Karaoke Forums

It's just a comparison, guy. A group of people who forced laws to change, for the better. Also, who said anything about piracy? Is that a normal discussion tactic of yours? Making things up to make your opponent look bad? We're talking about media-shifting, not pirating.

I was not trying to make you look bad. I don't have a tactic.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Dear heart, just because I'm doing this now doesn't mean that it's all I'm capable of doing.

I became an attorney because I like to solve problems. I have never once been sad that I did my job well enough that my client didn't need me anymore. In fact, that's kind of the point. There will always be more problems to solve, and if I ever get tired of it, I can just use some of my other skills to earn a living.

I am happy about being able to help Chartbuster, not only because it means more money, but also because it brings me closer to one of the main goals of this project.

And I forgot to bring my waders.

Here's a question for you counselor; what do clients sell?

Do they sell "songs" for people to sing to or,
do they sell "disks" that contain the songs people want to sing to?

Because it appears that you want to have it both ways depending on whether or not you can drag them into court. And if a purchase of a karaoke song whether it is digital download or on a compact disc, do you agree that a purchaser has purchased the "rights to use that song" regardless of original delivery method, to use that song in their karaoke show?

Remember, your answer cannot specify that you get to choose on a case-by-case basis, I'm looking for an ironclad policy that your clients will agree to.

It doesn't matter how I respond to your inquiry, because no matter what I say, you'll either twist it around to something I didn't say, or you'll refuse to accept it. So I decline to respond.

Your refusal to respond – is in fact, a response. And it appears that you simply want to keep your options open either way in order to be able to file a suit against a KJ .

As far as accepting any kind of guarantee; you're only correct in the fact that I will not accept one signed by anyone other than the owners of the company. And frankly counselor, there really is nothing wrong with that.

Actually, it's just that I'm tired of having my words twisted by a person whose sole apparent purpose in life is to find a way to destroy my clients. To what end, I can only speculate.

That's a bit of a stretch, not to mention overly dramatic. Having an opinion that does not look favorably on your client and actively seeking to destroy them are not even on the same planet, let alone in the same ballpark. However, it does make for a good story.

Besides, it's not like your clients need any help. They've been self destructing just fine on their own.

_________________
Birdofsong

So Chip, did the owner of the manufacturer of the vehicle you drive, sign your warranty? Or your computer, or television, DVD player, or anything else you own? I doubt it. The best you might get is a copy of his or her signature, if that.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

If it walks like a duck..........

Another drive-by?

The vendor for my computer, television, DVD player, or anything else that I own has not threatened to sue me for actually using those products. If they had done so, then yes I would require a guarantee from them or at the minimum someone of authority employed by them and not a third-party vendor. (which means I'm not about to ask their outside janitorial service, lawn care, snow removal or even law firm for a guarantee)

Besides, haven't you ever purchased a product that contained a small card that said "our guarantee to you…" And is ultimately signed – even if rubberstamped – by the president of the company?

I see you can't read either. What part of the best you might get is a copy of his or her signature, don't you understand?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

I think Kurt is a little more accessible than the owner of Sony.

_________________
Birdofsong

Of course I read that. I just didn't know if you are aware of it in Canada. And I should quantify that by saying "Eastern Canada."

If all you and Chip had were opinions, then I would have no problem with you. But when you sense that someone might have some claim against SC, you actively take steps to foment action on that person's part, even when it has absolutely nothing to do with your direct interests. Example 1: Contacting music publishers and making false or misleading statements about SC to them, in order to get them to "investigate" SC.

Counsel, you sound as though you're speaking from fact when the truth is you're simply speculating. You have absolutely no way of knowing what my contact with any music publishers could possibly be. You are once again simply fishing for information and you're inventing a scenario in order to paint me (once again) in the worst light possible.

I believe the biggest problem you actually have is that when either of us post information it is usually backed up with facts.

Your accusation above – although you would like it to sound like a fact – is nothing more than a guess presented in an inflammatory manner to elicit more information.

Is there something you are concerned about with these music publishers? If you let me know, I'll be sure that I ask a question for you next time I'm in contact. (And thanks for reminding me)

Just trying to be helpful.

Believe that if you like. But you might want to ask yourself: If a music publisher were to contact SC about something relating to licensing, would it really be that far-fetched for an attorney for the company--who represents it not only in litigation but in other matters--to be in on the details of that conversation?



Well, if that isn't the kettle calling the pot black, I don't know what is.

Are we agreed that "simply fishing for information" and "inventing a scenario in order to paint [someone] ... in the worst light possible" is wrong?



I have all the information I need for the moment.



Not at all. But it's nice that you think that we do. I'd hate for you to have to find someone else to hate.

Oh I don't believe it to be far-fetched at all. But you make it sound as though your client is being investigated for something at the moment....

You know, we're here to offer a sympathetic ear and helpful advice whenever that's necessary. That's why these forums are created, it's all about "people helping people."

And contrary to your belief and your overuse of the word "hate," I actually don't hate anyone. I may disagree with you, even to the point of pounding on the table, but I certainly don't hate you or your client.

Here's a quote you can use I made up myself:
"The karaoke world is a cash register, and the people in it are simply transactions."

I love watching you two fight. It's almost like a staged event, you have gotten so good at it. I have to say, Harrington, all this crap with investigations and everything else is REALLY taking the fun out of Karaoke. I hope you are pleased with yourself. I am not talking about anything but the fact that everyone has to watch everything they do instead of just enjoying the job. I know, when I work, i get into a zone, and just knowing that some investigator could be watching me just annoys me. I HATE being monitored and watched. I have ALWAYS hated that.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

I'm not unsympathetic to your view, but there is a really simple solution. I doubt any of our certified KJs feel like they have to "watch everything they do."

The people who cooperate with us find us to be fair and reasonable. People who contact us for help almost always receive the help they need. We'd rather have you as an ally rather than an enemy. Good faith matters.

Before we started filing lawsuits, we used to send letters to try to get people to get legal voluntarily. We got very little cooperation, and we found that a lot of people just went underground. I think SC has a long history of trying to be as delicate as possible, with the net result being that being delicate makes the piracy harder to police.