Karaoke Forums

Do you know how many people have actually been charged the $500 fee for an audit?

Do you know how many people have actually passed a post-suit audit?

Because without that information, your assessment that this is "pure GREED" is pretty much just your uninformed opinion.

Where did you come up with that figure?

Is that the price per disc from1990 or the actual first day that these disc were released?

As so many have reminded me here, you can't get the same price for a disc today that we old-timers paid for way back when.

But if you're interested in mine, they are available for $39.95 each – except the custom discs which were fifty dollars each. And no, I do not sell them individually.

I will take every SC8125 you have at $39.95 each just as you offered.

Edited.....Bah....you won't sell individually. Oh well. Let them collect dust......

-Chris

The problem with your theory--and with the judge's, frankly--is that the statute is explicit on the point: Our responsibility is to prove their sales of goods and services sold or offered for sale in connection with the infringing activity. The burden is on the defendant to prove all elements of cost or deduction claimed. If there is to be a deduction for some "baseline" profit they would have earned without karaoke--assuming that they could substantiate that in a non-speculative way--then the burden is on them to prove it. They did not offer a single shred of evidence as to ANY costs or deductions. The numbers we provided were THEIR numbers--the only things we did were to correct an obvious math error and to extrapolate a figure for the first half of 2012 based on the 5-year average.



No. It is not the display of the logo by itself; it is the display of the logo and use of the product to promote the sale of other goods. That is the way the defendants chose to make sales--give away the karaoke for free and sell the alcohol, just as the sell they alcohol and give away the mixers.

EDIT: I didn't make this clear before. 15 USC § 1114(1) provides as follows:

Any person who shall, without the consent of the registrant—

(a) use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; or

(b) reproduce, counterfeit, copy, or colorably imitate a registered mark and apply such reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation to labels, signs, prints, packages, wrappers, receptacles or advertisements intended to be used in commerce upon or in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive,

shall be liable in a civil action by the registrant for the remedies hereinafter provided.

The bold parts are critical. First, you must have use in commerce of the infringing mark. Second, the use must be in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of ANY goods or services. The mark need not be attached to the goods. The mark need not even be the drawing point for the sale. What is important is that goods or services are being sold, offered, or distributed and that the mark is being used in connection with the sale, offer, or distribution of those goods.

It is fine for you to disagree that that is what the law should be. Regardless of your disagreement, that is what the law is.

In assessing profits the plaintiff shall be required to prove defendant's sales only; defendant must prove all elements of cost or deduction claimed. In assessing damages the court may enter judgment, according to the circumstances of the case, for any sum above the amount found as actual damages, not exceeding three times such amount. If the court shall find that the amount of the recovery based on profits is either inadequate or excessive the court may in its discretion enter judgment for such sum as the court shall find to be just, according to the circumstances of the case. Such sum in either of the above circumstances shall constitute compensation and not a penalty. The court in exceptional cases may award reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing party.

Such sum in either of the above circumstances shall constitute compensation and not a penalty.

Have you pulled Chartbuster too?

-Chris

You guys want to debate technicalities. The crux of the matter is that their product was stolen. ......

I equally have no respect for theives who steal their music to run their businesses. They are equally disgusting in my eyes.

Really? Was this accusation ( that the product was STOLEN) ever made and proven?

Come to my show and find out....

Where is your show!

-Chris

Call me when you're in Michigan and we can even meet for dinner....

What about me? Will you meet me and have dinner with me when I go to Michigan to visit my family-even though I'm not your mother?

I will be passing thru again in a couple weeks. Got a middle of the week show Chip?