Karaoke Forums

But don't mess around with Jim.

1) Well, let's see:

-----------BEGIN QUOTE from PRS license------------------------

3.13 No Repertoire Work may be used in such a way as to imply approval or endorsement by the writer of, or a performer associated with, such a Repertoire Work, or of the content of
the Karaoke Product or the part of the Karaoke Product which includes the Repertoire Work, unless the relevant Member has specifically consented thereto for the purposes of this Agreement


Without prejudice to the generality of the above, any Karaoke Product will be deemed to be in breach of this clause (unless the relevant Member has
specifically consented thereto for the purposes of this Agreement), if:
(a) the product title names featured artists or groups and/or featured composer(s)/writer(s), and/or
(b) the packaging or supporting campaign for any product names or graphically depicts featured artists or groups and/or featured composer(s)/writer(s), and/or
(c) the Karaoke Product includescontent depicting an artist(s) associated with one or more Repertoire Works included on such Karaoke Product (unless the artist(s) or the artist(s)’s management
has consented thereto).
-------------END QUOTE -----------


So, I'm thinking that PRS LIcensing would not allow "In the style of....." without the specific permission of the artist.

Note: While one might see a similar looking page on Sunfly & Zoom, the designation on the Zoom/Sunfly discs to the "artists" is actually nothing of the sort: it is the designation to the "writer" of the song - who also happens to be the artist.

This would be a reason that SC discs made in the U.S. have it, and the GEM discs made in the UK do not.

2) Doowhatchulike's Gem user friend says that some of them do, which would make your statement above incorrect.

If you would be kind enough to supply an explaination? Why do the GEMS mentioned above have it?

1) I think that if you read that language carefully, you'll see that they are not using it to prohibit "style of" designations. They don't want the artist's name in the title of the product (as in "The Songs of Pat Boone" printed on the CD or the packaging).

2)The use of a "style of" designation does not imply approval or endorsement by the artist. It implies that the artist's rendition is being imitated.



The GEM discs do not use the artist's name in the disc titles.

3) The GEM tracks do carry "style of" designators. They are permitted under the KAR license. By the way, in order to qualify for the KAR license, the product has to be submitted to PRS. Do you think they would have issued the license if the "style of" designators were against the rules?

1) I did, and I would see "in the style of..." as an indication of endorsement.

2) According to Doowhatchulike's GEM user friend, that statement is false, at least in regard to SOME of the GEMS that he has. This could indicate a different region of production - one other than the UK, where the GEMS are licensed.

3) Simply untrue. The majority of available GEMS do NOT carry that page. Since you claim that PRS allows it, I will ask- again- why has this designator been removed from the discs made in the UK, and yet shows up on a few GEM discs?

It's on the disc face, but not on the opening screen on playback. Even Bazza's pics prove that.

I have tried to ignore your statement regarding posts that were 100% true, but you are making this difficult- or, I should say, MORE difficult.

I will ask again- Why are so very few GEM discs-so far- showing "in the style of..."?

Unless you will be kind enough to supply an answer, I will have to assume that these particular discs might be non-UK production ( US made reproductions of the FINITE number of GEM discs licensed in the UK), though the GEMS of that numeration were ONLY licensed in the UK. While this would only be a guess on my part, I simply cannot come up with another explaination without your help.

Please be kind enough to explain the descrepancy, and save SC even more label tarnish.

I do not own a GEM so it took me a bit to check it out BUT was curious so I went and checked 3 different Gem series owned by locals. It appears someone is telling a big ole whopper. I found nothing on any of the three as described by Joe C.'s "friend".

1) A pic of the label from a GEM disc #10001 showing the artists listed on the disc face.
.

You have been shown many times how to post pics & even a way to host the pic in an outside source & just post a link here.

...AND, MANY TIMERS, I have stated that I know HOW to post pics, but that the process does not work for me- possibly because I use dial-up for this forum. Do you remember now? The "browse" and "add file" buttons depress, but do nothing. I'm pretty sure you have been told this before.

...AND, MANY TIMERS, I have stated that I know HOW to post pics, but that the process does not work for me- possibly because I use dial-up for this forum. Do you remember now? The "browse" and "add file" buttons depress, but do nothing. I'm pretty sure you have been told this before.

But other sites with a link shouldn't be a problem. Can you post pics anywhere else?