Karaoke Forums

I can most certainly agree with statement. EMI and other music publishers operate their collections process like the mafia with fear and intimidation, not unlike the karaoke manus. The big difference is SIZE.

The point is nobody's hands are really clean and for anyone to pretend morale outrage is the height of hypocrisy.

And you never give a straight answer whereas I have.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

all I know is that the music industry, as a whole, is the biggest theif ever. They have stolen millions, if not billions, of dollars from the artists from the beginning of time. First they did it by making the artists sign their rights and life away, then they got copyrights extended and nowadays they take works that are 'unclaimed' and record without having to pay a dime to anyone

I may not agree with everything that soundchoice has done, but I do believe that EMI is trying to change the rules, just because they don't like the outcome.

Until someone proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that the GEM set was not properly licensed, I will take their word for it just as i would for ANY person or company .


However that being said, if I was in a position to buy a GEM set right now, I don't think I would until the outcome was decided.

Given the fact that EMI is such a giant, even if it can't be proven that soundchoice stole the music, EMI could still win. There is actually very little justice in out justice system sometimes..

and that's coming from someone who doesn't even live in the US

And if the case is decided in favor of SC, what would that mean for you?

I'm not sure if this post was directed toward me or not, but per my post, I am NOT cheering for EMI. I don't hold them in particularly high esteem either. Once again, if EMI wins, we ALL will eventually take the hit. Whether or not SC deserves to take a big hit will be of no help to US. OUR music source pool will still be depleted- both quantitively and qualitively- and OUR costs of doing business will still go up.

I'm not going to sit here and lie. Would I love to see SC take a beat-down? Absolutely, and I believe they deserve one for other actions if not this one. The problem remains that their beating will hurt us as well- even though THEY have been the ones to cause the problems.

The rock and a hard place. If they lose, so do we, but to stand behind them is also a form of assisted business suicide.

In my opinion, the damage done to our beloved industry by Sound Choice has been and will be immeasurable- as I have been predicting it would be since they initiated their new business model and began it's mismanagement.

I'm no friend of EMI - or any of the organizations that CLAIM to rep the artists either, such as BMI, ASCAP, and SESAC- who seem to get sued quite often by those they claim to represent. However, EMI does own the property that is of actual value to karaoke, and claim that it has been used inappropriately, whether I like them or not..

On the other hand, of SC wins I'm sure they will find other ways to damage our industry.

I't a lose- lose situation. I guess the the bright side, if there is one, is if SC loses they would go down farther and faster than the rest of us, and we could watch them go first.

Not much consolation, but there it is.

What I can't comprehend is what those few KJs still standing with SC believe they are supporting. It's not fighting piracy- not only has that been disproven all over the place, but Kurt has stated it from the beginning.

So what is it, exactly, that these KJs are supporting? Whittling down of competition through SC's actions instead of professional skills? Except in isolated cases - which are even now sprouting new KJs- that doesn't work for long.

It sure as hell isn't SC's ethics.

So what is it? Maybe some sort of emotional defense for their own actions? can't admit a mistake due to embarrassment? Invested to much time and money in SC's marketing plan?

I just don't understand what it could be.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Personally very little Jim since I'm retired from the business, and I have no SC product to turn in. Even if SC manages to beat the wrap due to the statute of limitations as you have pointed out. It still doesn't alter the fact that they are suing others for something they have been guilty of as well. They have no morale high ground and are just hypocrites.

If EMI submits and gets a cease and desist order against SC from selling, licensing, or giving away its GEM series then SC could possibly be through in the Karaoke Industry as it seems like that is there only source of income for it. EMI could tie it up in court for a long time causing SC to go T.U.

_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet

Don't be obtuse.



So, to put it in a less obfuscatory way, it doesn't matter how the lawsuit comes out; you've decided that SC did what EMI accuses, and that's that.

At least you're honest. Sort of.

Honesty is ALWAYS the best policy (SORT OF).

_________________
"You know that I sing the Blues and I do not suffer fools. When I'm on that silver mic, it's gonna cut ya, just like a knife"-The SWINGCAT

Not to pick on you Jim but I've seen that very same thing go on for years, in this very forum, in regards to people named in a SC suit.

Not at my urging. In fact, one of the reasons why I generally don't comment on pending cases is because doing so tends to create that sort of presumption in people's minds.

Coming from you that is rich Jim. How many hosts have been accused by SC over the last 5 years and have had their business's and reputations damaged? How much suffering have you inflicted on others in the name of recovery? By your own admission Jim SC was going to get out of jail free by, using the statute of limitations, that means at one time SC was guilty of committing the same offense they have sued others for.

If it turns out these charges stick and SC is forced to pay $150,000 times over 4,000 infractions of the law, it would sink the already fragile SC company for good. That is unless they pull a CB and go into foreclosure to avoid paying the penalties. I wish you could be honest yourself, but then again you are a lawyer, and have to look after the best interests of your client. That is what you get paid to do.

Does anyone actually think there would be a judgement even close to this if there is a ruling against SC? People, EMI's goal is money. Their goal is NOT to put SC out of business. That would be a very stupid thing to do. It's the exact same goal SC has in their suits. Sure, EMI asked for the moon. Don't think for a second they actually want the moon, especially if it turns out to be a paper one.

Very similar Mr.Boo with what SC does with the pirates they don't really want to put them out of business. What they really want to do is have them become customers and license the GEM series. You see that is what everyone wants at the end of the day. They want others working for them to make them money. So the hosts pay SC, who pays EMI. Makes you wonder who the organ grinder is, and who is the monkey. In this case I guess it's still one organ grinder and two monkeys.

Here let me jump in. Yes Lone, the offices at Sound Choice does have employees that show up every day to work and make a paycheck to pay their own living expenses. I have been in their offices and know several on a first name basis and they are people just like me and you (maybe more like me since you are retired).

_________________
No venue to big or too small. From your den to the local club or event, we have the music most requested. Great sounding system!

Since you seem to know so much Rumbolt maybe you can tell me how many employees they have? Are there any still in production or are they all sales staff and of course the legal department. What's the matter is it so boring at the Free Forum you decided to come over here for a little stimulation?

Here is the Seattle area, the only people that were damaged were the actual pirates and those that chose to ignore being named in a suit. I personally know two hosts that were sued, settled, now have GEM's, and they are thriving. I know of other hosts that were sued, have dodged and been dodging, and they have all but disappeared.

So it appears that in my area, only the reputations of those that didn't come to terms with what they were doing were truly impacted.

But directing the question back to you - Do YOU know how many hosts have been accused by SC over the last 5 years and have had their business and reputation damaged? I think not. In fact, in all of the piracy, legal discussions here, that specific topic has had little to no play. There hasn't even been much anecdotal evidence presented by anyone. In fact, how many hosts on these forums, were named in suits? Athena is the only one I know of for sure and that was resolved and she seems to be thriving as well. Rodney was contacted but I believe that was resolved as well and I have seen no indication that he suffered any ill effects.



Again, a question that seems to have no purpose other than to conjure up an image that good people have suffered at the hands of SC actions when in fact there is no evidence to support that image. What evidence to you have that anyone that was falsely accused by SC has been negatively impacted? I don't believe you have a case with this argument at all.


More broadly - Can ANYONE present evidence that KJ's in their area that were FALSELY ACCUSED have suffered as a result? In the spirit of putting this to rest, please be specific.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Well let's see Chris isn't the SC bragging that they have done over a 1,000 of these suits the bulk of which have been settled out of court and the details kept secret. So at least over a 1,000 hosts have been affected one way or another by this legal process. Unless of course SC is lying, but they wouldn't do that would they? We know of at least 20 or more hosts in California that settled with SC and then were sued anyway. We also have the example of Panama City where the venues were forced to pay the fair retail value of the stolen materials. Whatever happened to the Las Vegas suits, that's right they were either dismissed or settled out of court, I guess there part of that 1,000 plus. I know of one host approached by SC the case was dropped but not before his long time venue fired him to avoid legal problems. So yes SC is having an effect and it is impacting hosts lives, if they are having no impact there is not much sense in all this legal mumbo jumbo is there.

P.S. You mean falsely accused like you maintain SC has been. When there legal rep says they are relying on the statue of limitations to protect them of their naughty deeds. In a way isn't this and admission some hanky panky was going on. You know where's there's smoke there's fire.

I believe I asked you to point out who has been FALSELY ACCUSED and negatively impacted. You have failed to do so with this statement.



Who? And were they pirates? And were that actually negatively impacted or are they doing just fine?



See my first comment above.



See my first comment above.



One. You know of one. While it is unfortunate to have happened to that one person, it is hardly happening on a scale that should cause anyone to be concerned.

So....try again.



Then by all means.....stop.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris