Karaoke Forums

I was beaten to the punch with this software, just released today.

Remove unwanted images from CDG files automatically. For instance, it will "scan" the unwanted image (i.e. a logo) and search your entire library for it, and remove it.

They can't SAY that this is what it is for (due to the Digital Millenium Act), but make no mistake, removing logos is what it is for.

P.S. - remove the trade dress, too

Thanks CAVS. SC - you got exactly what you had coming to you. Cockroaches.

http://www.cavsusa.com/help/graphicsedi ... Manual.htm

_________________
I'm not a cheerleader, but I paid for my pom poms with my own money!

Great, this way a KJ can display it's own logo to promote it's business and not someone else for free

And removing trademarks would be an actionable offense.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Sure it is. Prove it though.

_________________
I'm not a cheerleader, but I paid for my pom poms with my own money!

Not that difficult. A forensic examination of the soundtrack would do it.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Not only that, but if the only thing being removed is a logo, the publishers are still recognizable on sight. I mean, I just *sing* karaoke, and it's not hard for me to see, "Oh, that's yellow on blue, in that specific font? That's a Chartbuster track."

_________________
Co-host of The Greatest Song Ever Sung (Poorly), a karaoke-themed podcast

Not to mention a lot of time and effort, plus the cost of the program, to do what exactly? To save a $150 audit fee?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

I would imagine it would be if you were selling the tracks.

But I don't believe there is any law that prevents me from removing/altering the trademark (and or the audio) on any track that I purchase and use within my business.

I can buy a Ford truck as a delivery van for my business and remove their "trademark" all I want - it doesn't damage them in the least - I still bought the truck from them and I'm not using the mark "as a mark."

Otherwise Timberlea, please show me the law that says I can't remove it when I'm not selling it.

Interesting concept though. Since piracy recovery, LLC owns only the trademark for chart buster, I can only assume that removing that trademark... Well, you know.


PS: more surprises to come!

That's why I said remove the trade dress, too. This advice is part of Mr. Harrington's previous statements, that trade dress is, or may be considered, property of the karaoke music manufacturer.

Changing that is very easy. To be safe, I'd recommend setting the CDG background to transparent and laying it over a custom made background.

_________________
I'm not a cheerleader, but I paid for my pom poms with my own money!

To read the full article, go here: http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/165700/Trademark/Configuration+Trade+Dress+Claims+Can+Be+Costly

Sounds like CAVS is sick of being accused of trademark infringement, so they struck back. I am kind of interested to see what Harrington has to say about this. If you can take away the logos AND the sweeps, and redo them in your own style, this could be a game changer.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

cavs is not the first to offer .cdg editing......

cdgfix has been there for a few years now. and has been upgraded to supercdgfix to include ripping scdg's.

although the interface for the cavs programs looks way easier to use!

_________________
It's all good!

I have been using CDGFix for years, and you can remove logos and such, but it would take a very long time to do 10,000 cdg files (months). If your time isn't worth anything then go for it.....if it is worth something it would be way cheaper to get "varified" I mean certified. NOW IF YOU ARE TRYING TO PULL SOME WOOL that is another story.

To have a nice uniform, GENERIC collection.............might be worth it to some.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

When has CAVS been accused of trademark infringement?

As others have noted, software of this type has been in the marketplace for years. There is nothing new about it as far as I can tell.

If you want to use software to remove the entire graphical display from copies of tracks that you purchased legitimately, all to avoid a $150 audit fee, I suppose you could do that. That seems like a lot of trouble, pretty much to the point of irrationality.

I'm sure you're not advocating that someone do this to tracks that they didn't purchase legitimately, right? Because that would be a copyright infringement, which we would almost certainly pursue...and the removal of the graphics in an attempt to avoid detection would be strong evidence of willful infringement.

I have seen it here, people trying to say that CAVS discs are illegal and you shouldn't use them, and all that crap.

As for your $150 audit fee, I would want to avoid THAT like the PLAGUE!!! I'll tell you why, too. I already paid for my discs. I won't pay another dime for them, especially since they are now, anywhere from 6 to 8 years old. Besides, SC's discs were expensive enough WHEN I bought them.

I'm not advocating anything. I would just like to see SC get beaten because of the headaches and expense they have caused legitimate people in the business. I know, I know, the cheering squad will come in here and say what a wonderful experience it was to get audited. But I notice that even one or two of the cheering section have started to question the motives of SC, and have called for changes. You can't keep going after your customers and expect them to keep them happy, ESPECIALLY when you are one of ONLY two companies IN THE ENTIRE MUSIC BUSINESS that are auditing their OWN CUSTOMERS!!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

So who hear ever said CAVs was illegal? I've heard people say it is slow, bulky, not liking them for whatever reason. I have heard and it was confirmed that any CAVS units that have SC on them are illegal as SC never gave permission for their product to be on them. I don't think I ever heard SC saying or accusing CAVs of putting their (SC) product on the units. But instead, a third party doing so.

Smooth, you're right, you bought the discs but not the permission to format shift, and there's the rub.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

But, unfortunately, unlike just about every other active karaoke company out there, SC charges for that permission. That's the greedy part. That's the part that makes them lose respect, in my eyes.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Then don't use their product. Smooth, do you go on like this about other companies whose policies you don't like?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Sound Choice.

Please look up the current lawsuit between cavs and slep-tone where they were specifically referred to as "illegal cavs machines" in a broadcasted email by sound choice.

if you have any other questions, please contact Harrington – I believe he is the attorney of record.

(try to keep up)