Karaoke Forums

All Documents are on RFCExpress here -

http://www.rfcexpress.com/lawsuits/copy ... l/summary/

The Main Complaint can be seen here -

http://1drv.ms/1far7RA

Summary -

DigiTrax claims to have been in contact with Universal to negotiate a license to use material copyrighted to Universal for karaoke and related products..
Emails were exchanged between Digitrax and Universal.
Allegedly, an agreement was reached via email, but without a "long form" license (I take this to mean that no actual license agreement was produced and signed)
Allegedly, Universal grants preliminary use of Universal content pending the final long form license agreement.
Allegedly, Digitrax pays Universal a fee for use of tracks based on email negotiations.
Universal appears to change its mind and requests the music be taken down.
Digitrax complies.
Digitrax sues Universal for breach of license (though it appears it is an informal license negotiated only via email)

....and here we are.

_________________
-Chris

There is no doubt that this really sucks for the folks that subscribed to the Karaoke Cloud. For those that subscribed and also read these forums, the warnings were given many times over.

I still believe that Cloud based services are the future of content delivery for karaoke. The model already works for the software, video, and music industries. The karaoke companies are just late to the game and have to get all the properly shaped pegs in the properly shaped holes.

There will be those that look at this and will accuse Digitrax and willfully infringing on Universal's copyrights and/or trying to pull a fast one on the subscribers of the Karaoke Cloud. in fact, the only thing I can see they are guilty of is not getting everything in writing and signed by the right folks before putting things in play. They were too anxious to get things rolling before all the proper agreements were in place.

But I do sympathize with Digitrax. If they do in fact have an email chain with someone at Universal saying it is okay, and in in fact Universal accepted the money, then there should be a good faith effort on both sides to wrap it all up ASAP. That is effectively an email handshake and should be honored in my opinion. But there is a lot of money at stake here and money changes everything..

_________________
-Chris

I read somewhere that it has a lot to do with tracks that were formerly owned by Chartbuster that Digitrax claims to be theirs now. The problem is that Chartbuster never had those songs licensed properly so they had no rights to transfer ownership of those tracks to anyone. Therein lies the rub.

Seems like Chartbuster isn't much different than the people selling loaded hard drives on the internet. Sell whatever you can until you get caught. Then change the name of your company until you get caught with your hand in the cookie jar again. Rinse and repeat.

Music publishers screw manus... manus screw KJs... KJs get screwed.

_________________
Wam bam thank you m'am.

Does no one having a damn working phone at either place?

Don't know about Universal, but lots of luck with DT

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

This is So Typical of the music publishers.

Publisher: Oh yeah we'd love to give you a license. send us 20 grand and we will let you start using our music now while we get your official paperwork in order.

Karaoke Company: Thanks, that sounds great. here 20 thousand dollars.

Publisher 1 year later (Different person): we never gave you permission to use our music, I don't care what your email or this person from our company said. we're going to sue you Using attorney Paul Stacy (Where have we heard this name before? Hint:EMI Vs. Slep-tone) if you don't stop using our music now. By the way, that 20 grand check we cashed is ours to keep because we think we deserve that.


I hope they nail universals (@$%&#!) to the wall.

_________________
Sal "Kjmann" Esquivel
Karaoke With Sal - Website

THE POM POM GIRLS ARE OUT IN FULL FORCE ON THIS ONE. AMAZING HOW MUCH KOOL AID SOME PEOPLE CAN DRINK.

It is not just the publishers that are playing games and using the legal system to try to recover extra money, but the legal process manus as well. The hosts bought their product in good faith and thought it was an investment in their business. It turned out that the producers of that product at a later date decided to impose new rules and restrictions that were not in play when the original purchase was made. If the hosts would have been aware that certain companies would come back at a later date and try to rewrite the rules, how many would have bought in the first place? It is indeed all about money and power and who has it and who doesn't. This ownership issue is all an illusion as far as the public commercial application of any of this material. No clear line of ownership can be established and all this gray area does is make the lawyers rich, and leaves everyone in the industry exposed to lawsuits.

LR, exactly what rule(s) did the karaoke manufacturers change?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Who do you think has the better lawyers on retainer? Exactly.

Come now tim back in the day if you purchased your karaoke equipment and discs from the mom and pop brick and mortar concerns, there was no mention about after purchase there would be audits required by the manus. You bought the material under the illusion it belongs to you and you can use it. There was no mention that it could not be used to run a karaoke service business. If the purchasers would have known it was not kosher to run such a business in the first place, how many would have gone into business the right way? The only hosts being punished are the one's who did try to do things right. The pirates run their risk and if they get caught they just agree to settle by licensing GEM, or subscribing to Cloud.

LR,, it comes with the changing of times and technology. Back then there wasn't computer karaoke that forced those manufacturers that really cared about their product to adopt new rules to address that change.

_________________
The Line Array Experiment is over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

LR are you purposely being dense? All over the discs and packaging, it said do not duplicate without permission. This all started when people wanted to duplicate their music onto hard drives. No one, except Rodney, which was dealt with, has been sued for using their discs in the intended way.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

No. He's Just Naturally Dense.

_________________
Sal "Kjmann" Esquivel
Karaoke With Sal - Website

You may wish to re-read your discs, if made in the U.S. they don't say that at all. They say NO UNAUTHORIZED COPIES - yet no not specify what is or is not authorized. For instance, copies made for back up and single site use ARE AUTHORIZED whether the mfr. gives permission or not, while copies made for re-sale or multi-site use are not. Completely different from no copies allowed.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I don't think it's a matter of density so much as it is a matter of pretense. The manus material was for sale and hosts bought it to run their shows, at the time of purchase it was believed by the purchaser they had paid for ownership of the material. It turned out the underlying material is not owned by the manus but rather licensed from the true owners. Currently all a host is getting when they do license GEM or subscribe to Cloud is the assurance that SC or DT/PR/CB/WWD won't come after them legally. It does not stop the possibility of legal problems with the true owners of the underlying material. It is like CAVS said SC is selling protection for a product they don't fully own. At best all they can offer any host is limited protection from legal suits arising from the use of the material the host has purchased.

The authorization of copies is dependant on each manufacturer's policy. So far only two manufacturing companies have instuted audits as requirements of gaining permission. The others have decided to trust the user that they have the actual discs to back up what they have on hard drive.

_________________
The Line Array Experiment is over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

Joe, really? So if there is a sign somewhere that says "no unauthorized entry", that it only applies to me if someone in authority tells me? BTW the copying without authority is for personal use only, not commercial use. There are a limited number of exceptions but you can go to the obligatory Acts and read it for yourself.

LR, again see what I wrote about copying. Better yet maybe you guys should read up on IP law or talk to a few IP attorneys.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

The only people who seem to care, even a little bit, about people copying their karaoke tracks to a hard drive are the Slep Brothers. NOBODY else does. The cheer leaders care but they have NO POWER to do anything about it except whine. No one is going to invest the time and money to track down an individual KJ because there is no real money there. Sound Choice is willing to settle for 5 grand every now and again. They have added less than a dozen people to their certified lists in the last year. What a money tree they have there!