Karaoke Forums

so DT and PRLLC ARE related?

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

The word I remember being used is affiliated to describe their relationship, which could mean they are independent branches of the same tree. They are somehow two organizations working together, in some mysterious manner. That is what has bothered me from the beginning the mysterious nature of this relationship. Anytime I have tried to nail down any information concerning what PR intends on doing I only get this stonewall. One has to ask one's self if PR is truly serious about defending the CB trademark, why haven't they filed any new suits since the collapse of CB, and why haven't they at least resumed the auditing and certification of CB product out here? Have a blessed day.

It means that I have nothing pertinent to share with the public on the topic of discussion.

That's ok James if and when PR/DT do finally get around to doing something I will probably be retired anyway. If I were taken to court by PR I could say honestly I did try and obtain information about the company and could find none. I could under oath truthfully state I thought they died with CB. Have a legal day.

One has to assume a connection between the two. DT's original library was CB's catalogue, with the unlicensed tracks deleted. PR owns the trademark.

While one company often licenses the use of their trademark to another, they don't allow the second company to delete that trademark and replace it with their own- unless the two are strongly affiliated.

My theory is that of two sides to the same coin. One company to sell tracks ( I don't know if the actually produce new tracks, but haven't heard of them doing so)- which would require a customer base. This company would not want the negative backlash that SC has created for their own, non-producing label.

The other company to develop income through SC's litigation model, with no worries about a customer base to offend and lose. Of course, after sitting back and watching SC's court results (and reading judges' comments) they may be a bit reticent. Add to that the fact that since they don't sell product, claiming damages through media shifting will be well nigh impossible.

The would mostl likely be seen as the perfect example of a litigation troll by the court, having purchased the trademark for the sole purpose of initiating lawsuits and/or trolling for "settlements".

After this amount of time, I'm beginning to think that PR kinda gets it....

This doesn't mean that SC couldn't use this company for a "partner" to make a case look bigger and more supported than it really is.

Cueball: Please note that I posted this BEFORE going to work......

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Where have you been? DT has been releasing new music every month for the past 6 months at least.

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

Just the terminology alone answers these particular directions of comment. As is the case with the initial release of tracks by DT (rehashed CB) it is possible that the tracks they have released were produced elsewhere...

Producing a track elsewhere? What does that have to do with anything, it is DT releasing the tracks. Karaoke companies often outsource studios all over for music tracks - but I doubt that is the case here. UK is famous for that. But even if they did outsource for their music, it is still new music being released under DT label in the final stage.

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

DT has been releasing tracks in their own name for several months now. Just check out Taylor Swift's "Red" album for starters.

I guess I should not have given everyone the benefit of the doubt concerning the differences in the areas we were discussing, i.e. releasing vs. producing/recording tracks...

But again it doesn't matter if they are PRODUCING their tracks, their releases of the tracks are theirs whether they are producing their own music or outsourcing other studios. It IS DT tracks being released.

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

Part of the discussion was focusing on the production end, so that is why I commented in that direction.

It just seems that if you do not use in-house production, putting out materials readily available elsewhere is just unnecessary excess, unless someone wants to pay more to line another company's pockets...

Only some of the stuff I've seen is readily available - ie new releases (todays hits) - which I would expect from almost any karaoke manu to put out since there are people who stay brand loyal and only buy from them. Much of their new stuff is exclusive to DT - like the unplugged series - you won't find those through anyone else - I personally think it's a small niche market, but those who have bought them seem to like them. Plus I have seen some 'new' releases from them that aren't out on other labels as of yet. Production doesn't mean they have to MAKE the music. Sometimes it is cheaper to outsource a studio to make it for them or buy something that is already made that other manus haven't released than to hire and pay for the studio time, engineers, masterers, musicians, producers, etc. But again this is all on the speculation that they aren't making their own tracks in house, I think they are but I don't know for sure. But it really doesn't matter either way - the DT label is being put on new tracks, so they are producing music for release whether it be already available or not. ALL manus are going to put out the hottest hits, hence repeats between different manus.

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

I don't use downloads- the very least reason that there is no licensing available for use in a U.S. based karaoke show. Downloads seem to be licensed for home use only. This is only one reason why I didn't know about DT's new productions, which were never germaine to this discussion anyway...

The gist of which was whether PR and DT are connected- which they are, or PR would never allow them to delete the CB trademark and replace it with DT's.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I believe there has been discussion on here in the past about how CB's investor arrangement was for the investor group to have control over the audio production and the music created, and others holding the trademark related details. Again, it would be interesting to see how all of this is interpreted by the courts in light of all the negativity and mystery surrounding those arrangements. It just comes across as fishy and potentially messy...

Read the labels on your CDs again, Joe. They are the same.
Manufacturers do not license for public performance, that licensing is the responsibility of the venue. That's what keeps ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC in business.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

That's fine, but not germaine. The question was whether PR and DT were connected. My answer:

"While one company often licenses the use of their trademark to another, they don't allow the second company to delete that trademark and replace it with their own- unless the two are strongly affiliated.

My theory is that of two sides to the same coin. One company to sell tracks- which would require a customer base. This company would not want the negative backlash that SC has created for their own, non-producing label.

The other company to develop income through SC's litigation model, with no worries about a customer base to offend and lose. Of course, after sitting back and watching SC's court results (and reading judges' comments) they may be a bit reticent. Add to that the fact that since they don't sell product, claiming damages through media shifting will be well nigh impossible.

The would most likely be seen as the perfect example of a litigation troll by the court, having purchased the trademark for the sole purpose of initiating lawsuits and/or trolling for "settlements".

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Sort of like buying a license to go fishing Joe. That is what of these suits filed by these two manus are legal fishing expeditions, hoping they can land that big blue fin tuna. Have a blessed day.

Could someone be kind enough to suggest a better trademark registration site than Trademarkia?

Their last registration of the CB trademark shows as Big Mama's in 2009, and nothing for Piracy Recovery.

I know that can't be right, with CB gone.

A more up to date site would be greatly appreciated.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

How about the USPTO?
http://tess2.uspto.gov/bin/gate.exe?f=s ... 1h0uko.1.1