Karaoke Forums

I'm not talking about RE-sale or importing for distribution. Markets are global nowadays. I can SELL my music to anyone on earth via the internet. Legally. I can buy music from anywhere on earth. Legally. Two of my favorite CDs were released by a friend in the Netherlands. If you want them you need to buy them via a company in the Netherlands. You can't buy them from a US company.

You've never ordered karaoke or anything else from an overseas company?

_________________
Dave's not here.

If they're licensing the music, they ARE doing the right thing.

How can doing the RIGHT thing - licensing the music you use - an easier, less expensive way be wrong? The artists benefited MORE than if the music was licensed in the US. Sound Choice did the RIGHT THING in this instance - licensing the music. The convenience is what saved them money, not lower licensing fees and royalties. It's highly probable that they're paying MORE on both of those and still coming out ahead.

I'd much rather see a company take the "Sound Choice option" and license overseas than NOT license at all. If they're not licensed at all the only people that win are the crooks.

So I take it you think civilization ends at the borders of the USA?

_________________
Dave's not here.

I understand what you're saying moonrider, however look at this picture: SC and CB are NOW saying that the custom cdg's and the downloads you may have already purchased are "not authorized for commercial use."

Does your friend in the Netherlands place a restriction on how/where you can play this music that you've purchased?

I'm not saying that it's not morally right, but I am saying that it's technically legally wrong.
I'm not arguing with you that the artists could have gotten the better deal. It's a moot point.
What matters is that according to the law, the manus shouldn't be doing it. Just because you don't agree with a law doesn't mean you get to ignore it. You can't pick and choose which laws you follow. You either follow the law of the land or you pay the consequences. And apparently, this law is pretty well defined, regardless of whether it's morally or ethically right or wrong.
Until the law changes, it should be followed, regardless of what one thinks.
I just find it quite ironic that many are defending the manus actions which could be construed as illegal, all the while vilifying KJs for splitting hairs that are not nearly as fine, nor as well defined, if defined at all.
What I'm saying is, what's good for the goose is good for the gander. If you're going to hold some high moral standard for KJs, then you better be prepared to apply it evenly across the board and include the manus in that as well. Otherwise, you're nothing but a hypocrite.

Diafel, on my end at least, i do see it as a bit different. SC in this particular case, is paying for the music they use, getting the music to us in a more timely manner (in theory at least) and everyone is getting paid for what they created, until the pirates steal and download those new discs without paying for them. this is a step up actually. it is also easy to turn the table as well.....the anti-SC (for lack of a better term at the moment) condemn SC for having some (an admittedly not insignificant number) unlicensed tracks, but in the same breath condone boycotting them and supporting SGB, Karaoke Kurrents, Quick Hits, all of whom do not license anything at all. at least in the overseas scenario, SC pays, artist gets paid, we get music. it ain't perfect, but i feel it is better than anything else happening right now.

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

Stupid is as stupid does. If they want to lose their cut of the performance royalties for those tracks (yes - they get them) when they're already "struggling to survive", that's their prerogative. Don't use 'em.



He requires that his music be licensed for public performance. Just like I do.

_________________
Dave's not here.

Not the question.

The question is: Do you restrict your customers based on where they are allowed to play this music? Do you say it's okay to play cd #1 ONLY at home and cd #2 is okay to play in public and if you want to play the songs from cd #1 in public you have to buy cd #3?

Because that's exactly what SC & CB is doing.....

Then there's our disagreement. Just like Ralph Waldo Emerson, just like Henry David Thoreau, and just like Martin Luther King, I believe:

"By the sentiment of duty. An immoral law makes it a man’s duty to break it, at every hazard. For virtue is the very self of every man. It is therefore a principle of law that an immoral contract is void, and that an immoral statute is void. For, as laws do not make right, and are simply declaratory of a right which already existed, it is not to be presumed that they can so stultify themselves as to command injustice."

You believe the right thing IS to obey the law, regardless of the injustices it creates.

Fair enough. That's a fundamental difference of philosophy that means we'll never be able to agree on this. I'll debate it with you no more.

_________________
Dave's not here.

No. That's simply stupid. You lose an income stream that has the potential to be larger than the sales of a few extra units of CD #3. PLUS you lose customers by inconveniencing them. Stupid.

. . . but it's their stuff to be stupid with if they like.

_________________
Dave's not here.

Then you are simply contradicting yourself: you say on one hand that you won't support the pirate manufacturers because what they do is wrong and yet it's still perfectly okay if you to break or simply ignore the law if for any reason, it seems to inconvenience you then just label it as "unjust" and stupid....

You appear to want the law to work only your way and when it doesn't fully accommodate you, you'll simply call it "stupid" or unjust and ignore it anyway.... Why bother with the law in the first place? Why vilify the manufacturers for piracy when all they are doing is ignoring laws they feel are just as "stupid" or "unjust" too?

You can't have it your way all the time. There are guidelines (laws) that we must all operate with.

You claim you don't host anymore because that would be supporting piracy and breaking the law, yet you are here defending your right to break the law?

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth....

"If I contradict myself, then I contradict myself. I am great. I contain multitudes."
— Ralph Waldo Emerson (quoting Walt Whitman in the essay, "Self Reliance")

_________________
Dave's not here.

Quote poets all you want, but when you just flat out go against law because you disagree with it, that makes you a CRIMINAL and does NOTHING towards actually CHANGING what you think is an injustice.
The best course in such a case is to actually get off your @$$ and DO SOMETHING about it, rather than just defy the law you don't like.
You'll never get anything accomplished except to gain a jail term the way you're going.

So Di, do you use Sweet Georgia Brown, Super Core, or Karaoke Kurrents? If so, that makes you a CRIMINAL by your own definition as well. Heaven forbid that you would use SC, CB, or PHM to keep your moral hypocrisy in tact.

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

Uhm that was Walt Whitman

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Sorry, but you don't get to turn this around onto me. I'm not the one vilifying one side of the argument, while holding up the other as pure and clean as the driven snow.

"Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye." ~ Matthew 7:5 King James Version

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

Whoops, yes it was!

_________________
Dave's not here.

Uhhhh.... What (new) music has SC gotten to us lately in a more timely manner?

You are spot on, Moon. They could go overseas and sell direct to the end user. The thing is, SC is looking to sell full sets of Gems ( not onesies and twosies of discs), AND request licensing fees.

I don't know how many will be willing to shoot thousands overseas to a company that eventually would be out of sight and mind. A few buck for a disc or two? Sure.

Also, as bad as trying to get licensing fees from people now might be, I simply don't think they could pull it off at all once they acknowledge no licensing of their own here.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

This is interesting and it could be relevant to the situation of SC manufacturing in the UK. I have previously been able to purchase backing tracks from Ameritz. But now when I enter their URL, all I get is a web page with this message:

We're sorry but it seems like you live in Canada. We are not licensed to sell music in Canada.

If you do not live in Canada please email us talk2us@ameritz.co.uk or call us on +44 (0) 1925 438104 and we will lift this block. Thanks.

Seems there have been some conditions imposed on Ameritz lately!