Karaoke Forums

EElvis brought up an interesting aspect.  Class action *IS* the most effective means of implementing change.  Sad thing is,  for all we know given the time Civil law cases wait until court dates (average of 18 months), assuming a case goes to the trial phase and appeals take place Karaoke in bars might be a thing of the past. (This can take over 5 years).


ADDED IN:

Scary thing is, when all is said and done,  this Ebayer pirating over a million dollars worth of material MIGHT not go to trial.  As stated, an Atty that milks this out might end up defending this individual against a company that will no longer exist, or file for bankruptcy prior to a trial date.  One never knows.  I certainly will be following this case just out've curiousity.

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

No you haven't explained one thing.  Your only spout is it's illegal.  I'll admit technically it is.  Monetarily I am not harming any manu in any way.  I buy ie purchase my discs...EVERY disc, no downloads, no pre-loaded hard drives, no ripping customer discs, no borrowing from people, no file sharing...I PURCHASE, SPEND MONEY on originals & buy more & more every month.  Ove 1300+ discs and counting.
This is what I keep asking, HOW am I hurting the manus monetarily?

Your argument is that i'm completely illegal for using a computer, AGAIN, I WILL ASK YOU!?!?!?!  
If I kept running the computer to get the added benefits except use the original discs you so badly want me to use (No songs in the hard drive), then you would deem me completely legal?  Or do you want me to have to drop the computer and go back to players?  

So the scenerio is:  I still run my show from computer, but use the original discs which are with me at every show anyway, instead of the hard drive (no songs on the hard drive), I still get all the added benefits from using the computer...special graphics, sound effects on the fly, messages, singer up next display, my own special screen display for in between songs, but now you are happy that I am running all original discs thus making me 100% legal - correct?

Still waiting for that answer as well!

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

She basically said that earlier, Ttown!

She told me I should go back to using original discs, and wait for the laws to change.

Revenge keeps going on and on about how folks that convert their material to the computer are ripping off the industry.

While I grant that SC doesn't LIKE peeps that convert, even BC/Production Manager from Sound Choice sort of admits (paraphrasing) that the 1:1 guys are NOT hurting the industry. While SC can't blanketly give us permission to convert, they are admitting on several occurances that WE are not the "problem".

http://www.soundchoice.com/ubb/ultimate ... p=2#000047

Specifically,


Here BC goes on about the copyright. To be fair, Revenge is correct in her statements about the illegiality of copying/converting cdgs... but he also hints at what they consider to be the real bane of the existance of the manus...

He had a post on a thread once, but I can't find it, about how he PERSONALLY feels about those that convert to computer that have the original discs. And that he understands the desire for wanting to convert... if someone has that link, please post it.

Anyway, the point is, those of us that OWN the original discs and use a 1:1 ratio are NOT hurting the industry!

No she keeps spouting that originals should be used, but computer users are illegal.  My question in the second part is if I use the computer as a player but use only original discs...she would then deem me legal, or would one need to drop the computer completely to be deemed legal by her?  
For a situation like myself, I see absolutely no difference if I ran the discs or ran the computer hard drive, the library is not going to change one bit.  



EXACTLY, it's the ones that don't pay for their library, borrow discs, file share, trade libraries, rip customer discs...THESE are the ones COSTING the manus MONETARILY!

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

TTowntenor: At what point did you lose track of this argument? You are only illegal on the computer if you shift the format. If you rip the songs from the disc to your computer, it's illegal. If you are using your computer, essentially as a CD&G player only, how would that be illegal and who ever said it was? The 1:1 copying and ripping is illegal. I DID explain how you were costing the industry money. Kudos to you for that you haven't had to replace discs. We run a lot more shows than you. We have had people working for us who didn't quite understand the proper way to handle discs. If we lose a disc, we replace it because that is what businesses do. They replace things when they break or run down or are in any way unusable. And it costs money. If it's free, then there is no money being put back into the industry, thus the industry will eventually fail.

In the future, if you are going to ask a question, actually read the answers when they are given to you. And if you are going to be upset about something someone said, make sure they actually said it first. I never said you were illegal just for HAVING a computer. If you are not format shifting, what exactly are you worried about and, if you ARE format shifting, whether you run club shows or private parties, if you are making money on it, it IS illegal. Technically, figuratively and literally. If you are sitting at home singing to yourself and not making any money, it's legal.

I’ve been reading this whole thread, and I planned on not getting near it myself, (more just learning),

but I think the difference between playing the disc on the computer vs. the music on the hard drive is that the industry looses it’s advantage of the planned obsolescence, where the disc will eventually fail, and you’ll have to buy another.  

Again, I’m not taking a side here.  Personally, I use the discs, but that’s only because I’m technologically retarded.    

Edit:  I wrote this before I knew the above response was being posted.

_________________
Hate is like taking poison, hoping the other guy gets sick

First, thank you Knightshow. I know I am not your favorite (or even your tenth favorite) person, but at least you researched it and understand what I was saying and brought in quotes from someone they MIGHT listen to help clarify things. Much appreciated!

But...



DID YOU ACTUALLY READ THIS?????-the financial impact would be - BY ELIMINATING (FOR THE MOST PART) THE REPLACEMENT WHEN THE ORIGINAL IS DAMAGED OR WORN OUT.

HELLO PEOPLE!!!!!!!!!! He just said that THAT is one of the financial impacts on the industry!! Now...how are you going to be paying replacement costs if you are not using your discs. You ARE making a negative financial impact. BC just said it and you tried to use it to say you weren't. READ what he wrote. This is why no one gets the "fair use" part of copyrights. People read ONLY the part they want to read or only the parts that seem to make them right. Unfortunately, judges will be looking at the WHOLE thing and not just itty bitty quips.

So the fact that the program I use has to rip the disc to temorary file on the computer doesn't bother you?  It automatically deletes after the song is done.  And I never disagreed that 1:1 ratio is illegal, I SAID there is absolutely no monetary loss.



Then WHY on Earth would SC & CB and a couple other I can't think of right now OFFER FREE replacements to damaged discs, be it an accident, misuse, improper handling or flat out broke on purpose?  If this is the large part of their business I would think they would get rid of that ludacris & MONEY LOSING replacement policy???  Wouldn't you think?  If I were to replace a disc, I would probably look for it on ebay first before spending full price (business common sense to find cheapest prices) or a disc that is no longer in production, via ebay or closeout wholesalers, the original manu is not going to see a dime of THAT sale anyway.  I buy many used discs off of customers very cheap (manus won't see any money off of that sale & I got a new disc), some have even given me discs before, the manus did not benefit from this from me either but I gained a new disc.  
So if having a free replacement policy is causing them so much failure, why do they have it?  BC has stated because it is THE lowest percentage of their yearly sales to begin with & if they have to essentially eat the cost of a disc, then that's what they will do to keep a customer happy...why in your opinion would they do this if it's costing them money?  
So the fact that I haven't ever had to replace a disc...there was a time I ran as many as 3 shows per night (yes I DID have all originals for each show...you know, even more money to the manus, TRUE piracy screwed that up for everyone around here), had good storage & hosts that treated my stuff with respect...so don't talk to me about more shows, I just quit doing clubs a couple years ago.  



I have read and given you opposition to your replacement cost to the manu theory which is virtually non-existant otherwise they wouldn't give free replacements.  SO OTHER than replacement cost (which we determined is pretty much non-existant), HOW am I costing the manu money by having my files on computer?  You keep side skirting the answer and going back to one which is pretty much undebateable in the first place.

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

Then I ask you, WHY do companies such as Sound Choice & Chartbuster (the main companies I use) offer a FREE replacement policy of discs currently in production?  They aren't making ANY money off of these discs other than the shipping cost...which again, they could be over charging for shipping & pocketing a percentage of that, which then would be a legal issue on their part.  So since they are not making any money off of replacements, when a disc fails, you send it in with shipping cost & they send you a new one free of charge.  If it's out of print, then you go to ebay, in which the manufacturer isn't going to see any money off of that sale anyway?!?!?!

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

OK here's another quote directly from Sound Choice main help page.
http://www.soundchoicestore.com/help.php?section=return



Now from Chartbuster.
http://www.chartbusterkaraoke.com/cgi-b ... =Guarantee



So where is the financial impact of the industry when they are GIVING replacements when needed?  They obviously pocket the shipping cost & send it cheaper...this must be what they mean, i'm sure that's not the case  :whistle: but even if that's the case, they are making absolutely no profit on a new cd they send out.  And they can only offer replacements for those discs that are still in production.  Anything out of production, they wouldn't see the profit in a replacement situation as it's probably already been sold once and the new owner will reap the monetary benifit not the original manufacturer!  So replacement cost being diminished is no longer a valid argument as they aren't getting anything for replacements in the first place!  NOW how is one using a computer hurting the industry MONETARILY?!?!?!?

Anyone, Anyone?

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

TTowntenor- I never "side skirted" anything. You ONLY have Sound Choice and Chartbuster in you selections?? Because they are the only ones I know of (and I could be wrong. Those are the only ones I have had to deal with replacing) that offer free replacements. See, I am talking of the karaoke industry as a WHOLE. NOT just SC and Stellar. They are both wonderful companies, but I buy from any manufacturer I can find with the songs I need. Sometimes, especially lately, SC has been extremely slow in coming out with a song someone wants. In those cases, I get discs from other companies. Now, if you ONLY have SC and Stellar, then, you are right, your $5.95 MIGHT not be enough to be an issue. But if you have even ONE other company's disc and you rip it into your hard drive and...DON'T USE YOUR ORIGINALS (because if you put the original in the tray for each and every song, then you ARE using your originals and I don't understand what your dilemma is) then you would not be contributing to the industry because the disc will never wear out as you would not be using it? Now...is that direct and to the point and clear enough for you? Do you now understand WHY you are compacting negatively on the industry if you use a hard drive to run your shows?

YOU say you are taking AND using your originals at the shows. So, obviously, this discussion wasn't about you to begin with. Bored were you? Thought you'd try to cause some extra drama? (as if it were needed in this thread) We are talking about the illegality of multi riggers, downloaders, the woman selling thousands of preloaded drives on eBay (in fact THAT was the original comment), and the main question became whether ripping on a 1:1 basis into a hard drive and NOT TAKING OUR ORIGINALS TO SHOWS was legal or not. None of that has anything to do with YOUR particular situation. And NO ONE ever said it did except you.

Stanford School of Law.

Although the legal basis is not completely settled, many lawyers believe that the following (and many other uses) are also fair uses:

Space-shifting or format-shifting - that is, taking content you own in one format and putting it into another format, for personal, non-commercial use. For instance, "ripping" an audio CD (that is, making an MP3-format version of an audio CD that you already own) is considered fair use by many lawyers, based on the 1984 Betamax decision and the 1999 Rio MP3 player decision (RIAA v. Diamond Multimedia, 180 F. 3d 1072, 1079, 9th Circ. 1999.)
Making a personal back-up copy of content you own - for instance, burning a copy of an audio CD you own.
5. Is Fair Use a Right or Merely a Defense?
Lawyers disagree about the conceptual nature of fair use. Some lawyers claim that fair use is merely a defense to a claim of copyright infringement. Although fair use is often raised as a defense, many lawyers argue that fair use can also be viewed as having a broader scope than this. If fair use is viewed as a limitation on the exclusive rights of copyright holders, fair use can be seen as a scope of positive freedom available to users of copyrighted material. On this view, fair use is the space which the U.S. copyright system recognizes between the rights granted to copyright holders and the rights reserved to the public, where uses of works may or may not be subject to copyright protection. Copyright law gives the decision about whether copyright law applies to a particular use in this space to a Federal Court judge, to decide after weighing up all relevant factors and the underlying policies of copyright law.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Even for private use format shifting might not be considered legal, and of course the chances of getting caught format shifting at home when content stays at home is slim to none.   Still,  home use format shifting might NOT be "Legal".   This is a TOUGH area to really understand.

This is important.

Copyright law gives the decision about whether copyright law applies to a particular use in this space to a Federal Court judge, to decide after weighing up all relevant factors and the underlying policies of copyright law.

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

Steven Kaplan: If you are going to use quotes from law schools or any other "knowledgeable" sources, you might want to make sure they don't shoot down what YOU are trying to prove. Stanford School of Law specifically states (in the article YOU posted) that format shifting can be done "FOR PERSONAL, NON-COMMERCIAL USE." They specifically put that for a reason. What we, as KJs are doing is NOT non-commercial and NOT personal. We fall under the other set of rules which say it is illegal. Thank you for finding that article and proving what I have been saying all along. Much appreciated.

First of all,  I wasn't disagreeing with your term regarding what is deemed "illegal". Stanford University school of law (if you read acknowledges grey area in both commercial and private applications).  You however, will only see this in all or none (black/white) terms.   I stated and agreed that FORMAT SHIFTING IS NOT ALWAYS legal regarding private use. Meaning yes,  technically what I am doing IS NOT NECESSARY legal.  HOWEVER,  such grey also exists with "fair use law" regarding types of "Commercial application".   There ARE exceptions that the Law has not yet established.  Regarding "Format shifting",  I don't think many here stated it "Is Legal",  I think many stated "They Believe" they are not harming anyone in doing this, and opt to do it using "reason" not "law" as their guide.   Still,  Commercial use IS covered (but to what degree we don't yet know) by "fair use exception", and this is ONLY weighed CASE BY CASE.   NOTHING states ALL instances of ANYTHING is always legal, or illegal, and THAT is why I posted the above.  To show that EVEN private isn't all or none.

Some commercial applications of copying ones originals IS legal , and ALL personal use is NOT always legal regarding FORMAT SHIFTING. I have admitted OVER and OVER again that I acknowledge what I do MIGHT not be legal.  I have explained my rationale too.   My argument regarding what *I* believe is "fair use" pertains to BACKING UP A LIBRARY with like format.  It is MY opinion. I don't have facts on each case, nor do you.

 Regarding format shifting,  I don't know much about this area and I'm not stating anything about it in terms of all or none,  nor is the law.. The fact that the manus makes statements wouldn't matter in the scope of this because fair use ALWAYS supercedes Copyright..  As I stated SOME THINGS ARE ILLEGAL,   some things have yet to be established as "ILLEGAL",  in life their are degree's of "illegal" that in real, we ALL cross over at times.

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

So tell me how are we to trust a company that has a high record of having discontinued discs?  Sure, use the discs so they wear out and buy another one.

"Oh, I'm sorry. We don't make that one anymore."  I'm supposed to worry about their bottom dollar but not mine?  Again.  Makes perfect sense.

Kelly

I will agree the multi-riggers and file swappers are hurting the industry; both KJ & DJ music.  But what I hate to say is that what also is hurting the industry as a whole is with the exception of some of the country music; no one is putting out any music that for the most part is worth a crap anymore.  The newer music I try to buy is seldom if ever requested.  It's the old stuff that is the main stay of my part time profession.  And it's the younger ones as well as the older ones who want to sing the older music.

Unless the music gets better and the CGD companies decided to start doing something about the true violators, their days are numbered.  Trying to scare away the rest of us 1:1 users will not help them; only hurt.

Kelly

I find this interesting Revenge Karaoke that you make such a statement.  It is YOU that complains about people NOT reading what you state, and you indicate that you do not like your points to be misconstrued, however you erroneously interpret what I state to suit your own wishes.  

You state:



Where did I state *I HAVE PROOF* of anything ?   I have stated over and over and over again that in CASE BY CASE situations, WE DO NOT KNOW.   I never stated something is necessarily "LEGAL" or "ILLEGAL",  I stated it's a subjective area few understand. There are GREY areas you refuse to see regarding Fair Use.  You claim to know all about this area. YOU CAN NOT know all about this area.  I certainly don't, and atty's aren't even certain, AND such cases have not made it to court yet.

Yet you "Revenge Karaoke" pontificate having ALL the answers and insist on playing judge as well as jury and deeming others guilty of criminal behaviour.  You don't have such a right.  THAT is what I've stated.  You use "fact" to push what is just your opinion.  The fact that this is SUBJECTIVE law, means you CAN NOT know these areas, and what the outcome would be assuming they were in fact tried in a court of law.

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

Settle down Steve.  Maybe she has "BD" disease.  LOL

Kelly

Somebody throw me a milk bone, and scritch behind my ears  :(


Her content has potential. Now all it needs is a person with the capacity to present it  LMAO

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

Well actually I still don't understand, you keep going round in circles.  Yes I buy primarily SC & CB because they are the best.  The rest I buy hardly get used so if it takes 14 years (and counting) for 1 of my discs to wear out to the point of replacing, just think of how long those discs that get little to no play will last.  I am willing to bet 20 years or better before I would even need to CONSIDER a replacement.  What do you want me to damage my discs so I support the industry & replace my discs?  Sure sounds like it, i'm sorry your hosts don't handle your stuff better that you need to waste more money replacing discs you already have, my hosts knew that if anything was damaged it would come out of their pay, so they treated my stuff with kid gloves.  Now if I had discs stolen, then I would pay to replace...which I DID have 2 discs stolen from me back in the mid 90's, & I replaced them...luckily I found them used at a local karaoke store...OOPS, that money didn't go to the manufacturer, so I didn't support/contribute to karaoke.  
YOUR logic is flawed, you are hung up on the cost of replacements which are rare to nil over the fact that I spent hundreds of dollars a year to get new discs.
What part of i've never HAD to replace a disc yet don't you get.  So there is no financial impact from me & willing to bet OVER 90% of karaoke users out there don't usually need to replace their discs either.  The manus GAIN monetarily by each and every NEW disc I purchase...THUS supporting/contributing to the industry...but you seem to close your eyes at that point.



No you were lumping all computer users in a monetary loss to the manus, they aren't!  The multiriggers that MAYBE have one set of originals, the file sharers, the kj's that trade libraries, the kj's that import their customer discs, the ones that pre-load & sell hard drives, the ones that makes copies for redistribution or sales ARE THE ONES THAT ARE HURTING THE INDUSTRY MONETARILY!  :roll:

As far as the extra drama comment, looks like you are going to be deemed the new queen of it.  I joined this discussion because i'm just as passionate about it as you...obviously WHY YOU decided to open your yapper in the first place.  Yes the main question did become of that of 1:1 users, which is why I responded in the first place, if you go back & read, I wasn't in the conversation until someone...HMMMM, YOU I believe, said that pretty much anyone using a computer is illegal.  I even agreed with that fact, however I am not the cause of the industry decline, I buy my discs thus supporting the industry.

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