Karaoke Forums

Doing a little research I've discovered the scheme employed by SC is a recent and now fairly widespread practice. There are numerous companies and law firms who specialize in this legal (although ethically challenged) practice of intimidating people with little understanding of legal due process.

These copyright "legal teams" at the very large firms tend to be comprised of college students and novice law students with an interest in intellectual property law. They are hired through work study programs and internships paying on average $15 /hr. You can find these job postings in the campus work study offices and sometimes online.

The procedure as prescribed includes the following recommendations. Letters that presume the guilt of the recipient, carefully crafted and to include a demand for payment as settlement of a predetermined amount including unspecified "damages" for the alleged infringement.

The "settlement" amounts are specifically set to be low enough that the recipient will be unable to hire a competent attorney. The settlement amount should be set such that it quickly appears "generous" when compared to the hourly fees of the competent expert legal counsel required to reply or defend.

Letters should contain a "deadline" for reply in order to accelerate the sense of urgency and evoke a more immediate emotional response while minimizing the window in which the recipient may obtain relevent public counsel or advice.

The "settlement" or complaint is often presented as a bill or "debt" that must be paid and subsequent phone and written communications address it from that perspective. It deflects attention away from the yet unsubstantiated "complaint" - and on to the perception of this as the collection of a debt already owed.

The entire scheme is designed to elicit a quick financial response through advantage of the recipients anxiety and lack of adequate knowledge of the legal process.

Few cases actually go to court, save for the opportunity for summary judgement against recipients unlikley to contest a case. The statutory damages often cited in the letters tend to be off base. Even in the event of a deafult judgement (meaning you did not contest a case) the plaintiff still has to substantiate these damages in separate heraing. Statutory damages are at the discretion of the court and are supposed to have a correlation to "actual damages." In practice, these amounts have often been less than plaintiff's were seeking.

In cases that do go to court - it is the attorneys who tend too make more money than the plaintiffs. Reasonable Legal fees granted to the prevailing party are actually a bigger concern to a defendant than the actual damage awards.

I'm perfectly able to "debate it" on the other forum. Why would you think otherwise and why do you ask?
I really don't have much to say about it, other than I find it well thought out and informative. Do I need to say anything else?

What, you can't debate it on the other forum?

Coming from a Person who failed miserably in the karaoke arena and spends his time berating those that still offer it.

Since you didn't quote anyone, I am assuming that that was not directed at me (since you posted 2 minutes behind me).

I'm going to counter-sue for damages.

diafel...I nominate you to be our spokesperson.

First order of business is to talk to Kurt Slep regarding why SC is going about it the way they are, and give us a full report.

I'm taking Alan's course if I am ever approached. I paid for my disks, therefore I owe SC or any other manu nothing more. That includes time out of my life for an audit.

So for all of you wannabe lawyers out there, good luck proving "damages."

And good luck to Sc if they ever hit a real courtroom, (which will probably never happen since they KNOW they will lose) on proving "probable cause" (it actually doesn't apply in civil cases, but I'll use your choice of words here)

So for all of you wannabe lawyers out there, good luck proving "damages."

http://www.answers.com/topic/probable-cause

You might wanna hone up on your internet lawyer skills, Matlock. To summarize, in civil court a plaintiff MUST possess probable cause to levy a claim against a defendant.

I'll let you catch up on the lesson for the day. Feel free to respond as you normally deem necessary.

If the plaintiff does not have probable cause for the claim, she may later face a malicious prosecution suit brought by the defendant. Furthermore, lack of probable cause to support a claim means that the plaintiff does not have sufficient evidence to support the claim, and the court will likely dismiss it.

Here's the bottom line.

1. I have legally purchased, own, and have reciepts for all of my Sound Choice disc.
2. I have format shifted these to a single {1} laptop
3. I am following the one to one ratio.
4. Sound Choice has authorized format shifting. I have it in writing:

"Slep-Tone only sells its recordings in CD+G format. Slep-Tone authorizes its customers to “format shift” and transfer the contents of a genuine SOUND CHOICE
CD+G recording to a single computer or MP3 player, provided that the customer keeps the original copy of the CD+G in his possession as an archival copy that is not used."

So, since I'm following the guidelines set forth by Sound Choice, and am operating legally, if this ever went to court, the judge would have to laugh at this.

Like I said, after all is said and done, SC would have to prove in court that I'm guilty. And that's unlikely to happen.

"Slep-Tone only sells its recordings in CD+G format. Slep-Tone authorizes its customers to “format shift” and transfer the contents of a genuine SOUND CHOICE
CD+G recording to a single computer or MP3 player, provided that the customer keeps the original copy of the CD+G in his possession as an archival copy that is not used."