Karaoke Forums

It is not difficult, even from one looking from the outside in, to see that this response is accurate only if one does not take into account the semantics of this, as some may classify, invisibility cloak and dagger approach to the issues...

Old re-hash here.....




Well of course CB is not a party to these suits now... they're out of business. But, didn't PR, LLC pick all that up (judgements and debts and all) when they took on the ownership of the CB Trademark name?

not if the contract stated ONLY the trademarks were to be transferred to PR. The defunct CB could still own all the debt.

But what about the copyrights? The new lawsuit lists copyright infringement as well which would be on the audio re-recorded rendition of the song.

_________________
-- Mark

It almost seems like that would be where that World Wide bunch (whatever that is supposed to stand for anyway) would come in, but it seems logical to think that there is some blurring of the lines of who owns what, and who has what corresponding rights. Perhaps some of the creditors and/or prevailing companies with suits against CB will get involved and find cause to call this very strange looking hodge-podge of companies into question...

Excuse me James wasn't shakedown lawsuit used by judge Wright in California to describe some other manus same type of legal process, with the mass single suit filing and all? Maybe judge Wright should be sued of libel as well? Have a legal day.

James you continue disappoint me, just when I felt that maybe there was some redeeming value to the SC legal process. That maybe it is not all about the money, you go and crush what little hope I had, that maybe there is a heart in there. With the hundreds of suits you have filed you have never went after a private club or non-profit organization, was that just and oversight on your part? It seems strange that you have never gone after such a target, and PR on it's second joint venture has. Does this mean they are more desperate and ruthless than you and Kurt are? I was hoping it was because you hold yourself and your client to a higher standard. Have a legal day.

the lawsuit is for copyright and trademark infringement. they have copies of CB music on hard drive. how can someone with CB music on hard drive not get sued? what options do they give?

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

It might turn out that if they DON'T give anyone any choice, that fighting in court might actually set a specific precedent concerning whether transferring songs from disc to computer is a problem LEGALLY (not just a matter of a given company's POLICY)...

Thank you for noticing I forgot to post a reference to explain the context of my comment.
I have edited my original post to add that reference.
Here’s the added part:

By that I mean something similar to what United States District Judge Otis D. Wright, II determined Slep-Tone was doing with their Sound Choice trademark lawsuits in Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp., v. Backstage Bar And Grill, et al Case no. 2:11- cv-8305-ODW ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR ATTORNEY’S FEES AND SANCTIONS [97] when he clearly stated:
“Upon consideration of Defendant’s motion papers, the court is convinced that this was nothing more than a shakedown suit.”
In addition he said:
“in this case, Slep-Tone takes trolling to the next level and essentially ignored all requests for discovery, explanations of exculpability, and requirements to act in good faith. Therefore the court finds that Slep-Tone’s conduct was both vexatious and in bad faith, and awards Defendants reasonable attorney’s fees in the sum of $18,105.”

This order is has since been referenced in another case (Expressway Music, Inc v. Slep-Tone Entertainment Corporation) as they are seeking sanctions for allegedly similar conduct.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Excuse me isn't that pure speculation since the terms of the transfer are a big secret. Speculation something I have been taken to task for many times. If the defunct CB could still own all the debt, wouldn't any company filing a suit on behalf of the CB trademark, also be exposed to possible recovery suit by the debtors? Especially since one of the managing partners of Worldwide Digital John Stovall was at one time a principal player at the now defunct CB. Have a blessed day.

Nice back-pedal earthling....

_________________
-- Mark

Let's see 1 Judge in California that referenced "a shake down" VS 14 judges in 6 other states ruling in favor of SC. So a .06375 (less than 7%) chance of getting out of a lawsuit if you are named.

That is still a better percentage than the number of settled cases and current certified hosts that exist since the start of this legal process. If you take the number of possible hosts in the USA and you stack it up against the current certified hosts that comes to less than 1%. I'm just glad that I live and play in California and not one of those other 6 states, I think judge Wright got it right. Most of those other cases were out of court settlements. Except for the Panama City suit and we all know how that went, where the defendants actually fought back. Have a blessed day.

What Judge Wright got right was the fact that APS screwed SC.

The California lawsuits were handled badly by APS/Boris without doing their jobs correctly thus the "shakedown" and "trolling" comments and appropriate judgement. Now that they have been eliminated from anything to do with future SC suits, I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that the hits will keep on coming eventually to California.

I will also bet that crow meat will be available as well.

Now as the OP of this thread, can we now keep focused on the topic of Piracy Recovery's latest lawsuit. This thread is not about SC.

_________________
-- Mark

I have a very strong hunch that we will be seeing some serious in-fighting between Wordwide Digital Entertainment and Piracy Recovery before either one of these entities delves too deeply into the litigation business model.

I understand that a joint suit has been filed, but I see disputes further down the road between Mr. Stovall and the folks at PR.

The only way I can see this not coming to pass is if an agreement has been reached between the two regarding ownership/benefits and the CB trademark. I would find this hard to believe, but I guess it's possible....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I have a certain level of personal frustration with all this because Chartbusters joined the KIAA when it started out. The KIAA position was do an audit with us and you won't get sued by any of the disc mfgrs for converting your files to computer. I wasn't doing shows at the time because of my work schedule, but figured ok there is my go ahead to get into computer karaoke from being strictly disc based since Chartbusters, Sound Choice, etc. have now joined KIAA.

I went to work ripping my library and a few years later when my schedule changed and I went back to doing shows I figured I'd finally join KIAA. Went to their website to join and lo and behold the KIAA had stopped taking new members and all this after I invested money into a laptop and my time into ripping all those discs.

Since Piracy LLC is owned by the same people who owned Chartbusters, I find their hypocrisy on computer karaoke pretty disgusting. If Chartbusters never intended to allow anybody to run their tracks on computer why did they ever join the KIAA in the first place?

Chartbuster absolutely supported and endorsed hosts running a computer based karaoke show.

They sold MP3 Thumb Drives with ripped content on them.
They sold the 6000+ and 12000+ Hard drives with ripped content on them.
They sold the KJMP drives with content on them.
They had an auditing program in place for people who wanted to convert from disc to computer.

They had no fundamental issue with computer based hosts presumably as long as they played by their rules.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

interresting.....
http://bigmamastudio.com/
CB sold to PRLLC, and who is suing for CB copyright and Trademark....
John Norbert Stovall
"WHEREAS, said Note and Deed of Trust, among other things, were assigned to Big Mama Digital Entertainment, Inc., said assignment being of record in Record Book 3324 page 77, in the same Office as above, and said Note and Deed of Trust were Collaterally Assigned to World Wide Digital Entertainment, LLC, in Record Book 3324 page 79..."
[url]http://www.publicnoticeads.com/TN/search/view.asp?T=PN&id=2966\5232013_20233112.HTM[/url]

how can he sell the company to someone else, sell the trademark, the tradename, the copyrights, then sue for those things? how can he go after CB stuff when there is still a large debt to be repaid to creditors?

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

Isn't that the whole point Chris, whatever CB's position on a computer based karaoke show was prior to it's demise. All that changed when the company collapsed and PR and I guess now Worldwide Digital assumed control of the trademark, and copyrights. The new owners of those rights are not compelled in any way to honor any old agreements associated with the CB product. Such as the certifications and the hard drives that were only covered for one year. It is as if the whole thing was staged so that who ever held CB product after the collapse would have to deal with the companies that came into existence with it's death. Have a blessed day.