Karaoke Forums

I think about everyone here figured that was the case.

But it is interesting to read that you consider what you are doing now to be "harassment".

ASCAP, BMI, SESAC are investigating the VENUE to make sure they paid the appropriate fees for having the music playing. they are not investigating the DJ/KJ, nor do they make the DJ/KJ pay for more fees or do an audit. plus it is not the vendors, it isd a central PR agency representing the copywrite owners, not the Vendors persay (Sony, DEF Jam, etc.)

2) Wireless telephone companies often do business through company-owned stores, especially in medium-sized and large cities. But in smaller towns, they often do business through "authorized resellers." These companies purchase products from the wireless company, making the wireless company a "vendor." The relationship isn't a franchise, for various reasons, but the reseller is allowed to use the wireless company's trademark, with restrictions. The wireless company will inspect the reseller from time to time to make certain that the reseller is adhering to the rules for use of the trademark--for example, by using the phrase "authorized retailer" after the wireless company name, and to make sure that the reseller's personnel are properly trained and focused on selling the wireless company's products.[/quote]

i am not reselling anything, but using the product for what it was intended. to make this akin to karaoke, SC should be checking their B&M stores and online retailers for how they are representing the company.

3) Car rental companies usually own the high-volume operations at airports, but when you rent a car "in-town," it's often from a separate company that may or may not be a franchisee. The agency owns the cars it rents, and it may or may not buy them from or through the name-brand company. Regardless, however, the name-brand company will inspect the operation from time to time to make sure its name is not being misused and its standards are being upheld.[/quote]

are they making the owners show and verify the VIN for each car to continue doing business? knowing several private "in town" rental owners i can tell you no. are they making the owners pay for that inspection? no. seeing the condition of some rentals i have ended up with in different parts of the country i dont believe they check very often, if at all. i called two friends that own "in town" rental companies that rent ford, dodge, and toyotas and the answer was the same from both...."WTF is he talking about?"

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

Again....I may be wrong, but I think Harrington was taking someone else's use of the word "harassment" and applying that to what they are actually doing which is filing lawsuits against infringers.

Although, if we want to apply "harassment" to pirates, I am all for that.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Almost every national car rental company uses the VIN number to scan in/out their cars. It is a tracking and an inventory system and it gets reported back to corporate offices.

Bobby-Joe's Car Rental Deluxe may not simply because they have 1 lot (or a couple) and it is pretty obvious if a car doesn't come back.

Avis Car Rental does check up on the locations that use the Avis brand. I have rented almost exclusively with them for 20 years now and I have had many conversations with these folks over the years on a wide variety of subjects and they do get visits from corporate. Usually unannounced.

Because of my last name I have been able to have quite a bit of fun with these folks over the years.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

i understand what you are referring to Chris, but he was not talking about corporate visits to national chains to see if they are upholding the AVIS name. i am not part of SC, SC corporate does not need to be checking me out.
he was discussing the small one off rental places and Dodge investigating them to make sure they are somehow upholding the Dodge name.
Avis scans VIN for inventory purposes, not to report to Dodge.
not to mention, another reason it does not appply to our situation.....rental companies lease the cars, not buy. compare it to the GEM, but nt to discs.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

As with trademark, copyright also has a fair use provision within the law as it stands today. The only ones who would try to persuade you otherwise are those who hope to gain from your misunderstanding of the law....especially the lawyers who hope to "harrass" you with a lawsuit.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Does "Fair Use" apply to any commercial setting?

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I don't, but some people do, without cause.

Why doesn't SC go after all those Copying and Posting their "Trademark" on Ebay?
SC has said that when a KJ plays a song from a HD and the logo shows up that the customers may think that this is the real deal and thus "Confusion" sets in.

Can't the same be said of the Logo's shown on Ebay. One might think they are getting the real deal but could be getting a "Copy" and unless they were, "Very In The Know", they would never know it was.

Chrisavis got fooled and only found out when he got audited.

Unless of course these people are authorized sellers of SC...but then again how do we know?

_________________
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

Those people that are buying hard drives on line are just future victims of Sound Choice's extortion....I mean business model. E-bay and Craigs list are like the Golden Goose that keeps laying golden eggs for the Sound Choice Law suit machine. The more people that buy these hard drives the more defendants to file agaoinst. Ka-ching!!!

Sound Choice doesn't want to put these sellers out of business. If anything they would want to file a law suit against them just to obtain their customer list. Ka-Ching!!!

I think this says it all.

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

I wasn't "fooled" by an eBay purchase. The fake discs that were identified in my audit came from bulk Craigslist purchases. I always have the seller send pics of random samples of discs to me and those simply didn't show up in the random sample. I also expect that if someone says they have 1000 Originals that 5-10% of those are actually copies or damaged or otherwise unuasable.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Regardless of where you obtained the discs you must have thought they were genuine if you submitted them to an audit. So in fact even someone as experienced as you can be fooled which makes Lone Wolf's point valid.

Just after my audit, I posted the experience in another thread. I mentioned that I had paid a neighborhood kid to rip and organize a bunch of my discs for me. He wasn't nearly as diligent about things as I had hoped and missed the 10 or so fakes that we caught during the audit. That was my bad for not doing a more thorough review of his work.

So still technically *I* wasn't fooled as *I* was the one that found them during the audit and recognized them quickly. But I do understand the point that is being made here.

I would suggest that anyone that purchases from ANY source where you don't get to look at them first demand a full inventory (within reason) and pics be taken of as many of the discs as possible.

I would also suggest that transaction be made via PayPal for both buyer and seller protection.

Finally, have the seller insure the discs.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but ...

Fair use is determined by a balanced application of four factors set forth in the statute: (1) the purpose of the use; (2) the nature of the work used; (3) the amount and substantiality of the work used; and (4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the work used.

Note not one of the four factors is listed solely as commercial use. Given that I'd think there are acceptances of fair use commercial settings.

_________________
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.

i would say that 'commercial use' is a purpose. as the purpose of any commercial venture is to make money.

However there are lawyers out there who will argue that altho commercial use counts against you in terms of allowing fair 'use' there have been cases where it was still allowed.

so i guess it all falls back to wheather or not it will come before an actual judge.

I agree that commercial use would be considered as purpose. I was just pointing out that the 4 factors used did not include "use in a commercial purpose" as something that automatically prevented fair use.

_________________
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.

Whether a use is commercial or non-commercial is an important factor in copyright fair use analysis. It is not a dispositive factor. There are some commercial uses that are considered copyright fair use.

A good example, I think, is a television show that contains movie reviews. Typically, the show will include clips of the movies being reviewed. That is almost certainly a commercial use of those clips. If that were dispositive of the issue of copyright fair use, then the reviewer would have to get permission every time a clip was used.

But copyright fair use analysis probably goes in the other direction. In a typical movie review, a few clips are displayed that show elements of the storyline without giving away critical plot elements. Using a couple of minutes of footage out of a 110-minute movie is usually not a big deal ("amount and substantiality of the work used"), and the effect of the use on the potential market for the work is probably positive (movie reviews often drive sales). But if the movie is "The Crying Game" and the clips reveal the (at the time) very shocking plot twist in that film, that would probably not be considered a fair use.

Please note that this analysis is for copyright fair use only.

You can bet that Siskel and Ebert had all their ducks in a row when discussing the films that they reviewed!

I believe that only certain clips are released by the film company for said shows for them to show while giving their review even though most film critics are given a chance to see the film before it actually comes out.

Any clips that are not released by the film company would be BOOTLEG and thus prosecutable!

_________________
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

wouldn't the same be said for playing karaoke in a venue? if more sales are desired, being used every day in venues exposing people to the product would boost sales.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens