Karaoke Forums

Unauthorized media-shifting for commercial purposes is a form of trademark counterfeiting.

When we give permission for a media-shift of the trademarked goods following an audit, it is no longer "unauthorized" and therefore no longer a counterfeit.



There is no basis in law for your assertion.



You should read my earlier message about the various rights holders. The media-shift may be legal with respect to the copyright (i.e., not actionable due to a fair use or other defense) but not legal with respect to the trademark.



I believe our disclaimer is quite clear on this point, exactly as you state. I'm glad you've come around to our position.



Quite simply, because SC does have the right to tell you that you CAN'T use a media-shifted track. SC's permission is necessary (with regard to the trademark) but may not be sufficient. Thus, the disclaimer.



The media-shifted track may or may not be legal, in the sense that it may or may not be the subject of a claim by someone else that you have violated their rights. Our disclaimer, as a I said above, is clear on this point.



I don't think we've made any secret of our audit program. I believe, also, that the music publishers are generally supportive of, or at least not opposed to, our anti-piracy efforts, because they benefit from them as well at no cost. Music publishers (and songwriters) make money by licensing their work, so most of them are happy to issue licenses and cash royalty checks. Our anti-piracy efforts are directly working to increase those things, as well as to increase awareness that music piracy is stealing.

So if you'd like to "notify" the music publishers of our efforts, prepare to be underwhelmed by the level of outrage you generate.

Ok I think I get it now. You're saying due to the Trademark being embeded within the track that SC has the right to deny use of that track solely based on the existance of the TM that is embeded with the other IP?

So had the TM not been embeded within the track SC would pretty much be in the same boat as the publishers?

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

The right to deny use of the duplicate of the track. The KJ can still use the original disc.



I could probably agree with that, although I think there are probably some protectable trade dress rights (a form of trademark rights) in the lyric sweeps also. I think that most people who are familiar with the various karaoke brands would be able to identify a SC lyric sweep without seeing the logo, especially in comparison to CB, PHM, etc.

What if someone were to remove the entire video sweep and replace it with their own rendering?

I believe that there are programs where one can put their own lyric sweep on an mp3 to create a custom mp3+g lyric sweep.

I would bet that there are some pirates, at this moment, doing exactly this with the music portion of SC tracks, thus removing any visual reference to SC trademarks or lyric sweep styles that may have recognizable SC rights.

And that's why I think Mr. Harrington included:

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

In that situation, that person would have created an unauthorized derivative work (a copyright infringement), and could be more easily dealt with by a publisher or by the manu holding the copyright in the A/V work.



I have not seen that yet. I have seen logos digitally removed, but the lyric sweeps remain. If it becomes more prevalent, we will find a different approach.

You can't TM a an, already, TM'ed FONT.

"Counterfeit" is not a term that has any meaning with respect to copyright--it's a trademark concept--so copyright owners are not concerned with "counterfeits." The term "goods" in that situation refers to the physical medium (HD or other storage device), not to the track itself.




The KJ is perfectly capable of coming to that conclusion. SC is not willing to speak for the upstream rights holders, who can decide for themselves if they want to pursue it. I am inclined to believe that they either will not or cannot sue.



Then your solution is obvious: Don't media-shift. Use the original discs.



I really don't understand the militant attitude. You're the one wanting to make the copy. SC wants to make sure that you respect its rights when you do so. Why should SC indemnify you--which is what you are asking for--for your own misconduct?



Trademarks don't have any meaning or status except when they are applied to goods or services. But if you want to dicker over terminology...you can call it moonshifting for all I care.



I'm amazed that you think this is somehow an "admission" on our part. We've been very clear about it from the beginning.




Do they think that passing an audit insulates them against being charged with the violation of a noise ordinance?

There are very few activities that you could undertake that are definitely, always, without exception, and inalterably legal. One of the great things about this country is that we are all free to interpret the law and to act accordingly, with the understanding that if we get it wrong, there may be consequences. I very much doubt that anyone believes that passing an audit makes them TOTALLY LEGAL in the absolute sense. I believe, however, that most people believe that passing an audit will make it very, very unlikely that someone will sue them for the audited activities, and that if they are sued, they will have good defenses based upon passing that audit.



You are free to make whatever contacts you can to bring this urgent issue to their attention, just as they are free to ignore you when you do.

You can't gain trademark rights in a font, period. I am not talking about the font per se. I am talking about the look and feel of the sweep screens.

gd123 HL is referring to trade dress.

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Man...someone's got a real hard on for my husband...he's not even here and you can't resist keeping him in the conversation, and even creating a thread in his honor (in, of course, a very infantile way). He must have struck a real nerve with you. Would you like me to send you a wallet size photograph so you can keep him close to your heart?

_________________
Birdofsong

you're so silly...

your husband is reviled and ridiculed

perhaps you're unfamiliar with the term "hard on".

It probably isn't what you're used to.

But then again it is the Staley's who always refer with sexual innuendo isn't it?

roll over, bend over, and hard on...

I really don't think we're all talking about the same thing.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

I'm fairly certain I wasn't talking to you, but way to go, getting in your own personal digs. Anyone else want to join the bandwagon?

It astounds me the amount of Kindergarten crap that is allowed (in a very one-sided way) in this place.

Next.....

_________________
Birdofsong

@birdofsong - I have no issue with you. I do not wish to lock horns with you. I would rather not lock horns with Chip either, but he honestly brings it upon himself.

I missed the memo about Chip not being "here". Not sure where "here" even is. I suppose I should have them re-position the tracking satellite.

I believe I can speak for many when I say - Yes, he struck a nerve - and he does it on purpose.

A wallet size photo is intended for a wallet which is in fact much closer to another part of my body.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Sure, I'll bite.

So, you are innocent victims now?

I find it absolutely comical that Staleys are complaining about "one-sided" mistreatment, "kindergarten crap" and accusing others of having an agenda against you.

This takes the cake. "Nice Try".

Wow. That was so predicable, Bazza. The problem here is that you can't seem to tell the difference between a spirited argument with valid points, and schoolyard taunts like "reviled" "ridiculed" and an entire thread devoted to personally slamming an individual on the forum. I'd actually be the first to admit that Chip loves a good argument, but I don't recall him using 10-year-old taunts to belittle anyone here. EVER.

You want to debate issues and discuss two sides of an argument...fine. You want to call names and verbally spit on people. Not fine. And I don't speak for him. I speak for myself. Your behavior right now is no better than the guy who teams up with the class bully. I don't care what you think. This is simply wrong.

_________________
Birdofsong

It seems to be too much to ask for everyone to be nice. It hasn't happened in 10 years, going back long before my time to the early Jolt forum, and it won't happen now. But there are some things to deal with.

There are some people with strong opinions, and it seems to make sense to allow those opinions to be heard. But if you are going to dish it out, you have to be able to take it.

The rules remain the same. The moderators don't have much interest in being referees or judges of complex cases, so don't try to make complex cases. I think they would ask you to please stop it now. Hit the reset button, or there might be someone taking a vacation from this place.

NOTE: If there is anyone that is PM-ing someone else when you are not on friendly terms, stop it. If you can't make up in the forum itself, don't try on PM. Even if your intentions are pure, it might be interpreted wrongly.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Well then you haven't been paying attention, or perhaps your relationship has caused you to become immune to such things over the years. The veiled insults. The vitriole. The snide remarks. The mocking.



And yet you live with a bully you idolize as some kind of crusader. How you can sit at your computer and claim moral "high ground" with a straight face is beyond bizarre.



That's really what it's all about, isn't it.

You done yet?

_________________
Birdofsong