Karaoke Forums

What I am saying is that what SC, PR and WWD are doing is within the bounds of the law and they have the right to protect their intellectual property.

In my opinion, SC could have managed their actions differently to protect their long term relationship with the karaoke community considering their desire to go back into production. They have something to lose - existing customer and future sales. They need to balance protecting their IP and their customer base.

PR, LLC doesn't produce any product (that we know of) and doesn't appear to have any intent on producing any future product. Maybe we will hear differently on the 20th, but I suspect that PR, LLC was only formed for litigation purposes. They have no future sales to consider, only the existing intellectual property. They can sue away without damaging an existing customer base and I am actually fully supportive of that if it also puts a dent in karaoke piracy as a whole.

I don't know who/what World Wide Digital is so I will reserve my opinion until I know more.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

It will maybe put a dent in karaoke piracy, it will more likely hasten the demise of a currently struggling commercial karaoke. Haven't we discussed on another post the drop of in attendance for karaoke shows. Won't this type of shoot from hip legal process, only weaken the industry more? It does no good to give a patient a cure that eventually ends up killing him. It would be far better to let things go on like they have. There might be a few winners, and as long as you are on the winning side it doesn't matter how you win, at least this is what I'm reading from your responses. Let me know if I'm wrong. Have a blessed day.

Last time I checked many celebrities are dead (and companies) and yet their Trademarks (likenesses) are protected by those who own it and I'm pretty sure the celebrities haven't put anything new out. Some people are either naive or trying to look ridiculous on purpose.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Quite the contrary timberlea product is still being made old music is reissued and their is souvenirs for sale at places like Graceland. They are not some dead company but a still thriving concern. They are making something tell me what PR is making except lawsuits? Have a blessed day.

_________________
-- Mark

So Hostess Twinkies are dead, we can all start making our own and calling them Twinkies?

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

No...
The recipe has been sold, and Twinkees will be coming back on the market this Summer.

Hopefully they bring back the fruit pies too, that was my fave.

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

as was CB music, graphics and logo.

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

The difference is while the CB music and graphics might still be produced it will be a reduced library under the DT trademark. No new product will be made under the CB logo, which is necessary from what I have been told, in order to renew the CB trademark next year.

Okay Lone, then take RKO Radio Pictures which went defunct in 1959. By your logic their TMs, logos, and Copyrights must be gone as they haven't produced a darn thing in over 50 years. But alas all that is owned by RKO Pictures LLC which was founded in 1989. Oh how can that be?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Piracy Recovery is suing for copyright infringement as well as trademark on CB product so your point really doesn't matter!

_________________
-- Mark

new production IS NOT required to renew the trademark. A google search and a bit of reading will confirm that fact for you Lone Ranger

So what!!! That's still meaningless. PR, LLC can still sue for Trademark and Copyright infringement on the OLD CB product that DOES STILL EXIST out there. PR, LLC does NOT have to make a single new track or re-issue of an old track under the CB name in order to pursue this.

In comparrison, what NEW stuff has come out in the past 5 years under the name of Elvis Presley??? I'd be willing to bet that there's a copyright and trademark that exists for his name. I'm sure that if someone produces something of his without the proper permissions from his estate, that they will get their A$$es handed to them on a silver platter.

That is very true cue his estate is still managing the trademark, it is active in making a product or providing a service. Elvis's old music is being reissued, souvenirs are being made etc.etc.etc. CB is a defunct label no new product is being made, only rehashed old product under another trademark. Certain conditions have to be met in order for a trademark to be renewed, one of them is to be currently making product under that trademark. That is why it is so critical for SC to be able to make new product, otherwise their trademark also could not be renewed. Have a blessed day.

Sorry I had the lawyer who filed on behalf of CB for their trademark on the phone. She told me the trademark was due to expire next year. One of the conditions for the renewal of the trademark would be currently making product under that trademark. If no new product is made in a three year time frame it is considered abandon ware. Have a blessed day.

While it is true that the logo appears on the movie when shown on the Western channel, or TMC, I don't think they are getting paid for the public display of their logo since they are no longer active companies still making movies. Are they suing TMC trademark or copyright infringement? If anything they are happy that TMC is giving them free advertising, since don't they now make the home libraries that can be purchased? Have a blessed day.

And again, what difference does that make for the company if they are going to sue anyone for past copyright and trademark infringements on the product that already exists? It doesn't matter if the company goes forward or not in producing new or re-issued product for any time period. What they already made is out there. It is still theirs regardless of the current status of their trademark name.


And if that is true (that they can not renew their trademark name), they can just come up with a new name if they decide to make any new product... like Top Hits Monthly became Pop Hits Monthly (because Panorama took that name from Stellar), and later, PHM became Sing It Now. When one name become inaccessible to the company, they create a new name if they are making a new or re-issued product line. In the case of Piracy Recovery, LLC, they are not making a product. As far as we know, they just have claim to the name and all the legal claims associated with that name. Even if the name goes into abondonware, the name still exists, and they can still make any legal claims they want to or need to with regard to the product that does exist under the CB name.

Can someone other than The Lone Ranger correct me if I am wrong?