KARAOKE SCENE MAGAZINE ONLINE! - Sample Digitax agreement with Publishers..... Public Forums Karaoke Discussions Karaoke Legalities & Piracy, etc... Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums Home | Contact Us | Site Map  

Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene

   
  * Login
  * Register

  * FAQ
  * Search

Custom Search

Social Networks


premium-member

Offsite Links


It is currently Mon Jan 20, 2025 3:17 am

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 7:29 am 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm
Posts: 6086
Images: 1
Location: Redmond, WA
Been Liked: 1665 times
Enjoy discussing this....

Source: https://rl101.infusionsoft.com/app/form/publisher-inquiry-for-licensing

-----------------------------------------------------

Non-Exclusive Digital Karaoke License


Licensee:Digitrax Entertainment LLC
448 North Cedar Bluff Road
Suite 174
Knoxville, TN 37923

For good and valuable consideration, Licensor and Licensee hereby agree as follows:

1.Grant of Rights

(a) Licensor grants licensee a non-exclusive, limited license for the territory of the World ("the Territory") for a term commencing from the date of acceptance by the Licensor, and expiring on the two year anniversary date of that acceptance ("The Term") to use publishers' compositions (but only to the extent of licensor's ownership and control therein) that shall be listed as approved by that publisher ("The Compositions")

(i) The right to adapt, arrange, create and record, or license from third parties, instrumental versions of digital sound recordings ("Recordings") of the Compositions (The "File(s)") subject to subparagraph 1(b) below; provided however, that no such adaptation or arrangement shall change the basic melody or fundamental character of such Compositions.

(ii) The right to synchronize the Files to the music and lyrics of the Compositions (the "Lyrics") and additional background images ("Images")which may be blank or consist of visual images which may or may not follow the theme of the Compositions, or to license the same from third parties (collectively a "Work").

(iii) The right to allow customers, subscribers and users of the Service (the "Customers") to sing along with Works in order to create new recordings of their own audio and/or audiovisual vocal performances and arrangements of the Compositions ("Customer Versions").

(iv) The right to create server copies of each of the Files, Works and/or Customer Versions to create a database containing all of the Files, Works and Customer Versions stored on servers owned within the control of the Licensee solely to the extent necessary to distribute such Files, Works and Customer Versions as permitted hereunder. Such copies and database(s) may be accessed by any digital site including but not limited to www.karaokecloud.com (the "Primary Site").

(v) The right to stream excerpts of the Work from the Site in order to allow potential customer to preview a particular Work before purchasing same.

(vi) The right to allow the Service to sell the Works in the following formats; downloadable "Mp3". WMV, DIVX or other digital audio/audio-visual file codec or format (Each format a "Download") from the Site and/or through third-party music retailers.

(vii) The right to use the titles of Compositions to identify the Works.

(b) The list of approved compositions may be amended, in the Publisher's sole discretion, from time to time as reasonably requested by Licensee. Such request shall be made in writing, on composition- by -composition request basis, subject to all terms of this Agreement. Licensee shall not use any such Compositions until Licensee receives written notice from Licensor confirming that such additional Compositions may be used and setting forth the relative ownership and/or income interests of the copyright proprietors of each Composition concerned. All requests by Licensee to amend the list of approved compositions shall be sent in writing to the licensing officer.

(c) Sound Recordings. Among the rights granted by Publisher to Digitrax hereunder is the non-exclusive right to create and/or license sound recordings embodying the Compositions ("Sound Recording") solely for use in and as part of Karaoke Recordings of the Compositions on Digitrax's Karaoke Service, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, with such rights being personal to Digitrax and non-assignable to any 3rd party without obtaining Publisher's prior written consent. Publisher and Digitrax each hereby acknowledge and agree that the copyright in the Sound Recording(s) is/are owned exclusively by Digitrax and that Digitrax's sound recordings copyrights are limited and exist solely for the purpose of this Agreement. Accordingly, Digitrax shall be authorized to exploit such Sound Recordings during the Term hereof as provided in this Agreement.

2.Restrictions of Right.

Licensor reserves all other rights in and to the Compositions(s), including the right in its sole but reasonable discretion to restrict or rescind the use of any Compositions due to an objection or claim received by the writer(s), co-publisher(s), administrators or owner(s) of such compositions (A "restricted "Composition"). In the event that Licensor shall request Licensee to cease using any Restricted Compositions, Licensee shall do within fifteen days after receiving notice.

3.Consideration for Grant.

In consideration of the rights granted pursuant to this Agreement. Producer shall pay Publisher the following royalties (The "Royalties"). For the purpose of this Agreement, "Qualifying Stream" shall mean a streaming performance of any Composition that exceeds thirty (30) seconds. In each instance, Royalties shall be pro-rated to the extent of Publisher's administrative share of each Composition.

a) Subscription Revenue- Producer shall pay publisher Royalties in an amount equal to 15% (the "Publisher Rate") of Subscription Revenue received by producer in a given accounting period, multiplied by a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of Qualifying Streams embodying solely Compositions in the given accounting periods and the denominator of which is the total number of all Qualifying Streams of all musical compositions (including the Compositions) on the Site in that accounting period (such fraction is hereinafter referred to as the "Pro Rata Multiplier"). The fee for the subscriptions to end users should be no less than $7.99 per month , and ranging up to $199 per month (Professional Subscription")

b) Ad Revenue- Producer shall pay publisher a Fifteen percent (15%) share of all other revenue including advertising revenue, generated by the Producers internet-based Karaoke activities, prorated by the overall percentage of Publisher Compositions including the total number of User Recordings in each quarterly period. As used herein, Ad Revenue shall mean the net revenue earned and received by Producer which is solely and directly attributed to advertising and sponsorship on the Sites, net of any agency commissions paid by or incurred by Producer.

c) Downloads- Producer shall pay Publisher a royalty equal to Publisher's Prorated share of 15% of Producers retail price per download (pro-rata), but not less than fifteen ($.15) cents per each Download embodying Compositions. Downloads should be sold to end users for no less than $.99 cents per download.

d) Fifteen Cents ($.15) per Composition/per Product Number or "configuration"/per Use for each copy of each Program embodying such Composition distributed during the Two years of said applicable Term.

4. MFN.

In the event that during the Term Producer agrees to pay another music publisher a higher Publisher Rate or higher Royalties than those prescribed above, such higher rate shall be deemed applicable hereunder from the date of commencement of the agreement with the other publishers.

5. Accounting.

(a) Within forty- five (45) days after the end of each quarter- annual period, (i.e. ending March 31, June 30, September 30 and December 31) Licensee shall render to Licensor a true and detailed accounting. Each accounting shall report each composition by title, composer, song code number (as indicated on the list of approved compositions) and type of exploitation (i.e. Subscription revenue, Advertising Revenue, Download Revenue, etc.). Payment of the applicable Royalties due shall be mailed to Licensor at the above address.

(b) Licensee shall maintain accurate and complete records and books of account detailing the creation of the Works and the exploitation of the same pursuant to the terms contained herein and containing all other information needed to compute and verify the amounts payable to Licensor hereunder. Licensor may audit those books and records. Licensor may make such examination or appoint a third party to examine for a particular statement only once. Licensor may conduct such audit only once per calendar year and only during Licensee's usual business hours and at the place where it keeps the books and records to be examined, on at least thirty (30) day prior notice. In the event an examination of Licensee's books and records reveals a deficiency in payments paid to Publisher of ten percent (10%) or more of the total amount accounted to Licensor, Licensee shall pay all reasonable and customary out-of-pocket expenses related to the performance of such examination, together with any underpayment and interests provided herein.

6. Assignment

Licensee may not assign, transfer or sub-license any of its rights hereunder without Licensor's prior written consent, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Any assignment, transfer or license made by Licensee without Licensor's prior, written consent shall be void ab initio.

7. Termination and Bankruptcy.

(a) Licensor may terminate this License by giving Licensee notice in the event Licensee fails to perform any of its material obligations under this agreement for any reason (including impossibility of performance) and such failure has not been remedied to Licensor's reasonable satisfaction within thirty (30) days after Licensee's receipt of Licensor's notice of it. Such early termination shall not affect Licensee's obligation to make payment of all monies Licensee may be become obligated to pay under this License.

(b) Subject to U.S. bankruptcy law, the Term of this License will terminate automatically, without notice, if Licensee is dissolved or its assets are liquidated, or if Licensee becomes insolvent or if a proceeding in bankruptcy, for a reorganization, or for other relief from the claims of creditors, or any similar proceedings, takes place with respect to Licensee or its property.

(c) Upon the expiration or termination of the Term all of the rights granted by Licensor to Licensee hereunder shall terminate, and Licensee shall withdraw the Works and Customer Versions from its database of possible Customer retrieval and shall make no further use of the Composition(s), or of the Recordings, Lyrics or Works whatsoever.

(d) A termination of the Agreement under this paragraph 6 will not limit or affect any of Licensor's other rights. Notwithstanding anything of the contrary set forth herein, Licensee shall have thirty (30) days following termination of the Term during which to remove from the Licensee's servers, copies of the Works and Customer Versions posted to such server. Within that Thirty (30) days period, Licensee shall submit an affidavit to Licensor verifying same.

8. Representations and Warranties

(a) Licensor represents warrants and agrees as follows (with respect to Licensor's Share of the Composition described in the list of approved compositions):

(i) Licensor has full right, power and authority to enter into this License and to grant to Licensee all the rights set forth herein.

(ii) The Compositions are original copyrighted works and in no way infringe the copyright or other rights of any third party.

(iii) Licensor will pay any and all fees, royalties and other sums due (excluding payment for performance) to Licensor's songwriters of the Compositions as well as to the publishers and co-publishers whom Licensor administers during the Term with respect to the royalties timely received by it hereunder.

(b) Licensee warrants, represents and agrees as follows:

(i) Licensee has full right, power and authority to enter into and perform this License upon the terms and conditions set forth herein.

(ii) Licensee shall take all steps reasonably necessary to secure and maintain protection of the Compositions under copyright and equivalent or similar laws throughout the Territory.

(iii) Licensee shall own or control and/or have valid and enforceable licenses with the applicable rights holders with respect to all aspects of the Service.

(iv) Licensee shall comply with all applicable laws governing any competitions that it may host or sponsor as part of the service.

(v) Licensee shall not synchronize any Compositions with any Images that could reasonably be perceived as offensive or obscene and shall use reasonable good faith efforts to prelude Customers from doing same and/or creating any unauthorized parody, profane, libelous or other similarly objectionable Customer Version and Licensor shall inform its Customers in writing that Customer Versions are to be created solely for their own personal use and shall not be sold or otherwise distributed except as permitted hereunder.

(vi) Licensee shall not use the Composition in a manner that infringes upon the proprietary rights of any third party (including without limitation intellectual property, publicity and privacy rights).

(c) Each party (for these purposes, "Indemnitor") shall indemnify defend and hold the other party ("Indemnitee"), its successors, assigns, agents and licensees, free and harmless from and against any and all claims, demands, damages, expenses, losses or costs(including reasonable attorney's fees and costs), or any sums paid in settlement, arising out of or incurred as a direct result of any breach of representations, warranties, agreements and undertakings of or by the party concerned, provided that such claim or demand has been fully adjudicated by a court of jurisdiction or has been settled with the Indemnitee's consent. Indemnitee shall notify Indemnitor of any claim presented to Indemnitee by a third party. Indemnitor shall defend any third party claim at its sole expense, with counsel approved by Indemnitee, except that at Indemnitee's option, Indemnitee may defend the claim and shall consult with Indemnitor about choice of counsel and the conduct of the proceedings. No such claim asserted by a third party may be settled by Indemnitee without Indemnitor's prior written consent (such consent not to be unreasonably withheld or delayed), so long as Indemnitor is actively defending such claim in a manner consistent with industry norms, unless Indemnitee shall agree not to seek indemnity from Indemnitor for any settlement payment made by Indemnitee to the claimant. In all events, Licensor's cumulative liability to any and all Indemnitee(s) shall not for any reason exceed the amount of money paid by Licensee to Licensor under this License.

9.Miscellaneous:

(a) This Agreement sets forth the entire agreement between Publisher and Digitrax with respect to the subject matter hereof, superseding any and all prior written and/or oral agreements and understandings, and may not be modified or amended except by written agreement executed by the parties.

(b) No breach of this Agreement shall be deemed a material breach until the party against whom such breach is alleged shall have received written notice of the same from the party alleging such breach, and the notified party shall have failed to cure such breach within thirty (30) days after the receipt of such notice (fifteen (15) days, in the case of a payment of money).

(c) This agreement shall be governed by the laws of the state in which Licensor is incorporated and the law shall be applicable to agreements made and to be wholly performed within such State, and the State and/or Federal Courts of such state shall be the sole forums for the resolutions of disputes with respect to this Agreement. Both parties hereby submit to the jurisdiction of such Courts for such propose.

(d) Digitrax may not assign its rights, licenses or privileges except to a corporate parent or subsidiary or to purchaser of substantially all of its respective stock or assets.

(e) Publisher shall from time to time (but in any event no less frequently than any other user of the Compositions for similar purposes) during the Term fully cooperate to assist in providing Digitrax with updated list of all Compositions as they become owned or controlled by Publisher and/or available for karaoke use as contemplated herein. Publisher shall provide and deliver to Digitrax any and all information related to the Compositions required for Digitrax to exploit the Compositions and account to Publishers as contemplated herein, including without limitation, the song code and the names of the songwriters and music publishers.

(f) The parties acknowledge that the relationship between them is in the nature of independent contracts and that this Agreement shall not be deemed to create a partnership or joint venture, and neither party shall be deemed to be the other's agent, partner, employee or representative. Neither Digitrax nor Publisher shall issue any press releases or other forms of publicity materials which make specific reference to Publisher or this Agreement without the prior consent of such other party.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused the forgoing to be executed as of the date set forth electronically through the acceptance of this form.

_________________
-Chris


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:02 am 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3885
Images: 0
Been Liked: 397 times
So, if Digitrax can get an agreement like that, why can't Sound Choice?? I don't think Sound Choice WANTS that kind of agreement. I think SC WANTS to stay stuck in the past.

Interesting read, Chris.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 9:29 am 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm
Posts: 6086
Images: 1
Location: Redmond, WA
Been Liked: 1665 times
I don't think there is anything holding SC back except for the fact they don't have an online portal for distribution. Not to mention they aren't actively producing anything anyway.

The agreement I posted is heavily geared toward online distribution of content which is all the Karaoke Cloud does.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 10:41 am 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3885
Images: 0
Been Liked: 397 times
chrisavis wrote:
I don't think there is anything holding SC back except for the fact they don't have an online portal for distribution. Not to mention they aren't actively producing anything anyway.

The agreement I posted is heavily geared toward online distribution of content which is all the Karaoke Cloud does.

-Chris

In this day that is ALL ANY karaoke manufacture should be doing, or at the very least MOSTLY how they should be distributing. SC isn't interested. Buying a portal is the least of it.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 2:11 pm 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Tue May 31, 2011 7:09 pm
Posts: 839
Location: Myrtle Beach, SC
Been Liked: 224 times
If you've said all along that downloads are not legal, it's difficult to suddenly jump on that wagon. Besides, all the law suit money disappears then too. It's like trying to get my grandpa to try sushi, ain't happening. I do applaud Digitrax for jumping into this century with the rest of us though.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 2:42 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3885
Images: 0
Been Liked: 397 times
rickgood wrote:
If you've said all along that downloads are not legal, it's difficult to suddenly jump on that wagon. Besides, all the law suit money disappears then too. It's like trying to get my grandpa to try sushi, ain't happening. I do applaud Digitrax for jumping into this century with the rest of us though.

Oh yeah, Heaven forbid they lose the lawsuit money. LOL. Personally, I do NOT believe that Kurt has ANY interest in working on Karaoke any more. He likes chasing around his old customers trying to catch them doing something wrong. If he REALLY cared about Karaoke, as a whole, he would be inclined to get with the times.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:47 pm 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm
Posts: 5107
Location: Phoenix Az
Been Liked: 1279 times
to be on the other side for a second....
it was said by Jim that the publishers want to own the re-recordings of the tracks including previously recorded tracks. Digitrax is not getting that same requirement, they are being allowed to keep ownership of their copyrights on the re-recordings.
maybe you can think of another reason but i see two possibilities....
the talk about the publisher restrictions on SC are lies...(we may not always agree, but you would be hard pressed to convince me that Jim is a liar)
or
the publishers are mad at SC and trying to screw them.
either way it appears to not be the norm (as Jim did state) in the industry so i can't see any other options.

Thanks Chris, interesting to finally see what they get from the publishers

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


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 11, 2013 3:56 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3885
Images: 0
Been Liked: 397 times
Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
or
the publishers are mad at SC and trying to screw them.
either way it appears to not be the norm (as Jim did state) in the industry so i can't see any other options.

Thanks Chris, interesting to finally see what they get from the publishers


Well, if that is the case, Jim AND SC should start thinking about what they are doing, and what to do to change their reputation.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 8:03 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:16 pm
Posts: 2027
Location: HIgh River, AB
Been Liked: 268 times
Well I'm no lawyer, but if that really was what was going on, wouldn't soundchoice be able to sue the copyright owners for restraint of trade? *not sure exactly how that term works, so forgive my ignorance*

-James


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 10:45 am 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 3011
Been Liked: 1003 times
rickgood wrote:
Besides, all the law suit money disappears then too.


Why on earth would you think that SC introducing a digital product would cause the lawsuits to go away?

Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
to be on the other side for a second....
it was said by Jim that the publishers want to own the re-recordings of the tracks including previously recorded tracks. Digitrax is not getting that same requirement, they are being allowed to keep ownership of their copyrights on the re-recordings.


That second part is not exactly accurate. According to the sample agreement provided, if that is in fact Digitrax's agreement with "the publishers," Digitrax's copyright is limited to the synched karaoke track. There is ordinarily a separately copyrighted sound recording, which karaoke producers have frequently sold for other purposes, such as for use in movies and television (usually on an ad hoc license agreement that is entirely separate).

Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
maybe you can think of another reason but i see two possibilities....
the talk about the publisher restrictions on SC are lies...(we may not always agree, but you would be hard pressed to convince me that Jim is a liar)
or
the publishers are mad at SC and trying to screw them.


It's not a publisher restriction per se. It's more that the publishers, or at least one major publishing group, is seeking to interpret certain language in the standard agreement in a way that differs greatly from what that language has historically meant.

To be a bit more specific, there is a standard term in karaoke recording contracts that any element of the recorded version that is separately copyrightable as a composition belongs to the publisher, not to the recording artist/producer. An example would be "With a Little Help From My Friends," which is of course Lennon/McCartney. The Beatles recorded the original version, and it's a nice enough song, but nothing special. Joe Cocker created a new arrangement of the song that changed the meter and turned it into something truly magnificent and memorable, and his version is well known (it was used, for example, as the theme for the television series The Wonder Years) and the Beatles' version is mostly forgotten. If something similar were done under a traditional karaoke-style contract, Lennon/McCartney would own the composition copyright in Cocker's contribution to the derivative work.

That might sound a little bit unfair, but it's something that karaoke producers could live with because the reality is they are trying not to have any changes.

The problem is that this particular publishing group is now taking the position that the language in question applies not only to stuff that falls under the composition copyright, but also to the sound recording itself. I can't share the language with you, but I assure you that it uses terms that can only reasonably be interpreted in the traditional way. The problem with that is that a significant portion of the recoverable value in a karaoke track is in ancillary uses of the sound recording--at least as far as SC is concerned.

Now, I'll point out that even though SC has a perfectly reasonable basis for ignoring the publishers' interpretation--there is a signed contract, after all--it goes back to something I said a long time ago on this board: When your business depends upon using intellectual property that belongs to others, you have to expect to spend time managing your business relationship with them. It would be foolish to disregard the publishers' views, because even if they are dead wrong on this point, they have a great deal of discretion in other areas.

Paradigm Karaoke wrote:
either way it appears to not be the norm (as Jim did state) in the industry so i can't see any other options.


I don't think it's an attempt to screw SC specifically in the slightest--just a mechanism by which publishers can set themselves up to get more revenue wherever they can find it. As I said above, DT's agreement seems to be a different approach with a similar outcome.

Smoothedge69 wrote:
Well, if that is the case, Jim AND SC should start thinking about what they are doing, and what to do to change their reputation.


Reality is just over your horizon, Bobby. And by that I meant you can't yet see it.

I assure you that no one of importance at any music publisher knows my name, and that very few people at any music publisher are even really aware of our lawsuits. This has nothing to do with our lawsuits. It has everything to do with extracting money from wherever it can be found, via whatever means are necessary. It is no small irony that you seem to support that when the music publishers do it, while you identify that as a point of criticism of SC when we don't even do that.

jclaydon wrote:
Well I'm no lawyer, but if that really was what was going on, wouldn't soundchoice be able to sue the copyright owners for restraint of trade?


Shhhh! :wink:


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 12, 2013 4:35 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2001 6:55 pm
Posts: 4433
Location: New York City
Been Liked: 757 times
HarringtonLaw wrote:
...but I assure you that it uses terms that can only reasonably be interpreted in the traditional way...
Which just goes to show everyone that the Law can be interpreted in different ways and still be correct for either side of the fence. I've said similar things with regard to all those lawsuit briefs (and links to them) that have been posted here (in the past)... that there is so much language put into a simple thing, that it can be interpreted in different ways (depending on whether it is the Defense Attorney or the Prosecuting Attorney, and how the Judge also interprets it).

As an example, about 8 years ago, I was in a car accident in Florida. I was in a Rental Car, and I hit another vehicle going through an intersection. I did not have any insurance with the Car Rental (Budget) agency, and I filed my claims with my regular car insurance (Geico). Geico assessed that the car I was driving was a "Total Loss," and they paid out to Budget for that car. Budget then sent me a bill for "Loss of Use." My Credit Card company refused to pay out for that unless I provided them with a "Fleet Utilization Log" from Budget. Budget refused to divulge that. Geico refused to cover the "Loss of Use", siting Badillo vs Hill (which talks about Windfall Claims). I contacted Budget to tell them that I felt the "Loss of Use" was an invalid claim since they got paid for the car (as a Total Loss). Budget also sited Badillo vs Hill. Since I could not afford a Lawyer to fight this out (especially since this happened in Florida, and I live in NY), and Geico and my Credit Card Company wee not going to help me in that matter, it was cheaper for me to pay Budget for the Loss of Use, than to try and fight it.... not to mention, having my credit rating destroyed if they (Budget) reported me to a Collections Agency).


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 12:31 am 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
rickgood wrote:
If you've said all along that downloads are not legal, it's difficult to suddenly jump on that wagon. Besides, all the law suit money disappears then too. It's like trying to get my grandpa to try sushi, ain't happening. I do applaud Digitrax for jumping into this century with the rest of us though.



There has never been a question of whether selling downloads is legal- it is if licensed. The question has always been in regard to the legality of USAGE as a base for a U.S. based karaoke show., which is not mentioned in the post . Also, even DT states that they cannot grant permissions for such usage, and Jim agrees.

When DT state "Legal for commercial download, it's a neat way of saying that the act of downloading by a commercial entity is legal, but gives the impression that they are granting permission for commercial USAGE, when they are not. What DT is doing- selling downloads- is just fine. How the downloads are USED is not their problem or responsibility. This rests on the KJs' shoulders- which is how the producers love it.

All that being said, I LOVE what DT has accomplished, assuming Chris's "sample" has been put through. Why? It only shows that SC seems to have mis-managed ANOTHER situation. Though I am a Luddite by nature, if I were a karaoke producer, seeing the trends of the business develop along with online usage, there is no way I would split the rights to the catalogue as I understand they did. Silly SC... :roll:

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

" Disc based and loving it..."


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 2:32 am 
Offline
Super Extreme Poster
Super Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
I take it to mean that it's not legal unless PRO fees are paid - just like an original disc!

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


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 8:26 am 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm
Posts: 6086
Images: 1
Location: Redmond, WA
Been Liked: 1665 times
There is a lot more to putting up a download site than just putting up a download site.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 9:51 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:35 am
Posts: 752
Images: 1
Been Liked: 73 times
The one thing that I have not seen any proof about is this: If a manufacturer cannot deem a product "safe" for commercial use, how are they able to deem certain products NOT "safe" for commercial use???


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Wed Nov 13, 2013 11:18 pm 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
Lonman wrote:
I take it to mean that it's not legal unless PRO fees are paid - just like an original disc!


You take it incorrectly. What PRO fees cover the display of the lyric swipes, Lon? Jim even said in another thread that the PRO fees do not cover karaoke producers- which, BTW, is confusing, since the named orgs charge a specific fee for karaoke shows.

You ARE right that the same applies for discs- it's just that OMD hosts can pass back most of any possible liability to the mfrs, since they are using original product that was distributed and sold by them. It's possible that even PC hosts are covered ( a gray area) if they can produce the original media. Download hosts? Not so much....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 2:31 am 
Offline
Super Extreme Poster
Super Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
JoeChartreuse wrote:
Lonman wrote:
I take it to mean that it's not legal unless PRO fees are paid - just like an original disc!


You take it incorrectly. What PRO fees cover the display of the lyric swipes, Lon? Jim even said in another thread that the PRO fees do not cover karaoke producers- which, BTW, is confusing, since the named orgs charge a specific fee for karaoke shows.

PRO covers the music being played (including swipes) - which is the same as if a cover band is playing the same song according the BMI & ASCAP rep I have dealt with. So if the swipes are covered as per what you said Jim claims, the music certainly is as well (which I got confirmation from the reps themselves)! PRO do not cover karaoke manus because karaoke manus are not performing the song, they are creating the song. PRO are 'performance' rights which is covered by a bar paying those fees.

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


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 9:53 am 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm
Posts: 4094
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Been Liked: 309 times
"The one thing that I have not seen any proof about is this: If a manufacturer cannot deem a product "safe" for commercial use, how are they able to deem certain products NOT "safe" for commercial use???"

It's not much different than a manufacturer stamping their products "Not for resale". Most of us have seen them, toilet paper, cleaners, food, and other sundry items that are for use in commercial settings.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 11:42 am 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 3011
Been Liked: 1003 times
JoeChartreuse wrote:
Lonman wrote:
I take it to mean that it's not legal unless PRO fees are paid - just like an original disc!


You take it incorrectly. What PRO fees cover the display of the lyric swipes, Lon? Jim even said in another thread that the PRO fees do not cover karaoke producers- which, BTW, is confusing, since the named orgs charge a specific fee for karaoke shows.


It's not confusing as long as you understand that the PROs only represent music publishers, whose permission is needed for you to put on a karaoke show.

The PRO fees cover all aspects of the music publishers' rights, including the performance of the musical composition and the display of the lyrics.

They do not cover any aspects of the karaoke producers' rights, which would include performance of the audiovisual work and the display of any trademarks and trade dress.

JoeChartreuse wrote:
You ARE right that the same applies for discs- it's just that OMD hosts can pass back most of any possible liability to the mfrs, since they are using original product that was distributed and sold by them. It's possible that even PC hosts are covered ( a gray area) if they can produce the original media. Download hosts? Not so much....


I think you will find that your understanding of this subject is suffering from a belief in something that is simply not true.

A performance license from a music publisher, which is handled through one of the PROs, is utterly unconcerned with the origin of the copy and even whether it's licensed or not.

As long as the venue has paid for the appropriate category of performance--live, pre-recorded, karaoke, etc.--then the publishers do not care where you got it from. It is simply not possible for the publishers to determine, without an exorbitant expense, whether the copy you are using is licensed or not, because they do not have enough of the background information needed to make that determination. (That's true even if they know they never licensed a particular production. In that scenario, they will simply go after the producer, because the damages are much easier to identify and collect in an amount that will make litigation profitable.) More importantly, it is entirely possible that a karaoke operator who uses an unlicensed copy to put on a show in which the PRO fees have been paid has not actually committed an act of copyright infringement. Specifically, the act of putting on a show is not "reproduction," "adaptation," or "distribution" of the work, and the public performance rights are covered by the PRO fees.

There is no liability being "passed back" to the karaoke producer. Liability doesn't work like that anyway to begin with.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Nov 14, 2013 12:14 pm 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 8:35 am
Posts: 752
Images: 1
Been Liked: 73 times
timberlea wrote:
"The one thing that I have not seen any proof about is this: If a manufacturer cannot deem a product "safe" for commercial use, how are they able to deem certain products NOT "safe" for commercial use???"

It's not much different than a manufacturer stamping their products "Not for resale". Most of us have seen them, toilet paper, cleaners, food, and other sundry items that are for use in commercial settings.


Another sorry attempt at a comparison scenario (just a pet peeve of mine)...this is not a resale situation. The products are being consumed in either case. I am just not sure any company in this situation has a legal right to dictate what CAN be done with something that doesn't break an existing law...


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 38 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 108 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Privacy Policy | Anti-Spam Policy | Acceptable Use Policy Copyright © Karaoke Scene Magazine
design & hosting by Cross Web Tech