Karaoke Forums

Probably my fault Earthling. Sorry.

I had to call out Rum, Sal, and Chris on being...umm...less than professional.

And to stop messing with the Bird. She's too smart for anyone

Only the cheer leaders are allowed to misbehave and be forgiven with nothing but a slap on the wrist. People who argue the other side of the coin get banned or have their posts deleted or both.

Ya'll crack me up. Always a conspiracy.

_________________
-Chris

You should get a chuckle out of this Chris, because sometimes the truth can be funnier than fiction.

I think it is more of a case that a certain “Holier Than Thou” member was being called out and shown through his own past posts the hypocrisy he spews forth at times.

_________________
Music speaks to the heart in ways words cannot express.

What I don't understand is why the whole thread had to be eliminated, not all of it was name calling. In the past wasn't a thread just locked and the material it contained could still be viewed, why was that not done in this case? Better yet why weren't the three threads just merged?

DID YOU NOT READ WHAT I SAID? I said I would clean it up & bring it back! Stop whining about it now - it's back!

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

Fun read, but in actuality the suits pending toward the karaoke mfrs. Are now almost moot in regard to our industry.

When SC failed as a karaoke producer they decided to regain income with a business plan based on that of earlier IP trolls. While they had a weak to non-existent case for the courts, they also made their efforts very public.

Doing so brought their antics to the attention of those who would have REAL legal grounds to work with- the publishers/owners. I believe these folks may have gotten just a tad agitated with others working their territory.

As I have predicted for some time now, the giants are awake.

We have already seen a reduction in music output while they now re- design their licensing options, and - also thanks to SC - a stop to importation for distribution. This is only the beginning...

Keeping in mind that there has never been specific licensing given for usage as the basis of a karaoke show. No matter whether downloaded, media shifted, or even OMD. That may change, whether for positive or negative has yet to be seen.

While it's interesting to watch events unfold, it may be better business to focus on the priorities, which are now publisher actions. This would also include not only making sure your purchasing records up to date, but getting what music you can while you can. I predict a lull in production worse than now exists.

Will publishers bother with individual KJs? Common sense tells me that it wouldn't be worth their while. Then again, who would have believed a karaoke producer would sue their own customers?

As for the mfr. and ex-mfr. currently being sued and discussed:

Do I believe that the courts will find against both? Yes, I think they probably will. What will these two do if that happens? DT would probably attempt another "CB Houdini". SC hasn't been a player in the karaoke production industry for some time, so who or what they might have to pay really has no effect on the industry. While I doubt that would see them in court with KJs much after such a loss, considering their record, I don't expect to see much of that anymore anyway. However, they could still find uneducated KJs from whom they might continue intimidating "settlements".

The point is, it's time to watch the publishers / owners and not worry so much about the managerial shortcomings of DT and SC. They just don't count as much anymore.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Why do you think it is just SC, Joe? Considering that publishers were already trying to crack down on piracy and karaoke companies before SC ever brought a suit, I think they were well aware of what was going on.

Right now we see an increased effort to control how we use music and who we get it from and how long we get to keep it. Universal has it's own karaoke and concert video products that it is making deals to stream on channels both in the US and overseas (even making a distribution deal with Stingray according to one article). Yet it doesn't want to license it's music to existing karaoke manus.

In the Universal/DTE suits it looks like there is more to it than meets the eye and more background then we may ever know. Just the fact that DTE did pay them something and they accepted it means that negotiations were going on to license music. Yet how many suits have we seen against the likes of Quik Hitz or others who are infamous for not making any effort at all?

Something doesn't make sense here. It's like the exisitng manus that try to stay afloat in a world of ever expanding rules and fees are better lawsuit targets than the ones that don't play at all.

Yesterday I was reading an old article about Rick Priddis of Priddis music. It was from 2005 and he did not know how an existing company could stay in business and still pay up front the (then) new snyc licenses that would be required on existing inventory. His last paragraph seems to be a prophesy that is actually coming true:


"The great irony in all of this is that the publishers, while claiming their actions are trying to root out pirates and willful infringers, are making sure that only the pirates will survive," Priddis said. "The true infringers have never paid fees and never will. If this continues, those of us who have paid fees and royalties all along will be forced out of business, and then everybody loses."
(From Music Publishers Are Killing Karaoke, 2005)

It was more than something one person posted, there were about 25 posts I had to hip wade through from several people slamming each other or name calling.

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

First of all I want to personally thank you Lonnie for your prompt response and work concerning the restoration of the recycled thread. As far as whining is concerned there is an old Spanish proverb "the squeaky wheel gets the grease". I don't think I have the market cornered as far as whining is concerned. Thanks again for your prompt attention.

The irony that you quote L&L carries over from the publishers dealing with the manus, to the manus dealing with the individual hosts. The true infringers aka pirates never paid for their material and never will. Yet it is the hosts that bought their material in good faith and have tried to do the right thing from the start, are asked to bear the cost of the recovery process, and run the risk of being forced out of business. Not only by unfair competition from pirates but also by the recovery process of the manus.

As predicted the sleeping giants have been awakened and I'm sure that there are more to follow.

_________________
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

Why the I told you so's on sleeping giants? This looks like the same sort of legal wrangling that's been going on between right's holders and karaoke manufacturers since the beginning of karaoke.

I was wondering that myself. I was also wondering what the reward for the anti-cheerleaders is in all of this besides just getting to say "I told you so" and potentially losing one or more karaoke manufacturers.

_________________
-Chris

That is the whole point Chris there is no reward for anyone in the hosting business. Just like Joe has been saying all along once the publishers get involved it could be game over for all public venue karaoke gigs. The real owners of the underlying materials start pushing their claims and litigating all karaoke service business's and hosts out of business. It will be the end of the legal recovery manus and possibly everyone else earning money from the commercial karaoke market. The one's at greatest risk are the one's who have quit their day jobs and put everything in to the entertainment effort. The one's with multiple shows and great investments in libraries and equipment, does that sound familiar?

That makes no sense.
This crazy theory you are promoting appears to be a bizarre form of wishful thinking on your part.
I would have thought that someone who spent so many years in the karaoke business would not be so eager to see it's demise.

Karaoke is a multi-billion dollar industry that generates a significant income for the publishers; it is doubtful that they will pursue activities that would diminish that income stream. Those who consistently dodge owed payment to the publishers are the only ones that the publishers are going to try to litigate out of business.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I guess Lone Ranger doesn't realize I have had him on ignore for a long while now. I was able to deduce from his quote that he was referring to me.

I am working harder and I am also happier than I have ever been in the last 6 years dong what I am doing with my karaoke business. I have no regrets and would do everything almost exactly the same.

Except I would have ignored several people a lot sooner than I did.

_________________
-Chris

I agree with that last statement earthling12357.

I would also point out that at least in the case of Stellar, the publishers are indeed working against that revenue stream by allegedly pricing the licensing on popular music/artists out of range for the mfr's (producers) to make profit viable. I would also specify that this scenario seems to be unique to the U.S.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

I agree that this is a situation unique to the U.S., and I don't believe it will change anytime soon. With 46,000 new attorneys released in the wild every year and growing, we may soon find every aspect of our lives being litigated. On the bright side, with so many lawyers...... oh, there is no bright side to that.
http://associatesmind.com/wp-content/up ... esmind.png

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I can think of one that has consistently paid the royalties owed, but that is being litigated against primarily because it has an insurance policy.