Karaoke Forums

World famous.. The music industry has been infiltrated by organized crime since forever..
Organized crime does not pay.. (pun intended)

Movie studios too, I know as I worked there for many years.. Production companies often have to be sued to part with profits. (And they use voodoo accounting to reduce profits)

What kills me, the fines levied on a KJ, does any of that go to the rights holder? I think not.
Any actual proof they get paid? I've not seen any proof..

Prove me wrong.. (Perhaps I have no standing in court to request proof)

For clarity: the "fines" levied on a KJ (assuming you are referring to karaoke lawsuits) are generally for copyright infringement of the karaoke manufacturer, not artists rights. They are being sued because they use the track that is owned by Soundchoice etc. You may want to look into the details of these lawsuits. They and the laws are convoluted.

I know that nobody wants to pay anything....for anything.....but this is really apples and oranges.

To my knowledge, ASCAP/BMI nor any other publisher's rights organizations have gone after KJ's. They are concerned with licensing for PUBLIC PERFORMANCE of music owned by their members. They don't care about Soundchoice's losses. They care about proper licensing for VENUES because they are responsible to pay fees for that public usage. It doesn't matter if it's karaoke, bands, jukeboxes etc.

Anyone who has intimate knowledge of these cases or is an IP lawyer is free to correct me if I have misstated anything here.

For even more clarity, the fines levied on a KJ (assuming you are referring to karaoke lawsuits) are for TRADEMARK INFRINGEMENT of the karaoke manufacturer's LOGO, and have nothing at all to do with the music.

It's not convoluted at all - Soundchoice and the like are suing for profiting off the use of their trademark and reputation without the permissions to do so (which in this case are granted by the purchase of their product).

It's the same concept as opening a restaurant called McDonald's without buying the franchise rights.

Nothing to do with copyright or the music, all trademark, and hense nothing at all to do with the music licensing entities. Proper licensing with BMI/ASCAP doesn't give you the permission to display the Soundchoice/Chartbuster/etc. logo.

_________________
C Mc
KJ, FL

Actually, your terminology is correct. I mistakenly used the term "copyright" when I should have used "trademark". Thanks for straightening me out!