have been doing for the last 25 years of karaoke. No copying of music, no intermediary PC's. Just video straight from the central karaoke machine to a display device in a club.

-Chris





-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Well, this time I am much closer to James than others. I think if someone is able to pull this off, there should be a mechanism in place for them to license their tracks for however many systems they have and I agree with James in that there is a loss of revenue for the manufactures. Should the cost be "full price" for each rig? No, not at all but not free. For one thing, the Manu doesn't have to do anything other than take the money so they are not out materials or shipping.
How do sites like Singsnap get licenses to have a single server (or cluster, if you will) that allows patrons to play any of their tracks all over the world?

What about a venue that has several karaoke rooms? Do they need a "set" for every room?

thats a good question. Rodney Carrington Show Them To Me is on Sing Snap twice, only Sc and CB made it, so how are they able to do what we cant? ARE they licensed or just being ignored?

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

I was going to say something similar. Aside from the obvious of how many sets of discs there are:
A.) 1 main server, multiple private rooms all at 1 location (all connected to main server), 1 set of discs owned for this setup.
B.) 1 main server, 3 show locations (all connected to main server) , 1 set of discs owned for all 3 setups combined.

How much different is it? After all, when you are dealing with a single location that is using private rooms for Karaoke, you could have (let's say) 10 rooms booked and in use between the hours of 9 PM to 11 PM, each with (let's say) 6 people in each room. Now, the people in each of those private rooms may be taking turns singing (in their own rotations), but they are also singing different songs all at the same time within that 1 main establishment. So, you can have 10 songs playing in all 10 rooms at the exact same time. If you go to a public karaoke show, how many songs can be playing at the exact same time? In effect, going to an establishment that is using private rooms for karaoke, is almost the same thing as a private room being considered as a separate location from each of the other private rooms. After all, each room has use of the same song books and selections, but each room has its own separate crowd of singers.

Both great examples of the questions at hand. Let's also offer a similar situation but with "DJ" in mind. We have, and I am sure every decent town has, clubs with multiple rooms where each room is catering to a different crowd. One room may be country, another may be disco, another may be techno. I would think all those rooms are tied to a single library. A library is a library. Who knows where that library really is. How is that different than many of these situations being offered here?

In a case of different rooms in the same venue they are all in the same building. Therefore in the case of private rooms with the server being located on premises 1 set of discs would equal 1-1 as long as the same song could not be sang at the same time.

Sounds like a bit of hair-splitting in this scenario. It is true that the line of demarcation may not be drawn at this time, as far as the actual law is concerned, not the opinion of any one state's judge...

That is not the scenario in the case noted in the original post.

I'm not sure how we would feel about that scenario. Certainly the fact that it could be plausibly accomplished with a single set of discs would weigh pretty heavily toward approval of the setup, but I think we would want some assurances about the technology.

To be clear, I (and I will go out on a limb and say we) completely understand the dynamics of the case at hand are different that the "what ifs" being proposed. It was never my intent to "muddy" all of these what ifs into the same little mud pie. Even with some similar elements, each "what if" could yield much different response. As is usually the case, the more we seek clarity, the more shades of gray are added to the portrait that is karaoke.

If there was s/w to assure control to multiple receivers along with fees for each rig, I can see a doable scenario in which manu's can be compensated.

However, here is a problem. Say if the manu's had this solution in place and the KJ has a personal server with their media-shifted copies of their personal SC8125 original disc available to 3 rigs, how would the manu license and/or charge a fee for the multiple satellite receivers for these Eagles songs that we all know Frey and Henley will not give license to karaoke manu's to reproduce?

_________________
-- Mark

Insane, surely you remember HL clearly stated that ALL those issues have been resolved, and all is good now.

I'm aware of that. Let me clarify.

If SC were to license and/or charge a fee to allow for multiple receivers from a personal server, wouldn't there be an issue with charging that fee considering all receivers can harvest from one disc transferred to the server? SC no longer has permission to produce more 8125 discs, so how would it be within rights to charge a fee for multiple receivers utilizing those songs even if the KJ owned one copy of that disc?

Look at the DT Cloud issues about pulling songs when licenses expires. I'm beginning to side that a personal server with multiple receivers won't work unless a particular song can only be played once in a 24 hour period, thus s/w is needed to assure that. Food for thought.

_________________
-- Mark

And with the 24 hour wait time between a song being able to be played again, could actually also screw up the next night as well say if a song was played at 11:58 PM, someone tomorrow would have to wait until 11:58, so that song could not be played earlier. Making almost a two day wait (unless someone sings it after midnight).

I'm starting to see the downside of things.

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

Seems the same issue is there when SC "blesses" a media shifter with an audit. Aren't they then giving official "ok" to the copy?

Mr Boo when you pass an audit you are given permission to use those discs on ONE system only, and that is only as long as you possess the disc's in a 1-1 manner.

The company in question had 1 disc for every track on the server and was using it to supply tracks to each location. They were running 3 shows at the same time making them 1-3 not 1-1 and that was found to be in violation of the law.

Being a multi-rig company I do understand how costly and difficult it is to keep 3 or more rigs up to date. Having to input and create separate books on a regular basis, having to purchase multiple copies of discs or tracks and keep up 3 systems of hardware is more work than most understand. Every track we add costs use 3 to 4 times what it costs a single op. Every time we upgrade mics instead of buying 3 we have to buy 12 and so on. We do however make more $$$ when all three (soon to be four) systems are in use.