Karaoke Forums

Here is one to get it started, for those who might need to hear the answer said aloud: SC/PEP is only allowed to pursue alleged improper use of the CB trademark that occurred AFTER the November 2015 trademark purchase date, correct?

Correct.

Peptone cannot claim any damages that they may assert that occurred prior to their ownership of the mark.

No, not correct. The terms of our assignment of the trademark rights include the right to sue for past damages, including those that occurred prior to the date of assignment.

Please stop offering opinions about factual matters that stand outside your knowledge. You have not read the assignment agreement, so there is no possible way for you to know what is contained in it.

So as I said in another thread they know who you are and know you have been using CB.

BOHICA

_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet

More FUD. As I have repeatedly said, we are offering people who legitimately have CB original media the opportunity to register it, to get a covenant not to sue, and to get other benefits, all at a low price. Everyone will have multiple opportunities with ample time to take advantage of this program.

If you've got 1:1 correspondence on CB, you have nothing to worry about. This will be easy. The hardest part will be putting together an inventory of your CB discs, and that might take a bit of time if you don't already have the information--but it's information you should have anyway, if for no other reason than for insurance purposes.

I'm sure that lots of people would prefer that this material become freeware, but that's essentially a pro-pirate position, and it's not good for the industry.

I guess the main question that folks might be concerned about is this: Is it fair for a company to use information, gathered in the course of investigating its property, against someone for property acquired down the road? If this were completely legitimate, it would seem that there would be plenty of companies using this as a business model.

It would also seem to be of some concern for a judge, looking at the whole picture, to have much of a positive outlook at such a blatant situation. Not to mention, such a situation would serve to only perpetuate what many perceive to be a drastically damaged reputation...

The "terms of your assignment" is not written in the law. Cite in the law, where you have these rights and/or where they are assignable.

You could try it in court.... but I seriously doubt it will fly far at all. But you don't have a problem throwing as much as you think you can and see what sticks...


Please stop the fear mongering.


.

Jim has previously stated that he has not begun suing anyone for CB trademark infringement and will not start until the new terms are finished. I don't think he (Pep) would look very good if he tried to exercise their alleged "retro rights".

Read that as "Pay again." And btw, you'd be paying "for the honor of displaying a logo" because PEP didn't get any licenses at all for the tracks, didn't record the songs, didn't add the sweeps, press the discs, or even sell them in stores.



Now, THIS is FUD. (and "funny FUD" at that)

Since when have you concerned yourself with "the industry?" Because I don't see where suing a venue is beneficial to anyone "in the industry." Especially the honest KJ's because it simply serves to poison the well for everyone... some more.

So what exactly are you licensing?... a logo?

ok, because this is just going to go in circles.... best to lock THIS thread too and use the PM system to ask questions directly to Harrington.

@Chip, regardless of your stance on PEP, you do need to let others do as they need to do. While I agree its a shakedown, its definitely better in some peoples minds to pay a small fee now then maybe a big one later. Does it suck? Hell yes! But some people may want the security blanket feeling, and that is up to them to decide.

Some people need information.. and yes they will look to PEP for it, as they are the controllers of those products. In this instance, whether or not its right or wrong, its what PEP is doing. When you have proof that you are an IP lawyer, more people will have faith in you say here.

I don't disagree with you personally, but at the same time, if someone following your advice gets sued, they are the ones with the problems, not you. So let them make those decisions with the help of PEP and/or a lawyer before they potentially have bigger ones.