Karaoke Forums

Does this mean that SC/PEP will be paying out additional monthly fees/royalties to both EMI and Sony for every monthly license that PEP sells to the KJs and Venues for their freedom to use the downloaded/media shifted SC karaoke tracks at their commercial shows?


The statement above (in RED) is very misleading. The way it reads, it sounds like PEP/SC is going to give the KJ or Venue access to ALL 16,500 SC "Red Logo" tracks if they pay for a monthly license from PEP/SC. This is NOT true. PEP/SC is NOT giving you anything except maybe peace of mind for buying into their HELP membership program. All that PEP/SC is really saying is, they now won't care how you obtained these specific tracks (whether it be 1, 100, 1,000, or even all 16,500 "Red Logo" tracks), as long as they were downloaded at a bit rate of 192 or higher. PEP/SC is NOT giving you access to these tracks, you have to get your own access to any/all of these tracks.





I am curious. Who were those people that you say planned to profit from SC's demise? I don't recall it being anyone here (in the K-Scene Forum). From the many post I've read here (from those referred to as the "Nay-Sayers"), the only common reason I recall them wishing for SC's demise, was because they didn't like the way SC was going about their Lawsuits and (lack of?) investigative procedures.

It's funny. Sound Choice thinks it is the only game in town. Party Tyme, Allstar, the SBI group, Zoom, Karaoke Version, and others are making great music in a timely fashion. I run very little Sound Choice, and I still have great singers, good size rotations, and make a decent living. Sound Choice is NOT the end all be all of the Karaoke market, and haven't been in quite a few years. The owners I work for are quite happy.BTW, I do not use Backstage,MM, or any of the other crappy brands. I just get tired of SC tooting their own horn all the time, and telling us we can't run a good show without their product. It is ENTIRELY possible to have a great show without SC.

It's all nice that SC won the day. But really, STOP saying that we can't run good shows without their product. It's VERY bad form.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

to be fair, SC has not said that as much as the other hosts on here have.
like this is the first of SC really touting combating piracy instead of just recovering money from thieves. the other hosts were the ones who said they were combating piracy.
make sure not to get the two confused, it does make a difference.
by the way, i am with you too. my second and third rigs do not have and SC and do just fine. i think Joe said it, "SC is good, not god".

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

All Star has only added 8 tracks for downloads since September of 2014.

This is a listing for the most recent Party Tyme disc -

1. All About That Bass - Meghan Trainor - A Major
2. Uptown Funk - Mark Ronson Ft. Bruno Mars - D Minor
3. Shake It Off - Taylor Swift - Vocal Mix - G Major
4. Animals - Maroon 5 - E Minor
5. Blank Space - Taylor Swift - F Major
6. Centuries - Fall Out Boy - E Minor
7. Love Me Harder - Ariana Grande & The Weeknd - C# Minor
8. Me And My Broken Heart - Rixton - C Minor
9. Bang Bang - Jessie J., Ariana Grande & Nicki Minaj - C Major
10. Best Day Of My Life - American Authors - D Major
11. This Is How We Do - Katy Perry - A Minor
12. Maps - Maroon 5 - C# Minor
13. Try - Colbie Caillat - Bb Minor
14. Classic - MKTO - Db Major
15. Birthday - Katy Perry - E Major
16. Pompeii - Bastille - A Major

Hardly what I would call timely.

The overseas labels blow away the US labels in every regard.

_________________
-Chris

I have to agree with this!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Here's a thought: It seems that some significant publishers were involved in this litigation. However, aren't there a number of OTHER publishers that might want to get in on this action? It seems that once they get wind of these developments, they would want to get in on the gravy train as well...Unfortunately, once that starts, the costs of being a part of this program could continue to skyrocket...

The educated guess is Kurt/Insurance company agreed to pay between 200-300K. Paul Stacy does not sue you and walk away empty handed. Just ask any those who have dealt with him in cases before. My prediction is business as usual going forward. Sign up as many as possible to the HELP program, sell the Gem sets and sue any venue that you can find that is playing SC tracks that has done neither of the above. Where else is the revue going to come from? New production? I'm not holding my breath... Repressing of SC discs? Nope, they don't have a license with Stingray anymore... It will take a helluva lot of Gem sets and HELP memberships to pay publisher advances (if they can get them to even license them) and production costs of the new music.

Welcome to the new reality... Grab a hard drive from wherever and pay the HELP license and you are all set!

I am still trying to wrap my head around this whole thing. Several questions come to mind, none of which do I expect to be addressed by anyone in-the-know, but if they are, we will see where that takes us...

It appears that a back-room deal has been struck to avoid further litigation. It has been stated that the publishers are to get some financial gains from the proceeds of the very suspect activity that is not directly related to the alleged wrongdoing for which they were suing...from what I have read in these forum pages, similar deals have been struck with publishers before, but never resulting in them getting a piece of the pie generated by counterfeit material.

SC/PEP has stated before that they cannot grant you any rights concerning the rest of the work connected to the trademark, which supposedly is the very thing being "licensed" in the HELP program. It has has also been stated that they believe that removing the trademark from these works is illegal, which implies that the entire work is a single entity. If these statements are correct, how is it possible to create an effective license for a work for which is not wholly covered, which is a work whose alleged illegality is the basis for their own litigation model? And to top it off, the publishers involved in the litigation (which only represents a small percentage of the works in question) are to get some of the proceeds of this activity, which is being generated from licensing of the trademark, which they do not even have a vested interest in?

Given the accuracy of these views of the facts in this matter, how in the world could such an agreement hold up under the scrutiny of the courts? I could not help but think that if this agreement was seen by a judge experienced in IP law as part of the settlement of this litigation, he would have recognized the holes in the language. This would tend to make one believe that this part of their agreement wasn't IN the litigation settlement, but in a separate contract. If this is the case, it would take a pursuit by the interested parties--the consumers--to draw the legitimacy of such an agreement into question.

Obviously, unless everyone decides to take the advice given earlier and just "fuhgeddaboudit", we can enjoy the ensuing forum discussion, but will we see comment from anyone actually involved in this web of intrigue? Stay tuned...

To summarize, let me pose this question: Has anyone ever hear of a company trying to legitimize counterfeit products???

Consumers have no standing in the court, because they don't own rights or manufacture anything.

Attorneys General could have a say citing RICO, but that never happens because the money is too little.

But that does not really answer the question about whether it is ILLEGAL for a company to profit from counterfeit material...

This statement is false:  


Stingray (and other suppliers of karaoke content) may own 100% of the copyright of the master recordings, but they have no claim whatsoever to the underlying compositions!  The publishers own 100% of the compositions (the songs) - and they most certainly can and do sue for copyright infringement if the usage is not licensed!  

The “big 3” publishers only control about half of the songs in the catalogs of SC, Stingray, and other similar suppliers - and the rest of the song shares are controlled by hundreds of smaller publishers.  No one has any right to sell karaoke recordings of songs in (or into) the US without first securing licenses with ALL of the publishers owning shares of the songs.  

Karaoke syncronization licenses are required, and the societies like Harry Fox cannot license karaoke sync.  Those rights can only be licensed by the publishers themselves. Note that these licenses have nothing to do with public performance rights (ASCAP/BMI), which are also required, but much easier to obtain.  

Further, Copyright Law does NOT allow anyone to make a copy of a recorded composition (such as into a laptop) for professional use - it only allows a consumer to make 1 copy for personal use.  So whereas the great concern has been over not getting sued by SC for trademark infringement - the real concern should be over getting sued by publishers for copyright infringement.  

And the big question is:  Has Kurt Slep’s new company secured licenses with all the publishers for use of the songs that he is currently selling into the US?

Everything we are distributing in the US is fully licensed for distribution in the US. That has been the case for a long time.

That's because they work under a different set of rules and laws.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

If I were into that kind of thing, I suppose I could feel a bit pleased with myself for posing points that no one seems to be able to comment on...but, I would much rather have the thoughts and comments...........

you did not take one thing into account....

Licensees pay a monthly fee under the HELP program and, in exchange, won’t have to worry about lawsuits from Phoenix or from participating publishers.

the publishers are going along with the piracy as well.

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

James: Both you and Mr. Harrington are wrong. Twisting the rules to suit your needs or conspiring against Copyright Law by agreeing with yourselves will not protect you in the event the publishers find out what you’re doing. And it’s only a matter of time before they ask for a list of everyone who’s bought into this, and go after them all.

To be clear: When you make a copy of a "karaoke work" - that involves BOTH the recording AND the song. You do need 100% rights from the owner of the master recording - but you ALSO need 100% of the publishers of the underlying composition! That is the law. As one major publisher already clarified:

"DJs are not permitted to burn a copy for professional use. Creating a copy (also known as reproduction) is a protected right under US copyright law. The law speaks to creating a copy for personal use (i.e. only the individual has access to it). There is no defacto right to creating a copy for professional use. And unless we grant professional use copies, that right is expressly reserved."

And that is what it sort of sounds like to me as well.... That is why I asked this question in my earlier post (which seems to have gone unanswered by James Harrington)...

The HELP program includes a publisher's royalty pool that is paid out to participating publishers. The particular terms of that program are confidential.

I would point out, by the way, that if a particular activity would be piracy without authorization, that activity ceases to be "piracy" once authorization is obtained from the parties that hold the rights.

Right...so a "Royalty Pool" is paying all of the publishers (since Sony/EMI only represent a percentage of the songs and besides the big 3 - there over a thousand small ones)... Can you please provide the assurances to the professional KJ's on this forum that the same publishers have granted the rights to make a copy of these tracks for professional use? In the absence of such rights it appears as though you are misleading your customers. I think everyone gets the concept of protection from your trademark litigation. But you have said nothing regarding the real issue and that is the publishing rights.

It seems as though you just want to sell your remaining sets for as much as you can and sign up as many HD users as possible under HELP and when the publishers decide to put an end to it, you will have no choice but turn over your list of customers.