Karaoke Forums

Whatever we think of SC's methods, in the long run this should help all of us. When someone asks me why I don't have every song ever made, I let them know what chances those hosts are taking.

_________________
KingBing Entertainment C'mon Up! I have a song for you!!! [font=MS Sans Serif][/font]

Since folks are still posting here, let me respond to the above.

When one really analyzes what SC is doing, one will realize that their strategy will not benefit most KJ's very much, if at all. And while in the beginning KJ's liked to believe that SC objective was to fight piracy, even SC now openly admits that fighting piracy is not their goal. They are simply trying to get back some of the income that they have wrongfully been deprived of by pirates!

Now getting back to the original post in conjunction with the comment I just made.

Since no support or link has appeared regarding the 3 judgments that have purportedly been handed down in Phoenix, I would love to know if anyone knows of ANY operator in Phoenix AZ, whether sued by SC or not, whether the subject of a judgment for or not that has gone out of business as a direct result of SC's efforts?????

And if so, can anyone provide both the name of the business along with a first hand knowledge that their rig(s) are no longer functioning? And please note that selling the rigs, or turning them over to someone else to operate to my minds means that they are still functioning

And BTW, a clever pirate can be back in business quite quickly even after vanishing into thin air! Or even after having a judgment handed down against them!

I think the jury is still out on whether or not SC's actions will benefit legit karaoke companies or not given they've just started the process and not too many pirates have had to shell out just yet.

My own instincts make me lend towards thinking at least a few company's will either be sued out of business or leave the industry voluntarily which should at least free up a few gigs for the karaoke companies who are left.

I don't know that for a fact, it's just an opinion and of course everybody has the right to their own opinions on the subject.

You are absolutely correct in that the "jury is out" on this matter.

And, personally, my instincts are in line with yours, but I'll go a few steps further and say that I don't think most markets will be effected at all by SC. And in some of the bigger markets, perhaps a few pirates will leave on their own but I don't believe anyone should get their hopes up that a strategy that IS NOT DESIGNED to fight piracy will have much results in that regard.

I realize that you have made a statement here about some "Said Club" which is hear-say (you even wrote "that is their words").

If you can answer this, I would like to know how that "Said Club" being sued could get out of their lawsuit by hiring someone from the KIAA. Where is the correlation between being sued for copyright infringement (because they hired a "Pirate Company") and then hiring someone from the KIAA to host a show for them automatically releases them of their legal liabilities? Wouldn't canceling Karaoke completely at the "Said Club" accomplish the same thing (having no karaoke is just as legal as hiring a legally operating KJ).

And by the way, is someone trying to imply that if you're not with the KIAA, then you're not legit (with that above hear-say)?

cueball @ Tue Apr 13, 2010 12:53 am wrote:

glmmantis @ Thu Apr 08, 2010 3:02 pm wrote:

TOVMOD,

I have a new account due to the fact that a local pirate comp. refuses to settle. They filed chap 13 and one of their club accounts was named in the SC suit. Said club can't get out of their lawsuit unless they hire someone in the kiaa. ( that is their words). I am the ONLY KJ in the area who is a member ( actually still pending) that I know of.

Sure they could get out via paying lawyers ( sc has to prove contributory liability) but why would they wanna do that when they can take the route of least resistance, and less $$ ??

L Mc.

I realize that you have made a statement here about some "Said Club" which is hear-say (you even wrote "that is their words").

If you can answer this, I would like to know how that "Said Club" being sued could get out of their lawsuit by hiring someone from the KIAA. Where is the correlation between being sued for copyright infringement (because they hired a "Pirate Company") and then hiring someone from the KIAA to host a show for them automatically releases them of their legal liabilities? Wouldn't canceling Karaoke completely at the "Said Club" accomplish the same thing (having no karaoke is just as legal as hiring a legally operating KJ).

And by the way, is someone trying to imply that if you're not with the KIAA, then you're not legit (with that above hear-say)?

I can venture a guess as to what is going on.

It is purportedly a fact that the case against a venue that hired a KJ that is being sued, is dropped upon the KJ settling with SC and the venue joining the KIAA

So... if the KJ doesn't settle and isn't around to be sued, SC's strategy has no defined method for letting the venue "off the hook". So, it would make sense in the overall scheme of things that the venue be required to join the KIAA and hire only KIAA members,

With that being said, since you questioned the post involved, I must say that under closer scrutiny while the information could be correct, I find it questionable. I state that because I don't know if it is possible for someone who is being sued who then files bankruptcy before a judgment is awarded in the lawsuit, to dispose of any judgment subsequently awarded! I don't know. Maybe they can file bankruptcy against SC based upon the existence of the suit? I don't think so

Sorry Tovmod... but the post did not say that the "Said Club" had to join "POOP." It only said they had to hire a KJ from "POOP" in order to be dropped from the lawsuit. Now, I'd be curious to know where this "Said Club" got that kind of information from. And as I said before, what does this pending lawsuit against them NOW, have to do with who they hire in the future (if they even want to continue having Karaoke after all of this)? And, who is placing this stipulation on the "Said Club" that the suit against them will be dropped ONLY if they hire a "POOP" card-carrying KJ?

Sorry, if this is all getting confusing. I said I would venture a guess as to what might be happening. You didn't like the guess? Why?

Meanwhile, SC has already been making several unreasonable demands that I am aware of, so suggesting "as a guess" one more is an easy "leap" for me to make!

And since you didn't like my guess, you figure it out for yourself if you're that curious. Personally, I'm not!

I have to wonder if we are only hearing from those that are being accused that don't have a disc to show and bought their drive from somewhere already loaded and believe that they are legal only in their minds because they may have bought them from a source that was supposedly legal themselves (I knew of a store years ago that actually sold loaded drives - luckily out of business for some time). I can imagine those accused that think they are legal without a disc to show would be the ones bitchin over someone accused that had all their discs that have absolutely no problem saying - here are my discs I bought & paid for, here is my hard drive - compare them & find nothing else that I don't have a disc for.
It makes you think since the only ones who really (@$%&#!) are the really high number computer users. I know if I was named in a suit, i'd have no problems showing anyone of authority my discs - hell I even have receipts for everything I bought from the day I started buying discs, each year for tax purposes.

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

"HIRE a private investigator?" Wow. The one that "investigated" McLeod's was obviously a bargain-basement deal maker.



Possible, but NOT really "proof"... simply speculation. Do you have any proof of the person's financial holdings or are you simply guessing? Do you believe the tattooed youngster wearing rags driving a Ferrari is always simply a car thief?


Nope. Not at all an indication of anything. SC produced them and SC sold them. Don't call the KJ a thief because SC didn't properly license the material before making money in a commercial operation with the same tracks. I have a number of the SC8125 discs - still in their original shrink wrap -- and they are collectors items. If you think I'm about to let some "investigator" unwrap them to verify the contents you're nuts.

This is particularly striking since the very tracks you speak of; those that have been "removed" from the market are usually those tracks that weren't licensed properly to start with. Sure, some licenses might have expired (if they had them in the first place) but using your logic, the mere existance of them tells me they were produced illegally to start with.


- Multi-rig companies where each KJ seems to have the full SC library, but whose gear is substandard

And exactly how would an investigator know any of this? Are the "hired investigators" also experts in what is and isn't "substandard?" There are plenty of KJ's with tons of top-notch equipment that don't know how to run it and it sounds like crap... does this qualify as "substandard?"



Make up your mind Dan.... because I don't see the "plaintiff" (i.e. Soundchoice) "proving" anything in their suits and it's exactly the opposite: the plaintiff points a finger and the defendant must prove innocence. All they have is "Joe Schmo said he saw..." or that a trademark was "displayed during the month of August."

if you look at a woman and see a wedding band, is that "proof" that she's married at all? Or are you simply going to accuse her of stealing the ring if she can't produce a receipt to prove its origin?



Didn't you JUST SAY:
"These are civil actions where the plaintiff must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is liable."

Now you're saying the plaintiff has to prove nothing and it's up to the defendant to prove innocence.



NOT SO... The only ones you're "hearing about" are those you mention. DanDanTheTaxiMan is still in a Phoenix court over all this and has not settled (to my knowledge) so where's the update on that? It's way too easy to "announce a landslide" by others not involved with the suit or those sponsoring the suit or someone willing to be a propaganda person...




Tell that to McLeod's or the KJ who was dragged through the media as "pirates" and see how they feel about this "cost of doing business."

I was just on Chartbuster's web site looking for some new songs to buy and they have a link on their site to report illegal KJs in your area. What's to prevent one KJ from making a false accusation about one of their competitors? It may not put someone out of business but it would sure be an inconvenience to have to go to court to defend yourself because one of your competitors thought it would be fun to report you as a pirate. I wouldn't be surprised if Chartbuster shares these "leads" with Sound Choice, who in turn may send their "investigators" in to see if it is worth filing another law suit against a potential pirate...not a proven pirate. Maybe when they pick on the wrong KJ and they get hit with some huge punitive damages, Sound Choice will re-think their new business plan.

This was just posted by Sound Choice on another forum:

"If they don't respond, we are going to file a default judgment, which means that they (by default) "admit" all our allegations, i.e., they are GUILTY. Then we are going to propose a $20,000 judgment AND the seizure of their equipment (or the court might go much higher, but we have doubts that they will go any lower) and then the court becomes the collector. To the guys considering "flipping the bird", they are much better off agreeing to a $6750 judgment where we are the collectors than a $20K judgment where the court can order the sheriff to do the collection. That "flipped bird" is going to really hurt then.... "

It would appear that there are no $200,000 judgments unless the person mentioned has 10 systems?

Seems like Sound Choice is running around like the old MAFIA demanding protection money to allow people to stay in business. They don't seem to care if you're a pirate as long as they get paid. I wonder if the RICO statutes would apply here? Let's say that Sound Choice files a law suit against a 100% legitimate Karaoke host and "offers" them the $6,500 settlement option to be left alone. Is that any different than the extortionist who walks into a local restaurant and tells the owner that for a small monthly fee, they won't have any "fire issues"??? I guess if you extort money with the help of a lawyer, it's legal??

Finally! The blinders are coming off and people are beginning to see the light!

Good luck with that! I seriously doubt that any judge will grant a seizure order for unspecified equipment.
A judge will only generally grant an order seizing very specific itemized things, not just general equipment. I hope SC has an itemized list of said KJ's equipment.
As for the court becoming a collector, again good luck with that. When you get a judgment in your favour, YOU are the collector. The court is NEVER in the collection business. All they can do is grant orders. If SC means that they intend for the sheriff to pick up the items, that's not how it works. SC must first prove to the court that they tried every other reasonable means to collect for themselves, and then, and only then, will a judge grant an order allowing the sheriff to go in and seize items, but again, there must be a list of very specific items.

Seems to me like Sound Choice is actually receiving free advertising from the pirates displaying the Sound Choice logo as they play their pirated tracks. It's not as if Sound Choice is in the business of selling their logo and people are reaping some benefit from displaying the logo, per se, without compensating Sound Choice for displaying the logo. Based on the fact that Sound Choice is using their logo as some sort of back door attempt at getting money from these alleged pirates, I would venture a guess that Sound Choice's lawyers have basically told them that they have no chance of winning a lawsuit based on piracy so this is a last ditch attempt at scaring KJ's into paying up out of some level of fear. I don't believe that Sound Choice has ever offered to sell their logo as a stand alone entity so I can't see where they have suffered any losses by people displaying this logo without ever paying for it. What has Sound Choice lost by someone displaying a logo? I could see Sound Choice filing for damages if some KJ was displaying the Sound Choice logo on Music Maestro tracks or his homemade tracks. This action could possibly cause a consumer to never purchase a Sound Choice disc in the future. Displaying the Sound Choice logo in front of a track that Sound Choice actually produced is nothing more than truth in advertising and I can't see any damages being inflicted upon Sound Choice by this action. I sure would be interested in hearing Sound Choice's argument as to how they are losing money by someone flashing their logo on a televison screen for a few seconds. In my opinion, seeing that logo can only help Sound Choice get introduced to new customers who might have never heard of Sound Choice otherwise.

Interesting argument, Bruce, and for the most part, I agree with you. This is why SC has no intention of actually hitting a courtroom, because I'm willing to bet that based on their claims, they will lose under the law they are trying to file under. Too bad, really, because I would love to hear what a judge has to say about it and how the law applies(or doesn't) in this case.

Amen Staley!


Spot on

After the black flags of the pirates sail back over the horizon, maybe we can hire a detective to investigate bad sound and shoddy rotations. Of course, with the pirates gone this may no longer be a problem.

Meanwhile, still waiting to see any proof that these last 2 pages were in reply to anything but a trolling pot-stirrer. A link to a verified source of info has yet to be given... How "Insane.."

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

" Disc based and loving it..."