Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums
https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/

Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
https://mail.karaokescene.net/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=36660		 Page 1 of 8
Author:  RaokeBoy [ Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:25 am ]
Post subject:  Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
The 9th Circuit held on Jan. 18, 2017, that the Lanham Act does not support Slep-tone's claims of trademark infringement for media shifting. The shifted tracks are not a "good" as contemplated by the Act. Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. v. Wired for Sound Karaoke, No. 14-17229 (9th Cir. 2017).
http://j.st/4LKB
http://law.justia.com/cases/federal/app ... 01-18.html
Author:  JimHarrington [ Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:39 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
Gosh, it's a good thing we have those service mark registrations. Those weren't at issue in this case, and we've already moved forward with asserting those.
Author:  Paradigm Karaoke [ Fri Jan 20, 2017 3:15 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
just so i understand, you are going to assert that by doing karaoke shows using karaoke tracks that you sold to them puts them in competition with you?
Author:  Karaoke Croaker [ Fri Jan 20, 2017 8:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
They are putting their faith in the fact that some people with still buy the Gem series out of some kind of fear of being sued by the men behind the curtain. It's their form of bullying.....or strong arming if you will. They are circling the drain.
Author:  The Lone Ranger [ Fri Jan 20, 2017 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
Karaoke Croaker wrote:
They are putting their faith in the fact that some people with still buy the Gem series out of some kind of fear of being sued by the men behind the curtain. It's their form of bullying.....or strong arming if you will. They are circling the drain.


8) You mean lease GEM since you cannot outright own it like the original discs that were purchased. It is the fear factor which is PEP's only means of generating sales. Starving the beast financially is the only way to stop the legal harassment. As for circling the drain SC/CB/PEP has been doing that for the last 7 years. The trouble is the drain is stopped up and it needs to be cleaned out, so that the water, I mean that business can flow again.
Author:  Karaoke Croaker [ Sat Jan 21, 2017 2:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
The fear factor has been dying a slow death as well. No high profile suits being won by the dynamic duo in a very long time and these judgements certainly can't be helping their PR. There are more pirates popping up every day and they use their SC tracks with no fear of being harassed any longer. It's like speeding down a highway that only gets patrolled on New Years Eve. Now they are just trying to create a new speed trap. there will always be some low lying fruit that they will pick off the tree but anyone with a lawyer will scare them off because they know they will lose ii it ever gets to a court room. Having to pay the defendants legal fees a few times will be the final nail in the coffin for them.
Author:  Paradigm Karaoke [ Sat Jan 21, 2017 5:18 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
this is why i asked him guys.
Author:  JimHarrington [ Sat Jan 21, 2017 8:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
just so i understand, you are going to assert that by doing karaoke shows using karaoke tracks that you sold to them puts them in competition with you?



No.

The problem is not and has never been the people who use the tracks we sold them. It's the people who use tracks who never bought them at all.
Author:  djdon [ Sat Jan 21, 2017 9:54 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
JimHarrington wrote:
Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
just so i understand, you are going to assert that by doing karaoke shows using karaoke tracks that you sold to them puts them in competition with you?



No.

The problem is not and has never been the people who use the tracks we sold them. It's the people who use tracks who never bought them at all.


So, you're going to continue to sue for the same thing, just using the 'service mark infringement' angle instead of the trademark infringement angle.

"Is displaying the 'service mark' likely to cause confusion among patrons who view the mark?"

"No."

"Case dismissed."
Author:  Paradigm Karaoke [ Sat Jan 21, 2017 4:58 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
JimHarrington wrote:
Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
just so i understand, you are going to assert that by doing karaoke shows using karaoke tracks that you sold to them puts them in competition with you?



No.

The problem is not and has never been the people who use the tracks we sold them. It's the people who use tracks who never bought them at all.

i don't understand, the service mark is different than the trademark.
Author:  The Lone Ranger [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
JimHarrington wrote:


No.

The problem is not and has never been the people who use the tracks we sold them. It's the people who use tracks who never bought them at all.



8) The problem is Jim that your company PEP has turned into a one trick pony. That the repeated failure to produce any new product has left you with only one option, that is to try and legally brow beat hosts into giving you part of their profits, in order to show a profit. Your efforts are a failure since there are more illegal hosts than ever and things aren't improving for the average KJ. If a host is waiting for you to fix things then they will be out of business before that ever happens. They better rely on their own skills. :spin: :spin: :spin:
Author:  jdmeister [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:10 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
The Lone Ranger wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:


No.

The problem is not and has never been the people who use the tracks we sold them. It's the people who use tracks who never bought them at all.



8) The problem is Jim that your company PEP has turned into a one trick pony. That the repeated failure to produce any new product has left your with only one option, that is to try and legally brow beat hosts into giving you part of their profits, in order to show a profit. Your efforts are a failure since their are more illegal hosts than ever and things aren't improving for the average KJ. If a host is waiting for you to fix things then they will be out of business before that ever happens. They better rely on their own skills. :spin: :spin: :spin:


The larger view, PEP is attempting to recover value from stolen property.
Nobody should have any issue with this.
IF PEP sues a DB KJ, then scream as you wish.
The OEM producers of karaoke have dwindled dramatically,
and perhaps this is a "Cause and Effect" of some downloaders.

I'm not saying it's right, but there seems to be no way to legally obtain product.
As for me and the few KJs I know, "we all" have those plastic round things "you all" despise.
That's how we choose to remain legal.
Your mileage may vary.

Edit to add: I wish there was more up to date media,
however, we are where we are.
Author:  The Lone Ranger [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 10:41 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
jdmeister wrote:

The larger view, PEP is attempting to recover value from stolen property.
Nobody should have any issue with this.
IF PEP sues a DB KJ, then scream as you wish.
The OEM producers of karaoke have dwindled dramatically,
and perhaps this is a "Cause and Effect" of some downloaders.

I'm not saying it's right, but there seems to be no way to legally obtain product.
As for me and the few KJs I know, "we all" have those plastic round things "you all" despise.
That's how we choose to remain legal.
Your mileage may vary.

Edit to add: I wish there was more up to date media,
however, we are where we are.


8) Unfortunately JD this recovery process is not performed in a vacuum, I don't have a problem with them trying to recover stolen property. I have a problem with the collateral damage that is done during the recovery process. The Dwindling of supply is due to the changes in technology that many karaoke manufacturers have not been able to keep pace with. It is hard to obtain material legally today and only old timers who have been in the business for years have stockpiles of those plastic round things, which I don't despise since I have quite a large collection my self. In the real world I just wonder how important it is to greater part of the industry to be legal? I don't see established hosts purging their karaoke libraries of materials that were illegally produced and distributed. 95%of the hosts out here are illegal, if they obtain the HELP license they will still be out here competing with the legal hosts, so what is the point of all this legal maneuvering? Especially since this legal process is a failure, with there now being at least five to six thousand more illegal hosts out here, than when this whole process started seven years ago!
Author:  doowhatchulike [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 11:15 am ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
This is the natural progression of ANY business, since the dawn of the Industrial Age, whose product is 100% dependent on the output of another industry for its survival: If there is a significant shift in direction of said industry, the result is often the catastrophic end of said business. Having all your eggs in one basket results in all of your eggs being destroyed if the basket is dropped. Some companies just stubbornly attempt to resurrect something from the mess that is made, despite how inedible the result is...
Author:  mrmarog [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:43 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
jdmeister wrote:
The larger view, PEP is attempting to recover value from stolen property. Nobody should have any issue with this. IF PEP sues a DB KJ, then scream as you wish. The OEM producers of karaoke have dwindled dramatically,
and perhaps this is a "Cause and Effect" of some downloaders.

I'm not saying it's right, but there seems to be no way to legally obtain product. As for me and the few KJs I know, "we all" have those plastic round things "you all" despise. That's how we choose to remain legal. Your mileage may vary.

Edit to add: I wish there was more up to date media,
however, we are where we are.

I and many others were fortunate to be able to collect large numbers of those obsolete discs when so many were abandoning them for pennies on the dollar...... it seems maybe we weren't so foolish :)
Author:  jdmeister [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 12:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
The Lone Ranger wrote:
jdmeister wrote:

The larger view, PEP is attempting to recover value from stolen property.
Nobody should have any issue with this.
IF PEP sues a DB KJ, then scream as you wish.
The OEM producers of karaoke have dwindled dramatically,
and perhaps this is a "Cause and Effect" of some downloaders.

I'm not saying it's right, but there seems to be no way to legally obtain product.
As for me and the few KJs I know, "we all" have those plastic round things "you all" despise.
That's how we choose to remain legal.
Your mileage may vary.

Edit to add: I wish there was more up to date media,
however, we are where we are.


I don't see established hosts purging their karaoke libraries of materials that were illegally produced and distributed. 95%of the hosts out here are illegal, if they obtain the HELP license they will still be out here competing with the legal hosts, so what is the point of all this legal maneuvering? Especially since this legal process is a failure, with there now being at least five to six thousand more illegal hosts out here, than when this whole process started seven years ago!


The urban legend is, most of the producers pressed more than the licensed number.
And then sold them, often after the warehouses were "Empty" according to records.

Now as I hear on the rumor mill, those that did this were sued, and may now be out of business. :bawling:

Connections? No, just a rumor.. :mrgreen:
Author:  The Lone Ranger [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
jdmeister wrote:

The urban legend is, most of the producers pressed more than the licensed number.
And then sold them, often after the warehouses were "Empty" according to records.

Now as I hear on the rumor mill, those that did this were sued, and may now be out of business. :bawling:

Connections? No, just a rumor.. :mrgreen:



8) I wasn't talking about an urban legend about over production JD. I was talking bout companies that produced cdg's that didn't get the proper permission and pay fees in the first place. MM and Panorama are two of these companies that were forced out of business because they were pressing discs they had no right to produce. It has come to light that other companies were selectively producing discs that they shouldn't have. Unless the host is told specifically that a disc has be produced illegally many have said they will not purge their libraries. If a host has a large library it is pretty safe to say that some of the contents is not totally kosher. Sort of like what the Bible says about "for all have sinned".
Author:  jclaydon [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 3:25 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
The Lone Ranger wrote:
jdmeister wrote:

The larger view, PEP is attempting to recover value from stolen property.
Nobody should have any issue with this.
IF PEP sues a DB KJ, then scream as you wish.
The OEM producers of karaoke have dwindled dramatically,
and perhaps this is a "Cause and Effect" of some downloaders.

I'm not saying it's right, but there seems to be no way to legally obtain product.
As for me and the few KJs I know, "we all" have those plastic round things "you all" despise.
That's how we choose to remain legal.
Your mileage may vary.

Edit to add: I wish there was more up to date media,
however, we are where we are.


8) Unfortunately JD this recovery process is not performed in a vacuum, I don't have a problem with them trying to recover stolen property. I have a problem with the collateral damage that is done during the recovery process. The Dwindling of supply is due to the changes in technology that many karaoke manufacturers have not been able to keep pace with. It is hard to obtain material legally today and only old timers who have been in the business for years have stockpiles of those plastic round things, which I don't despise since I have quite a large collection my self. In the real world I just wonder how important it is to greater part of the industry to be legal? I don't see established hosts purging their karaoke libraries of materials that were illegally produced and distributed. 95%of the hosts out here are illegal, if they obtain the HELP license they will still be out here competing with the legal hosts, so what is the point of all this legal maneuvering? Especially since this legal process is a failure, with there now being at least five to six thousand more illegal hosts out here, than when this whole process started seven years ago!


It's worse than that, getting the HELP license isn't going to help you stay 100% 'legal' cause your still commiting copyright infringement against Stingray.

The thing is, I've grown too tired to care about any of it anymore. I am going to do what is right for me, which is to purchase everything I use, and keep the agreements I signed by getting the GEM discs.

Beyond that, I don't give a flying fig if it's legal or not anymore.. I officially give up, it's just too damned draining

peace out

-James
Author:  The Lone Ranger [ Sun Jan 22, 2017 4:05 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
8) True it is all sound and fury signifying nothing.
Author:  RaokeBoy [ Mon Jan 23, 2017 7:23 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Slep-tone's TM Claims Die in 9th Circuit
JimHarrington wrote:
Gosh, it's a good thing we have those service mark registrations. Those weren't at issue in this case, and we've already moved forward with asserting those.

So James, precisely how are you distinguishing the "service mark" theory from the trademark theory that pushed PEP off the building in the 9th Circuit? Do you really think that it will be applied differently? Maybe some will seek reimbursement of attorneys' fees for this distinction without a difference?
Page 1 of 8 All times are UTC - 8 hours
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
https://www.phpbb.com/