Karaoke Forums

Unhinged:
Hello. Here's why the name.
I worked for another company for a couple of years and the owner of the company started doing things that I didn't agree with. Prime example, and the one that actually caused us to start looking for a system of our own: The company ran two full rigs (BEFORE downloading and ripping were even an option) and I usually ran between 5 and 7 shows a week. I was much younger then and I could do it, no sweat...if I tried that now, I would be dead in a week. Anyway, I was off one night from any of my obligated shows and she asked me to run hers. I ran it and, at the end of the night, the bar manager, bartender and several customers surrounded me and said they wanted ME in their show and, "not to send that other lady." I asked them why and they said that when she ran it, she sang every third song (no exaggeration, I'd personally seen her do it at other shows) and she played favorites with young men. I told them that SHE was the company owner and I had no control over it but that I would bring their concerns to her. At the next company meeting (the show was Wednesday, the meeting was Sunday) I brought it to her attention. She asked who said it and I said it was the customers and before I could add, "and the bar staff," she said, "Well too bad. I am not in this business for the customers!" As far as I am concerned, that is the ONLY reason to be in this business. So...her other KJ approached me after the meeting and we agreed that this was a problem (among other problems too numerous to mention...like, we went to her house to get the equipment, set up our own shows, did all of the advertising and ran most of her shows and she cut our pay from 40% to 35% because she wanted to go on vacation...things like that) and we decided to start looking for our own system. We found one and I sat on it for 3 months because she didn't have anyone trained and I didn't want to leave her hanging with 13 shows and no one to run them. (And we don't steal shows. We think KJ's that steal shows well...never mind what we think) So I kept telling her I needed a break and to hire someone so I could train them for her and then I could take a break. (Yes...I lied, but I really WOULD have trained someone and then given her two weeks notice to make sure everything was working out) Well, she never hired anyone and she did something to make the other KJ mad and he flat out quit and said he'd talk to me when I was ready to start MY company and I kinda had to tell her what was going on. But I STILL offered to wait to start my company and train someone for her. So, she says okay and we leave and before we get out of her building, we hear her ranting and raving to her boyfriend about how horrible I was and what an awful KJ (because EVERYONE lets awful KJs run 7 of their shows a week and run the company while they are on vacation) I was and the last thing we heard as we left was, "Well, it doesn't matter because success is the best revenge." When I got home and there was a message that I was fired, my husband (boyfriend at the time) said, "That's alright, because Revenge will be the best success." And he named the company Revenge Entertainment. She lost all of the shows I was doing (I only took one of her shows AFTER they fired her) and really didn't do much after that. Within a year, she was working a regular 9 - 5 and that's that. I felt bad at first, because she gave me a job when I really, really needed one and I very much appreciated it. And I really WOULD have waited to start MY company while I trained someone to take my place in HER company. But, alas, it didn't work out that way and we have been pretty successful since then. The other KJ worked for me for many years, trained his replacements (it took two. He was an awesome man and could never have been replaced by just one person) and then ran off and got married and had babies and such. Hmmmm...I am not very good at the long story short thing. Sorry. But that's the answer. Have a good day!

Aww,  How adorable.   Please post photo's of the "such".  I'm just dying to see them !

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

That’s okay.  

I was wondering if it was something like that.  

That was interesting; thanks.  

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

Interesting story...

In many ways, we're similar. AND having worked for someone like that, I can understand your zeal a bit more. Kudus to you, Revenge!

See you are the one NOT reading, I do use the computer, every disc I have is on hard drive so no I do not use the originals (never MADE that claim).  Yes I was asking hypathetical questions about using orignals.  I said each & every disc (that I buy/purchase/spend money on) is with me at every show.  I support the karaoke industry by continually purchasing new discs...a fact you are not seemingly getting.  You keep going on by me not using originals that the replacement discs that I should be buying won't be bought.  I have explained to you that since '93 I have never had to replace a defective disc yet...so that point is null/void.
But the argument between you & Kappy keeps going into fair use, which anyone multirigging, making/creating hard drives for sale, file trading, etc....would not be considered fair use by any means.  I will agree that people that don't buy any discs & run computers ARE IN FACT the problem creating monetary loss to manus & yes these are the people that should be going down!  So 'fair use' must be relating to someone like myself that has purchased ALL of my discs & transferred them to computer for playback.  So yes you are in a round about sense talking about me & people/kj's like me.  Fair use would NEVER apply to people that didn't buy anything in the first place or bought a fully loaded hard drive.  OKAY!!

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

Oh right on, I have some of their discs too, guess that's leaving less & less for the need to pay for replacement!  
So 3 companies have a free replacement policy & one goes so far to replace customs burns.

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

But you SAID you replace any disc that goes bad, that's what businesses do.
 
So now are you claiming that you don't replace discs?  You said it yourself & I THINK I reiterated, that I probably wouldn't unless I could find it used or NOS on ebay for cheap, otherwise I wouldn't bother as 1 disc wouldn't make or break the show! but in so buying a replacement disc in this manner, wouldn't benefit the manu in any way in the first place, so again, replacement discs are not a manus slight form of income.



So you break a disc, how does your insurance cover that?  Do you turn in a claim for that $20?  How much deductible do you have to pay for that disc?

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

OK....I have been reading this thread until mu eye has started twitching, and I can already predict the next response by many people to each others statements....

BUT, on a differrent note, I do have an interesting question for Revenge...

How do you handle discs that manufacturers lose the rights for, such as SC8125? Isn't playing that disc illegal since you should have returned it to the store, and not kept it in a safe deposit box? Or maybe DK02- with Mack the Knife by Bobby Darrin. If you use that version, the license has expired, and they were forced to take it off later versions of the set. Did you pull that disc?

And what about these companies that published music illegally, without paying copyright to the artists? Do you play any of those 'illegal' discs?

Just curious, since you are so proud of being 100% legal....

_________________
Let's Kick the Tires and Light the Fires!

Exactly my point.  Those of us that aren't clear about certain areas of ambiguity within current "Fair Use" exception understand that the current laws in this area deliberately ALLOW for areas of Grey WHERE EVER it exists. ALL users of Copyrighted material have certain "Fair Use" rights whether yet documented or not. Grey area means just that, Yet to be established. This isn't subject to interpretation by any of us as of yet based solely on our "side-walk" opinions, but what we do know is that the Court System ALWAYS in such cases factors in EVERYTHING. This includes "Reasoning behind an action" "Intent of the action", and as you've stated TTowntenor, degree of monetary loss by a specific action to the Plaintiff (assuming tried in court). Clearly, MANY cases don't harm the holder of a license at all, in fact in some cases, to not backup would just be plain foolish (based on certain allowances that likely DO exist under fair use, and would VERY unlikely be subject to charges of "copyright infringement" in a court of law) but even to state this is merely MY opinion. I WOULD back up and assume responsibility for my actions regarding this (yet to be established crime) if I was found guilty, and I'd justify my actions based upon my intent, and reasoning.  My intent is to have at hand (if/when needed) material so I can work, but also material that didn't cost me $40,000 assuming I was even able to get the material at all between time of theft, and time I must work. In a temporary use case BACK UP is allowable !  I cited this too, however Revenge Karaoke insists she's above all exception, She just knows SO much more than current law  LOL

The court system ONLY is allowed such discretion CASE by CASE. Realistically what this means is NOBODY as of yet can factually tell many KJ's they are guilty of anything. However common sense does dictate that there are some cases that clearly go overboard and cost the Manus, Copyright holders money by an individuals deliberately avoiding to pay ANY reasonable amount of money on originals, however still working with their (what might amount to) $40,000 pirated library.  In fact amounts can be calculated quite tangibly (such as in the case of the Ebayer selling well over 100,000 copies of pirated CD-G format).  ALL blanket statements Revenge Karaoke makes regarding "You all are guilty" are unfounded and substantiated by nothing more than her OWN opinion that if "Fair Use has not yet been clearly defined within the realm of Karaoke" her $750 Copyright Atty has deputized her know all say all voice of the US Court Systems ruling on future Copyright Law case law.  Why this is frustrating is she's above the current law.  She feels at liberty to convert "grey area" into Guilt Charge  LMAO

It's terribly babyish, and clearly her acting out a desire for control.


To discuss something with her is like having a conversation with a "see and say" toy.
You pull the lever, and it says " JUDGE Revenge Karaoke says GUILTY". She really thinks she is a scholar in Copyright Law.  :yes:




Well, Excuse me PRINCESS
 :worship:  :worship:  :worship:



.
.

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

I believe that a 1:1 user would not be prosecuted, no it hasn't been tested in court, but someone WILL eventually take it all the way.  Every manufacturer of the software, every manufacturer of the hardware & every retailer - both small & large ALL advertise these systems as 'never having to carry your discs around again' or are geared/promoted to the commercial/pro kj user - some even go as far as to state that as well - for the professional kj.  I know I have saved each & every one of these ads, website ads, email ads & anything else coming from these manus & retailers.  Along with the IP Justice findings & every one of these advertisements, I think that a true 1:1 user would get out of any punishement as the people who make the products, the people who distribute the products, the people who sell the products to the consumer through legitimate sources all tell the buyer that it is ok to use the hard drive systems & computers.  Even the advertisers on this site, 5 out of 6 that sell equipment, sell hard drive systems for commercial use.  1 advertiser that manufacturers equipment MAKES  a hard drive system.  So 6 out of 8 advertisers on this site alone promote the use of hard drive karaoke geared toward the pro/commercial user.
So each & every one of these parties should be just as guilty as a kj running a computer that has bought all their discs.
Don't go into the arguement just because it's made legally, don't mean it can be used illegally.  Guns ARE made legally, they have legal purposes, but I can guarantee you not ONE gun shop has ever sold a gun with an advertisment stating that you could go out & do an illegal act like these karaoke retailers & manufacturers do!

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

Lonnie,  


  Any idea as to whether the MTU Hoster legal disclaimer regarding CD-G use is respected ?   Or is it just a derivative of IP Justice, or vice versa ?  I have NO knowledge of Hoster,  haven't gotten into that type software yet.

  Reason being, ANYONE can reference Hosters legal section and realize that CD-G and Karaoke application is loaded with statements that refute the ongoing "Illegal" cry. Yet I know nothing regarding whether or not it's legal section if respected, nor do I know by whom it is or isn't respected.

  I was stating what I believe based on current Laws interpretations of ambiguity in current Copyright Law.  However in reading MTU Hosters legal section, there's plenty of interesting food for thought regarding this area.

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

Steve, it's good to see your actually looking at the copyright laws, fair use and the home audio recording act. My question would be seeing as you have those things in front of you, where in the fair use act does it ever mention cdg.? and where in the home audio act does it mention cdg. Yes they certainly mention audio recordings and very specifically "AUDIO RECORDINGS" nothing about audio visual recordings ( that would be movies) cdg's require the same copyrights as movies at this time. Which is not the same as an audio production.  So I'm curious why your spending so much time on fair use.

I believe MTU's legal stance is basically directing the IP Justice findings as they were the ones that paid for the initial research in 2003 & the latest study in 2007.

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

I believe you have hit on the very "key" that is causing all the uncertainty.  Much of the existing copyright laws were written prior to the boom in tech.  And many are just not sure exactly what is what.  This goes back to what Steve has been saying all along.  Regardless of the "law" a case must be judged on it own merit to see how it fits in.

I think common sense would dictate if it was all that clear, the CDG companies would have already done something at least with those who are obvious violators.

I may be wrong but most of the copyright laws concerning copyrights and fair use still deal vinyl and tape.  i think the shift format is something that no one is 100% sure.

Read the Sound Choice forums and you will find that even SC doesn't seem to be concerned as much with the 1:1 user as they do with the multi-riggers and file swappers.

Kelly

Phxkj,       *EQUITABLE RULE OF REASON* is what will be considered.

  Below is a tiny portion of what started me on this search wondering.  While I can't and don't profess to have answers, and might at times be doing things that aren't currently deemed as legal,  there are certain situations where I will "in good faith", and out've respect to ME (when I feel there is NO current reasonable alternative) exercise a certain degree of risk.  What I will use to guide me is not necessarily currently established or unestablished law.  Yet the VAST grey, which does allow for some degree of play. Cases will be tried using "reason", "intent", "conpensatory damages', and MONETARY damages are what appear to be main determinant aspects of these cases.  Little else can prevail in a court case.  Where there's grey, courts look for "reason" and weigh ALL factors.  As stated, this is ALWAYS tried CASE by CASE.    The purchaser of original material isn't going to be the person industry tries to kick in the face for "backing up" their investment using it in limited circumstance,  to me it'd be irrational to assume I have to worry about this based on what I've read (my opinion only).  Assuming my material was stolen,  naturally I'd use my back up as long as I must, and consult with an Atty asking the Atty if for MY use,  I really should go out and spend another 40K.  

Everyone must read this, and make their own decisions using "good faith" and "equitable reason" (which does not preclude *us*) and then search for
particulars.

University of Minnesota.

Copyright and determination regarding "Fair Use"

The statutory language of Fair Use (Section 107) is simple and seems clear,nonetheless, conducting a four-factor fair use analysis is critical to any good faith fair use assertion. Without careful consideration of each of the factors you may inadvertently overstep the boundaries of fair use

Because there are no bright line markers that define it, you must rely on your good sense and an "equitable rule of reason" to guide you to the safe harbors fair use can provide, or to seek permissions when your analysis leans in that direction. Balancing the four factors results in an opinion about an uncertain matter. Your opinion may differ from that of others.


Understanding the Four Factors of Fair Use

To determine whether any particular use is a fair use, you should conduct a case-by-case analysis based on the factors below.

First Factor: Purpose and Character of the Use

Nonprofit, educational, and personal uses are generally favored fair uses while commercial uses are less likely to be deemed fair use. Although educational use in and of itself will not assure that your use is a fair use, by the same token not every commercial use will fail as a fair use. Transformative uses, uses that result in the creation of a new work, with a new purpose and different character are favored as fair uses over uses that merely reproduce an original work. The more transformative a particular use is the less significant the other factors will be as they weigh against fair use.

Second Factor: The Nature of the Copyrighted Work

Factual works, published works and scientific articles that are factual in nature are more likely to be considered available for fair use than are creative, imaginative, artistic, or unpublished works. Additionally certain "consumable" works, e.g. workbooks and standardized tests are not likely to be considered available for fair use.

Third Factor: Amount and Substantiality of the Portion Used

The statute gives no bright line indication concerning how much of a work may be used under fair use but the implication is that Thus, use of only a small portion of a work is favored.  However in some circumstance e.g. uses like research, classroom use, personal use that already weigh in favor of fair use, you MAY use more of a work. In fact in such cases use of the entire work may be appropriate and allowable as a fair use if using that much is required to accomplish your purpose.

Fourth Factor: Effect on the Potential Market for or Value of the Work

Courts have established the availability of permissions or licenses as one of the potential values for copyrighted works. Positioned as the fourth factor it is a bit easier to consider market effects. If the first three factors weigh in favor of fair use then market harm should carry less weight even when considering the permissions market, since the market is for permissions that are required. Conversely, if the first three factors are tipping the balance in favor of permission then market harm will carry more weight in the balancing of the factors.

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

This is loaded with provision.  Terms such as "May" "likely" "case by case only" "intentionally vague and confusing",  and in some places there's a lot more that indicates "reason" "intent" is all a court will look at, assuming there even is incurred monetary loss to Plaitiff..

But again,  this is currently MY opinion on what I've read.   I am not smart enough to state this is "fact".   I can't, this is grey area law  LOL

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

Lonnie, several times I've seen where you say mtu paid for the IP Justice
" RESEARCH" You've been around long enough to know that IP site was up before mtu knew it was there, In fact mtu's site,when it found IP, stated that you could go to the IP site and it would back up their claims of " possible legality"(my words not theirs) Then a year or so after that mtu claimed to have paid for the research (BULL)
Mtu I am sure has made a donation to IP BTW the only law firm I've ever seen that solicites donations, and now they make each other more credible. The only research apparent for the 2007 myths is that the #1 case law they used is no longer listed as, finally somebody read it and found it was in direct contradiction to what they are trying to assert. Lonnie I know your a computer guy but I also know you've seen these sites for a long time. One more thought have you ever heard the saying let the buyer beware.

No I actually don't know the IP Justice site was up long before MTU made the 'claims', I do know that MTU has been making karaoke products since at least 1996 though with the release of MicroCDG - the precursor to MicroStudio.  I wasn't really even pondering a computer system then so I can't say I did any deep research at that point.  I started looking more into it in 2005 & finally bought the program in 2006 & that is when I came upon that claim, I have seen it before that floating around on the other forums as well but didn't research who claimed to have funded it then.  I didn't even get a computer until Mar. this year, so being the computer is relatively new for me.  MTU claims they paid for research, I have no reason to doubt it.
What does me having seen these sites for a long time have to do with anything?  I was answering a question to the best of my knowledge, & best of my knowledge they paid for research, you don't believe it - fine, that's your opinion.  You can't prove anymore than I can.

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

Let me just be brief and explain MY feelings regarding this.

Bottomline current law or not.

Assuming I have an extensive library, that is $40K,  assuming that gets stolen, assuming I work only friday and saturday night for 10 hours a week,  and my options are to back this up with my blanks, and go consult with a Copyright Atty for a several hour consult (at $200-$300 per hour) asking this individual the following.

Atty ____,

    "My option might only be to go out and purchase another library at 40K according to current law.  While I'm not sure of the current laws regarding using my backups as opposed to spending such a high sum of money for a new and original library, if I were to attempt to circumvent paying a sum I really don't have, would there be a likelihood of me being charged with nearly that much assuming I am prosecuted given my current use situation ?"

     No Atty would say absolutely not, or absolutely.  We are dealing with likelihood, and conditions where there might not currently be a middle ground for a small person like me under current established law.  If there's no current reasonable law, or accomodation other than spending a huge sum considering I purchased the originals two weeks prior at least I know I HAD to spend the money, and this would be based on my Copyright Atty consult informing me that even using backups in such a case MIGHT result in a severe ruling against me where there's no special defense to such copyright infringement. That's extremely unlikely however.  BUT, unless my legal councel tells me I must spend another 40K,  to automatically do-so might be quite a foolish and superfluous a thing to do.  It might turn out I DON'T HAVE to, nothing I have done can be prosecuted. It's OK to try to seek the middle-ground, see if it exists !   Again, I do not know,  this is grey area currently, and even Atty's have a tough time with these areas, hence they are viewed case by case.

 So while the proponents of big business and governent rights will zealously state "You must buy a new library to support the Manus, and Copyright holders",  *I TOO* have certain reasonable rights.  All Copyrighted material falls under Fair Use, certain media formats just aren't as defined at present.
I will not go out and spend loads of money that I don't have UNLESS my Atty tells me "You need to".   Not another persons "hypothetical consult experience", but MY OWN copyright Atty.

     Until such a point, ALL speculation is hypothetical.  We know there's Grey, We know "reason" is viewed by courts.  We will never however know if two judges will view this the same way in any law situation. Assuming this CAN even get to trial. The Atty might have a simpler option, this is a vast area of law.

     Judges don't go out've their way to see to it that the small struggling business person becomes a victim by example when the intent of the small guy was to reasonably make an accomodation allowance given his own particular case and doing so really harmed noone weighing all factors. Anyway,  I'd take certain risks, assuming I believe what I'm doing is "reasonable and balanced".

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

Exactly what this gets down to !   If more admitted that their beliefs in this area are likely only opinion at this point (since it's hypothetical law), and there are no generalities in such law, there'd be no point in arguing that which we really aren't qualified at this point to argue.  To discuss and exchange opinion regarding, sure..  To try to approach it from a philosophical angle, it can be interesting, but ultimately courts have discretion in these cases.   I know if I were smart enough to have answers,  I'd not be here typing about this content, I'd be in court trying to make money in this related area  LOL

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

Has anyone noticed that Karaoke.com is no longer selling CAVS hard drive systems on their website?  Unless I am not looking in the right place, ---but they WERE there about two months ago and not now.
Hmmmmmm????