Karaoke Forums

Well I'm saying just because a company is out of business, that you can't just grab their product and apply for a trademark and say it's now yours. The federal government is very specific and very strict about issuing a trademark for a product, in that you have to document when and how you created it, how you've distributed it. etc. Current karaoke manufacturers have done nothing of the sort when it come to karaoke tracks that were created (and apparently, in many cases, not properly licensed). In some cases, the owners are doing active prison time (MM) and are not in any position to convey a trademark to anyone. I say if a company is out of business, you don't have to worry about about another company scooping up their content and claiming it as their own. My opinion.

You are preaching to the choir Rick, I have always felt the line given out by certified hosts that viable manus could or would obtain orphan labels was a load of baloney sliced anyway they wanted it served up. The only reason until Cloud they would want to obtain the orphans would be to keep hosts from using them, they were never serious about resuming production, just keeping product off the market. Have a nice day.

Okay....

Lone Ranger - *I* am a certified host and I have never said anything about SGB being picked up by anyone. So please be a little more specific instead of lumping everyone together.

Also - "orphan labels" are a thorn in every legitimate hosts side as well as the manufacturers that do currently produce content. The labels that still exist but don't seem to care, and the ones that went under have allowed a large amount of content to thrive in the wild and essentially become "freeware". Anyone can download this old content and create a show with a sizable selection from labels that won't or can't pursue any action to stop it. So there is a valid cause for concern.

Considering the number of times I have seen folks claim that it is the host, and not the music selection that make a karaoke show, then it seems to me that all the orphan brands in the hands of the right host could be a great show. And they would have absolutely nothing to worry about from the manufacturers.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Great Chris then let the hosts that choose to take in the orphans and give them a home let them. Sometimes I think we forget what karaoke was intended to be. People sharing good times over a drink and a song. Much like the Ale houses in England and Ireland I so often frequented. I didn't mean to lump you in with the crowd, of certified hosts, but if you identify with a group, it is assumed that you share their views. All I know is that I am reaching the end of my life, and after I am gone you still will be fighting over what? Have a nice day.

The way I am reading this is that you think it is okay to steal as long as everyone can do it over a beer and a song and have a good time doing it.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

What I'm saying Chris is that the whole situation of who is righteous and who is a sinner is so muddled that it will never be settled for sure. No host with any certainty can ever claim that 100% of the materials they use is legal and all the proper fees were paid all the way down the line. The music product is merely a tool used by the host, how skillfully the tool is used depends upon the host aka craftsman. With the Cloud Service I think we are beginning to see the final solution to the problem. Cloud does not care if the host is legal or illegal, as long as they subscribe to the service they are entitled to use the library. It is up to the host and the venue to make the karaoke a success, merely having Cloud does not assure anything. The one plus with Cloud is that the service is responsible for the correctness and legality of the library, that burden is taken off the host and venue. Have a nice day.

P.S. I see little difference between the Cloud Service and the License to run a karaoke service that I originally proposed, except with Cloud the host will not have to obtain a library, it will be made readily available to them, and they will be able to compete with other hosts sooner rather than later.

"Possession of stolen goods "
From Wikipedia,

"Possession of stolen goods is a crime in which an individual has bought, been given, or acquired stolen goods some other way.
In many countries, if an individual has accepted possession of goods or property and knew they were stolen, then the individual is typically charged with a misdemeanor or felony, depending on the value of the stolen goods. If the individual did not know the goods were stolen, then the goods are returned to the owner and the individual is not prosecuted. However, there are often exceptions, due to the difficulty of proving or disproving an individual's knowledge that the goods were stolen."

Truely, to be without sin, we need to get rid of many of our tracks........some of us, may actual be up for a possible felony.......
Like I've said here many times.......many people on here tend to draw a line, where they feel comfortable.......

Johnny - I am no different. I am comfortable with a certain process. I draw the line at I paid the manufacturers for what they told me they licensed and I have paid individuals for authentic discs. What I don't do is download music that was ripped from those discs just because it is comes from a company that no longer exists or a company that isn't enforcing their rights.

I believe there is a clear distinction between using a product that may or may not be licensed properly by the manufacturers and using a product that was downloaded from the Internet without any compensation to anyone at all at any level.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

If we did not license these tracks and obtain them legally why would we only put up partial catalogs? Once again, have a question just ask! We have worked VERY hard on obtaining the licenses that we have received. If we were not following ALL of the rules then we would have the COMPLETE catalogs up for DTE (FKA Chartbuster), DK, SBI, Sunfly, Stage Stars, and Magic Music.

Then what you are saying gretchen is that all of the music offered on cloud is certified by the company to be correct and legal, taking the burden of the validity of the material off the host and venue and placing it on the Cloud Service? This does not give you the power, however to sue in court for all of these labels does it? Have a nice day.

Not quite so black and white as some hosts seem to think it is, there are many shades of gray even with some of the largest and most established manus.

That's nice. However it has nothing to do with the previous posts stating that CB, DT, PR, or any other company never bought the SGB trademark or library. They have no right to sue for Trademark Infringement in regard to SGB, and never did.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

They never sued for SGB. Gretchen, herself, told me in an e-mail that they had no problem with us ripping our SGB discs to hard drives, back when CB still existed. They owned SGB, but didn't enforce the trademark. I imagine that is still the case with DTE.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

that's the point smooth, they did NOT own SGB.
no problem with you ripping them because nobody owned the trademark.

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

As Paradigm stated, thaat's the point. Somewhere along the trail a rumor started that SGB's trademark was bought up by CB ( and other orphans bought up by other companies) with the hopes of pulling the same stuff using those trademarks as SC is doing.

These orphan trademarks are still just that. I never claimed that Gretchen said otherwise. Of course they have no problem with ripping another mfrs'. brand, because if even they did, it wouldn't matter.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

In regard to the OP- Sound Choice Filings- I am beginning to think that these may simply fade away. They seem to have more failure than success when brought into court ( as one may have figured), and will probably just do what they have to for any open suits. One big reason is that they have simply had several suits dismissed per their own request. To me, this indicates a waning commitment ( and financial losses).

Regarding the Cloud, they are yet uncommitted. This leads me to wonder if their next move may not be a competitive version of the same of their own..... Maybe this will be their new focus.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

Thank you Joe. We were led to believe that there would be wave upon wave of lawsuits all over the country, devastating karaoke piracy. BS. Not only have the filings trickled down to nothing, they still have outstanding litigation that has not been resolved from action filed in 2010 (NC specifically).

These last posts reinforce my own conclusions about the progress and legal status of the current suits still out here and pending. The implication by the true believers is that an army of investigators are at work right now uncovering the evil pirate network. Whipping up a frenzy in order to in my opinion increase sales of either the GEM series for SC or encourage hosts to protect themselves by jumping on the cloud. If SC develops it's own competing version of Cloud then the manus will still be divided and competing with each other. Rather than uniting and working together, guess some things never change. PRLLC. has not resumed new filings after taking over CB trademark protection, and has not even resumed certification of the former CB product. What they are doing is pursing suits already started by CB before the collapse by refiling under their own name. During the original DT Summit is was stated by the industry experts that the current viable manus faced implosion by sometime in 2013 if Cloud fails. I wonder how many players will still be around this time next year. Have a nice day.

Manufacturers in any industry should not be "getting together" to do anything. Why can't manufacturers be competent to run their own frickin download site? That is not rocket science to charge a fee and download a zip file. No wonder they can't stay in business if they can't master a simple transaction on the web.

Those who believed that such a small company had THAT kind of reach, were misled. There aren't even enough judges for that kind of legal push. I have said it from the minute I got on here, you will NEVER stop all the piracy. You would need a litigation force of THOUSANDS to do such a thing, and hundreds of judges just dedicated to this cause.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE