Karaoke Forums

Lonnie,
I think the 10 systems running under a server would probably be like a bar with 9 private karaoke rooms in it. They do this in japan. Really the chance of 2 people singing the same song at the same time is verry slim. Not that Im saying cavs is legal, I dont know. Just saying.

_________________
______________________________________
I'm Not Dead yet...... But every day Im getting Closer !

I may have been a little out of line stating "Illegal Cavs systems."  Though I think some are, I was meaning to be more generic as fas as using "A computer system" to run multiple shows off of one original.  But Lonman does point out a good question. "How can they LEGALLY do what they are advertising?"

Kelly

Oh I know that, was just pointing out being a server, that it could probably be set up as an actual server for the internet as well where a company could technically run 9 systems without actually having to have a library on hand.
Plus they SAYS it can play songs simultaneously - I know you can on Hoster if you have 2 instances open.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

First of all, I don't think "Revenge Entertainment" is BC. I've gotten to know the man over the years, both in a tiny bit of private coorespondence, and his postings on here, JOLT, and their own forum. Revenge is very opinionated, and while I might challenge her tactics a bit on how this discussion started, I respect her opinion. She believes VERY strongly in the industry as a whole, and  I share that enthusiasm... or at one time I did.

Secondly... addressing the CAVS issue.

With the first jukeboxes sold, they included libraries that they claimed were loaded with permission from the various manus. CB and a few of the others ended up being quite surprised that some of the library options were being taken without their express permission.

Thirdly, I've owned a CAVS jukeboxe (the original JB-99, not the 199 model), and didn't like the way it loads, the memory glitches... and I did see sync problems.  I've heard that the 199 model also has some of these problems as well.

Before I'd EVER have bought a CAVS system for pro use (my purchase was just for research... and we ended up sending it back for a complete refund), I'd have to have a guarantee from the CAVS folks that all the tracks (with a complete listing) were indeed licensable.

I agree about their timing swipes, however someone looking to save a buck isn't going to care about that.  They are now marketing this server stating you only need to buy 1 set of discs & run 9 other machines off of that 1 set at the same time - again, i'm sure this is marketed for the karaoke box type places with multiple rooms for private karaoke parties - HOWEVER, up till now, all of these rooms would need a complete set of discs for each room - now they just need 1.  And being a server, it's just a matter of time before someone makes it work as an actual internet server for their karaoke songs.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

Tee hee...no...I am not "BC" from Sound Choice, but I more than appreciate the fact that anyone might think that.

To the person who said they were switching to Chartbuster...you might want to rethink that. Chartbuster, the last time I talked to them, was planning on working with SC and the others in this crackdown.

Now...one more thought on the legalities...everyone keeps saying that SC doesn't have a right to do what they are doing and they can't win in court and all...ummm...one might take into consideration that SC made SURE they would win YEARS ago. The KAPA web site has been active for years and years telling all of us that we cannot copy their discs. Many chose to ignore them. Before KAPA, there was SPIN telling us the same thing. And many chose to ignore them. Inside each SC disc case, there are copyright warnings and things about KAPA and many chose to ignore them. And ON each SC disc, it reads "WARNING: This material is protected by federal copyright laws. Unauthorized DUPLICATION, public performance, or broadcast is a violation of applicable laws. That is on the first SC disc I ever bought and it's on the most recent SC disc I bought. Now....unauthorized means WITHOUT PERMISSION...if SC is saying, "Don't rip our songs to your computer and don't burn them to back-up CD's," then they are NOT authorizing you to do it. You don't have permission. What you are doing is UNAUTHORIZED. DUPLICATION means copying...ANY copying. But many chose to ignore THAT too. So...SC and the other manufacturers have been warning us for years and they will be able to prove that in court. What you WANT to do and what you SHOULD BE ABLE to do and blatant ignorance of the law are NOT going to save you in court.

Knightshow stated that I was very opinionated. Knowledge of a subject and opinion of a subject are two different things. I am not opinionated. I KNOW what you are doing is illegal. It comes from having knowledge about the law we are discussing. Call me angry or passionate about the subject, but not opinionated. People who are still arguing the law because they think it is unfair or old fashioned and people who are "never going to use SC again" are the ones who are opinionated. I HAVE an opinion about the law. But, my opinion and fifty cents will get you a stale gumball. The law is the law. You want to change it? Write your congressman. Go to Washington. BECOME a congressman and try to change things. Until then, use your originals. Turn in ANYONE using a computer for karaoke. When they get fired or quit or go to prison, take their shows and sit back and rake in the money.

Maybe no one has thought about the fact that we all bought Sound Choice, even though they used to be more expensive, because they were the best on the market. That hasn't changed. They have some close competition, but, in my OPINION, they are still the best out there. So...why does everyone suddenly decide they don't deserve payment for their hard work? They provided us with a quality product and when they got ripped off and decided to do something about it, you all decide THEY are the bad guys. Ummm...no...YOU are the bad guys. YOU are the ones costing the industry millions of dollars. If you broke into my house and stole from me, I would most certainly sue you and have you put in jail. You would do the same to me. SC and the other manufacturers have the right to protect their interests.

Here's an interesting read for you:
http://www.azcentral.com/w2/news/articl ... le=&full=1

It's been mentioned in several places that karaoke is the only industry where, the better it gets, the less you can get for running shows. When karaoke first started in our area, a three hour show was $225.00. and $50.00 for each additional hour. Back then, there was a very limited selection of songs. Now that almost every song that comes out is put on karaoke, the most you can hope to get for three hours (and not get underbid and fired within a week) is around $125.00. DJs are making $300-$500 a night and they aren't doing HALF the work we do. (to the DJs who still actually spin records and talk on the mic and PAY for their music, I exclude you from the previous statement) WE should be making at LEAST that much, but we have cut our own throats. Any yahoo with a computer can go into a bar and run karaoke for $50 and WE let it happen. And by threatening to boycott ANY manufacturer for trying to stop that trend and make it possible for us to charge a price that is fair, we are the ones keeping the industry from growing. If SC and Stellar succeed in stopping illegal karaoke, it opens the door for the rest of us to actually make a living on this. What's bad about that? Why would you fight that just because it makes your job a little harder? We should all be embracing the manufacturers for finally helping us to reap the rewards for OUR hard work. Now THAT is my OPINION. Want a gumball?

And so I buy all the discs...pay for each & every original that is & transfer it to a computer for playback.  Illegal yes, technically, but there is absolutely no monetary loss to the manufacturer with my action...NONE!  I am not using the disc AND the computer at the same time, nor trying to sell or redistribute copies.



Again, in my scenerio HOW are they getting RIPPED OFF?  I paid for each disc.  Am not using the disc at the same time, nor redistributing or selling copies.  



Yes I would be costing them money IF I was copying to sell, redistributing or even giving copies away to others ie file sharing, I have not & do not do this, I purchase every disc & transfer to computer...there is absolutely no monetary loss in my actions to any manufacturer.



As I would expect you to do...IF I broke into your house & stole from you that would be monetary loss to you.  Just as it would be if I happened to take a library, copy it & sell the copy...THAT is monetary loss & who is costing the industry millions of dollars.



Well I agree with this article for the most part.  It's primary focus is on the sharing of files, selling illegal hard drives on ebay via the original topic of this thread.  I agree with the user as well, IF I am buying all the original media...1:1 meaning 1 original disc per computer (which I can prove), there is no monetary loss to the manufacturers.  They got their money for the discs I am using...regardless of what format I am playing them on.



AH, BUT the difference here is you are talking about any Yahoo that buys a preloaded drive & goes into a bar for $50.  Someone like myself that has spent thousands UPON thousands of dollars for all my original discs & simply transferred them into the computer for playback is not some Yahoo.  I have been in this business since '93 & have never so much as downloaded a karaoke song or borrowed a disc.  I have quit doing clubs because of those types, focus on private shows now, that's where the real money is anyway.  When I transferred my library to computer, it never grew anymore songs than what I already had in my book to begin with!



I wouldn't boycott any company for trying to stop the true pirates...ie loaded hard drive sellers, people trading music ie file sharing, making copies of discs for sale.  It was mentioned that there has yet to be one case of someone in my situation to ever been tried...yet!  Once that happens, I will continue to purchase my original discs & transfer them to the computer for playback.  I don't do it to try & test anybodys patience or snub my nose at the law, I do it because I LIKE the computer functions.  And if that first case came down to them fining, jailing or whatever, I will just go back to my discs...absolutely nothing else will change, except I may get 1 more computer & still run my show using the computers as the player BUT with the original discs...CANNOT tell me THAT is illegal!!!

_________________
[shadow=deepskyblue]I'm impressed, I've never met such a small mind inside such a big head before.[/shadow]

Another boring subject going on and on and on................. Do what you think is right, and stick to it. You'll never convince the opposite party that you are right and he is wrong. That's called politics.

TTowntenor: Please read my previous post which breaks down monetarily EXACTLY how YOU and those like you are costing the industry money. If you NEVER have to replace a lost, stolen, broken, scratched or whatever, disc, then you ARE costing the industry money. Replacement costs are part of business. Replacement costs are definitely a part of THIS business unless you are illegally "protecting your investment." There is no law, part of a law, or ammendment to any law that allows you to protect your discs. Sorry. Wish it were different, but it isn't. So, yes, you TOO are costing the manufacturers money and taking from the industry.

For those of you so sure that what YOU are doing is legal, send all the manufacturers a list of all your shows and your addresses and phone numbers. Stand behind what you believe and see what happens.

Well since '93 I have YET to have to replace a disc ie lost, broken, stolen or otherwise...SO NOW how is your theory valid.  I would also wager that over half of my discs or no longer in production...can't replace what isn't available...So HOW am I costing the manus money when I have never had to replace a disc  or they have nothing to offer to replace the disc anymore?  I take really good care of my equipment and YES I ran all originals until about a year ago when I made the jump on technology, but my discs always come to each & EVERY show with me in a nice little dj coffin & gets set up right under my table.  Besides, I think similarly to Tim in this respect, if I lose a disc, then it's out of my book...I won't bother replacing it.  1 disc will not break a show!
There is and has NEVER been ONE case in court from someone running a show from computer loaded with discs they bought all the originals for.  If you know of one, please post it.  Until that happens & I hear of an outcome not favoring the kj in question, I will continue to run computers...if the case goes the other way, switching back to discs will not be any big deal, there would be no songs I would have to delete out of my book as everything that is in the book, is on a disc.

Also what about my last statement?  Would you consider me 'legal' if I was running my original discs off of the computer via the SAME computer karaoke program...as long as my songs aren't on the hard drive, but still get the full benefit (except for the songs not being on hard drive) of a computer run show, I am perectly legal then right...according to you, or do you want me to drop the computer altogether as well?  So again, if it ever comes down to it & I need to revert back to discs, I will just buy another computer, buy another version of the computer program & run it just like I did when I ran discs...2 computers = 2 players, but I would have all the computer advantages!

_________________
[shadow=deepskyblue]I'm impressed, I've never met such a small mind inside such a big head before.[/shadow]

Great point TTowntenor! I too have a great many SC discs that are no longer in production.  I've been trying to figure out also how me playing the digital file on my computer is costing anyone any money.  At last count my collection is up to $16,000.  

Makes you wonder who is try to take advantage of whom.  Just how much money does SC want the "legal 1:1" kj to spend before they think we are worth while keeping around?

Kelly

Yeah she is trying to use replacement cost, BC has stated numerous times that their replacement turnaround cost is next to nil & the ones that do go out for replacing are going out for free as per their REPLACEMENT POLICY, only thing that would be paid is shipping, i'm sure they may keep a couple bucks out of the shipping cost as it doesn't take $5.95 to ship a disc via USPS, but then they couldn't claim that as legitimate income.



Technically it is illegal, I won't argue, but I will argue that a 1:1 computer user is not harming ANY manu monetarily because as long as I bought my discs, the manu got their money!  PERIOD!

_________________
[shadow=deepskyblue]I'm impressed, I've never met such a small mind inside such a big head before.[/shadow]

So what's the difference between losing, breaking or whatever a discontinued disc or the loss breaking or failure of a Pioneer twin tray which are no longer being made?  None.  You either have to find an aftermarket one or replace it with something else. It would be nice to buy a Pioneer once and have it replaced fee everytime it breaks or even better yet have a replicator to make copies of it and keep the original in the box.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Well if you're going to use that argument, there are service centers to get that twin tray serviced & working again.  Not the same thing.  However I said I have never needed to replace a disc since '93 & if I lost one I wouldn't bother replacing it, but IF I did, I would fully take advantage of the FREE replacement policy provided the disc is still available, plenty of other songs people could choose from, 1 disc will not break a show.

_________________
[shadow=deepskyblue]I'm impressed, I've never met such a small mind inside such a big head before.[/shadow]

To me the difference is with equipment you CAN replace it.  As a DJ you can replace the "Beatles" "Stones" etc.  You can't replace a quality SC disc if it is no longer made.  Heck, I'm through with the topic.  I've got more SC discs to buy if SC doesn't mind me giving them money.

Kelly

          ABSOLUTELY !  Funny you should ask this because this morning I was just
          asking myself;

         "Kappy,  IF you could find your ideal woman,  what characteristics would she
          have ?"

          I came up with the following answers:

    1)  The ideal woman would throw out my VHS tapes of recorded programs
         and get my checkbook out and write large reimbursement sums to MGM,
         WB and FOX with copious letters of apology for her husbands "ILLEGAL"
         activity.

    2)   The ideal woman would throw out my reel to reel tape collection, cassette
          tapes,  CD collections of concerts, and of course get out my check book
          reimbursing the artists I taped, and their management generously for
          her husbands "ILLEGAL" activity.

    3)   My ideal woman would come home and find me smoking a joint in my
          basement and PROMPTLY call the police and have me handcuffed and
          booked because we all know pot is "Illegal", and of course she'd be
          doing this because she loves me !

    4)   My prospective wife MUST have a decibel meter which she pulls out
          EACH and EVERY time I play my piano, guitar etc so she can measure
          the sound level and obsessively preach to me how if all 8 families
          living in our Condo building had an individual playing the guitar at 80 DB
          right now, that would be significant and ILLEGAL noise level at 640 decibels,
          hence I must not EVER turn my amps on, it's just wrong !

    5)   My prospective wife MUST call independent contractors to make certain
          ALL aspects of wiring, installed lighting, furniture, etc are up to code.
          I would expect her to hire a contractor licensed by the state (after
          throwing away my potentially dangerous things that MIGHT result
          in a lawsuit down the road) and I would certainly hope she would tell
          EVERYONE how irresponsible her fiance is in allowing an accident or
          lawsuit waiting to happen to exist in her new home.  She would also get
          out my checkbook and without thinking in frugal terms, pay whatever
          a recommended contracter asks for getting our condo up to ENTIRELY
          legal code. It's crucial that my wife never compares contractor prices,
          Being frugal would ruin our marriage,  she must hire the contractor
          she believes to be the most legal !

    6)   My prospective wife would scrutinize my artwork, and photography
          collection,  and after finding out the owners of the property whose items
          I photographed, ring their doorbell (with my checkbook in her hand) asking
          if they'd like reimbursement for her rude husbands actions in photographing
          their possessions !  I would of course expect her to write out a sum for
          WHATEVER they deem fair !  We would know exactly what a fair
          compensatory sum is in lieu of the fact she'd ask "If you were to
          threaten my husband with litigation you'd win ! so how much would you
          ask for?"

    7)   My ideal wife would            while also realizing that
                    She'd think nothing of buying
          two+ of all her CD-G's because everybody knows it's VERY wrong to not
          squander what little money we have as small people the huge muckety
          mucks don't care about, if for no other reason than to not spend at least
          twice on a library is "illegal". Based on undocumented law, she'd know IF
          businesses prosecute           and this would
          ALWAYS make it to trial.  No reasonable wife would believe that (worst case
          scenerio) of a 1/1,000,000 likelihood of getting a "threatening letter" a
          substantially lesser chance of muckety mucks being able to take this to trial
          is realistic. She'd know businesses spend $10K to get NOTHING in return !
          With no cases in history to substantiate "Plaintiff would always win" she'd
          insist on using such reasoning regardless, and she'd squander our money.
          She'd never question consequences of a hypothetical suit though and she'd
          justify spending perhaps $50,000 (we don't have) in order to avoid a (what
          might be a one in a billion) chance of a "slap on the wrist" penalty phase
          of a court trial that has yet to exist."Muckety Mucks deserve this" she'd state,
          and of course my wife would ALWAYS go out of her way to insist that big
          muckety mucks SHOULD always get fat and happy off've struggling small
          business people, because she'd know it feels good to struggle and try to
          make a living, "Overspend when you don't really need to", she'd exclaim;
         "Intent to back up our libraries by copying our CD-G's (which would only
          be used in cases of theft) is VERY VERY wrong. Muckety Mucks that have
          big wig shmuckity shmucks SHOULD get our hard earned money just
          because", she'd state !  Since she'd know all areas of a law the courts are
          allowed subjective ruling on, as well as the outcome of cases that don't
          exist, she'd know more than our current court system regarding Copyright
          Law.  I'd know this as fact because she says it's so !  

             

     8-  My ideal prospective exwife would have a psychic Atty who for $750 she'd
          consult with.  This would be quite beneficial to me too, because she'd
          constantly be[strike]threatening and badgering me[/strike] explaining
          to me that since I'm divorcing her for unfounded reasons, she'll be
          seeking punitive damages (and she'll know the exact sum too of course)
          for having been exposed to a long marriage worth of illegalities.

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

Revenge... I said you're opinionated... and you are. Not just about the laws, but about how others are supposed to behave. You don't like what I said? Then DON'T post your OPINION! These are ALL opinions from you!... just from the first TWO post you made.

THAT's what I meant by opinionated.

Cause you are!

SHAEESH!

Kappy that was bruddy hilarious best laugh I have had all day

_________________
"Be who you are and say what you feel... Because those that matter... Don't mind...And those that mind... Don't matter."

Seriously now

You made a statement, and I'd like to know what actual criteria this is based upon !
Otherwise this is nonsense !


Yes,  they ARE "Well within their rights".  ALL of us are "Well within our rights" to sue
anybody we believe has wronged us !   Will the courts care to pursue a small frivolous case ?  Will this Manus care to spend large sums of money against a good Defense Atty who will drive up their fee's, and plea bargain this down to nothing ? What businesses wish to be reduced to a "Praying Manus" <rim shot> ?  This is currently NON-EXISTENT LAW and your supposed Atty has ALL the outcomes of totally hypothetical cases  !  LMAO  You've never heard of separate Tort action suits charged against businesses for Malicious Prosecution ? Or do you have all the answers to this as well ?  You think a business can do whatever it wishes to do ? Within the boundaries of what law ? Does your atty believe ALL judges wish to see the small guy screwed ?  THEY DO NOT. But, you know ALL about an area of Law that currently doesn't exist  :worship:  AND,  NO,  not all Defendants will "pay rather than risk legal action", I would not, in fact I'm currently involved in such as civil suit.  Legal action must have a basis !  There's criteria involved, case law MATTERS !  You feign having answers,  you do not, and can't, they don't exist yet.  What Atty will EVER make such a statement "they WILL win the case" ?   What case ?  Against WHOM ?   For What ?  There must be a basis ! You claim you know Copyright Law, however you profess that "case by case" means nothing. Cases that fall within Copyright law, MUST be analyzed case by case. So you contradict yourself with this point.
What will restitution be IN cases of "backing up some stolen copies" ?  You make no sense.  

Remember,  A business ATTEMPTING to make an example of a person CAN backfire.
I suppose this has never dawned on you.  You believe MONEY can do ANYTHING in such law without substantial grounds ?   It SELDOM can, because as you state "This is the USA".  There is some jurisprudence to be found within ambiguous areas of current law.  Copyright Law is intended as such.

I'm joining Kelly and the others, and playing in a different thread.  If Revenge Karaoke wishes to keep showing us a cup that has no bottom that's fine.  But she's certainly not convincing me that such a cup can hold anything.  The argument is all wet.  There's NO factual basis to anything she's insisting upon.  This should all be qualified under "OPINION".  Currently this is unsubstantiated.

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".

You laughing at my wife ?    :(

_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".