Karaoke Forums

Cars = karaoke tracks?

Arguing through analogy most often occurs when the arguer can not back up a position with logic, evidence or facts.
It seems to me the differences between a car and a karaoke track are too great to make a valid argument through analogy. In fact I'm not quite sure what argument you are trying to make.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

If the KJ isn't certified by SC then SC offers the audit process to what? Oh yeah, prove that they're not a pirate.

And why is it an accussed pirate gets the audit for free, but if a legit KJ requests the audit SC charges for it? Oh yeah $$$$. Becuase if your not willing to pay for the audit you must be a pirate.

I'll stick with my previous opinion:
"It seems as though SC wants to lump everyone into one of two categories. You are either a certified (read: legal) SC KJ or your NOT (read: pirate)."

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Yes. Spin is his middle name. He had it legally changed a few years ago.



Timberlea came up with a good analogy, which I applauded. Chip then spun that analogy around to fit his agenda, as is his way. Know your buzzwords!

Then there is the extremely tired trotting out of 14 year old screen shots from a defunct forum, as if it means anything in 2012, but I digress.



Hmmm. I have never been certified or audited and have no plans to do either. Guess I fall into category #3.



Who said other board members are enemies? Except for you?

A "good analogy?"... Really?
I didn't realize that Grand Theft of an auto was a civil offense.

I didn't spin anything.... as a matter of fact, I "un-spun" Timberlea's since his "assumption" was automatically "criminal theft" and not a civil action that had previously granted permission. His analogy was off by at least a Canadian kilometer....

And you might not like me "trotting out an old post" from a defunct forum, so why don't you trot out the "old post(ings)" that specifically terminate the originals before any lawsuits occurred?

Haven't got any?

Bummer...

(yep, looks like a trap to me but you're mileage might vary)....

. Classic.

You are the king Sir!

Timberlea's analogy was based on the assumption of theft. I don't think anyone involved in this thread condone the use of stolen tracks, so why use theft in an analogy to prove a point?



I've seen the screen shot and I believe that c.staley feels that SC should stand behind their word. Times are different and things change, but it would appear to me that he feels that SC's current tactics are conflicting with their past stance on backups. He feels dup'd and he's entitled to that opinion.

If you know his middle name is spin then must also know he's going to post the screen shot when he feels it proves his point or is relevant to his argument.



Category #3? Can you please tell me what you feel category #3 is and how that will keep you from being sued?



Ok maybe enemy is was a little harsh.

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

You said there are two categories. I fit into neither.

SC knows who am I, where I live as well and where I KJ. I will let you know if/when they come knocking.

Oh that's right you leased the GEM series.

I guess your right there is a 3rd category, SC Licensed Authorized User.

Since there is no need for SC to audit your GEM series there's no certification status for being a certified KJ?

You'd think with the money you are spending with them and that they know your a legal KJ that you would be added to their certified KJ's list.

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

I reviewed Soundchoice's Certified KJ list and it appears that there are a number of KJ's listed that are listed based on the lease of the GEM series complete with certificate #.


It would appear that SC considers GEM series owners or atleast 71 of them as certified KJ's.

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

And I guess everyone missed in my initial post, "replace the word steal with replicated library for free or next to nothing" It still doesn't negate that Ford would be on your @$$ if you drove around in a counterfeit Ford and they found out. Chip, as for policies, how many times has the U.S. government or any government or any business have changed their policies on things. I guarantee that the US policy on Vietnam is much different now than it was in 1965 or Iran or Iraq or health care or anything else. Companies can change their policies, they are not laws.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Similarly....

I can give my daughter permission to stay out until midnight on weekends.

I can take that permission away.

I have said before that I am not a fan of the tactics Sound Choice uses, but I have no issue with Kurt Slep changing his mind on a public statement. Especially given the rapid evolution of technology. Everyone knows that local, state, federal, international laws have not kept up with technology.


-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I didn't miss that, but your scenario doesn't include the scenario of the KJ who legally purchased their discs.

If the case is as earthling12357 puts it:


This would pertain to KJ's who legally purchased their CDG's and ripped them to mp3+g's.

If media shifting is determined to be legal it won't mean that all mp3+g's are legal. Only mp3+g's being used by an individual who actually owns the original media they were ripped from would be legal (with or without a manu's certification).

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

I hasten to point out that it is not merely media-shifting that SC is suing over--it's media-shifting coupled with commercial use of the media-shifted tracks.

Really?!? I thought SC was suing for the illegal copying of their Trademark (i.e. trademark infringement).

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

I would rather have the certification than always be looking over my back. Again it all comes down to All rights reserved. The manu's have the right to decide who can use their product in a digital form and who cannot. In the case of those who can prove they are 1:1 they have granted the permission (Or decided to look the other way) but for those who don't own a single disc since they NEVER allowed download of their SC TM product for distribution, they are saying get legit or quit which basically says pay for what you've stolen or go out of business.

_________________
The Line Array Experiment is over. Nothing to see here. Move along.

I don't see how commercial use, by itself, determines an illegal use. I'm not aware of any court that has ruled that KJ´s have less rights than other consumers to media-shift their cdg's.

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Yes. The "commercial use of the media-shifted tracks" part is the trademark infringement. Trademark law is concerned with "use in commerce"--i.e., commercial use. The media-shifting without authorization--because a trademark is attached (something that would not be involved in a regular MP3 transfer)--is "counterfeiting." So, when we sue for "trademark infringement involving counterfeiting," that is the same thing as calling it "media-shifting coupled with commercial use of the media-shifted tracks."

There have been some people who have complained on here that we "sue for trademark" but we're really after "pirates." We're actually after both pirates and people who media-shift without authorization (but who are otherwise 1:1). Both groups have been engaged in behavior that is described by the statute as "trademark infringement involving counterfeiting," but they get treated differently; the 1:1 but unauthorized group gets an audit and a dismissal, while the pirates have the choice to get 100% legal or get out of the industry.

Of course, if you want to media-shift and don't want to get sued, the audit is really the way to go.

I'm curious why you would go are after people who media-shift without authorization (but otherwise 1:1) only to offer them an audit and dismissal.

Is there something I'm missing in the audit process where it benefits SC to go through the audit process at no cost to the KJ only to find that they are in fact 1:1 and dismiss?

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Look, "All Rights Reserved" doesn't give a Manufacturer, who puts their product out for sale, complete and total rights over the consumer. EVERY manufacturer of ANYTHING in the WORLD has a TM.

It simply means that YOU, the CONSUMER, do NOT have the right to use their TM in any way that is NOT allowed. i.e. using their TM in sales, advertising, or any way that passes their TM as yours to another.

A KJ is NOT using anyone's TM, in and of itself, in any way to PROFIT from either by sale or advertising, which is what is meant by "All Rights Reserved."

In this case, SC, themselves, is doing the advertising by having placed their TM IN the TRACK.

We, the KJs didn't do anything to cause a TM to appear. The KJs are 2rd party to the Product, unless you bought straight from SC, and are NOT responsible for the appearing of the TM.

You have a right to backup the TRACK/DISC using software that takes the Ones and Zeros from a "DIGITAL" CD and transfers them to the exact TRANSFER of Ones and ZEROS to whatever DIGITAL medium you wish.

The SC TM simply goes along with the TRANSFER.

The SC TM is secondary to the TRACK/DISC, as SC doesn't own the MUSIC that is on the TRACK/DISC that you want to backup.

Do you think, during a Backup strategy, the KJ stopped and thought, wow...am I going to backup a TM? Noooooo. A KJ's thoughts were to BACKUP the MUSIC!

It, also, states on Karaoke CDs that BROADCAST and PUBLIC PERFORMANCE is prohibited. Do you think that KJs are breaking those prohibitions simply by having a Karaoke Show in a BAR?

Just because the secondary SC TM is displayed on a TV doesn't make the job COMMERCIAL.

A signal running to a TV is NOT a TRANSMISSION signal, which would need a MODULATED CARRIER WAVE to ride on through space.

This is ALSO why KJs do not perform BROADCAST. There is no MODULATED CARRIER WAVE.

There is no PUBLIC PERFORMANCE as a KJ is not paying anyone to PERFORM.

A KJ is not performing COMMERCIAL TRADE and with respect to showing MARKS in a SERVICE environment, the MARKS are NOT displayed in the sale or advertising of services from the KJs standpoint. SERVICE applies to the COMMERCIALLY Government recognized Company...like SC...got nothing to do with a KJ.

To say the SC mark is COUNTERFEIT would to say that a legal BACKUP of a TRACK/DISC is COUNTERFEIT.

"I would rather have the certification than always be looking over my back."
this statement is the reason so many have a problem with the methods.

you can either pay, or wait to get sued.

if you use backed up tracks, you are damaging SC.
if you pay for an audit, you are no longer damaging SC.
???????????????????????????????????????????????????

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens