Karaoke Forums

YOU CAN ALSO BUY POCKET SONGS KARAOKE AUDIO FILES FROM I-TUINES.

It still proves that Joe doesn't do any research which was the purpose of the citation.

_________________
-- Mark

Joe isn't working for someone else like you are Insane. He is running his own business and doesn't have the extra time you have to go looking up everything. That seems to be your bag, since on these forums you don't discuss any other topic. Not about running a show, rotations, equipment, nothing, which makes me wonder if you really are a KJ like you claim, or just another spokesman for SC like Jimbo. Hell I even had it suggested that you are really Kurt in makeup.

Like I said, it was possible that I missed something. However, they weren't CONSISTANT about it.

As for not using the product: You either haven't read or haven't comprehended my posts on this subject.

I use MM, I use Pocket, I use SuperCore, I use KJ Tools, I use Dangerous, and any dam label I paid for in good faith. Hell, I even use SC! Why?

First, most consumers of these products had/have no knowledge of licensing problems prior to purchase- and unless someone can prove they did, tough to prosecute.

Second, I am Original Manufacturers' Disc based. While this does not neccesarily relieve be of ALL liability, it minimizes it below media shifters and downloaders- add a little more safety to number one- because the media in use was distributed by the factory, and liability can be passed back.

You might not know these things as an employee- no reason you would need to- but owners have to be aware of them.

As for the "evils": PS isn't trying to sue people or tarnish reputations for the same things that they did, like SC is. Neither are/did ANY other of the companies. Even CB never really got the ball rolling, and DT is at least attempting to disassociate themselves from possible customer base killing suits by using PR, a company created specifically to take the dirty end. I'm not saying that is any better, but at least they KNOW they need to disassociate.

I would also add that the company known as DT has made an incredible effort toward a clean start, discarding literally thousands of " questionable permission" songs from the original CB library- at a financial loss- just to make sure they begin on the right foot.

I would also add that though created to do the "dirty work" I have yet to hear of unsubstantiated suits initiated by them- though I maintain a wait and see attitude.

There's your differences....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Selectatrack just pulled them completely... seems like they have decided to offer them on Customburn instead

Correct in regard to Selecta-Track

Timberlea, the difference between PS and SC is that the case was dismissed, payment Zero.

Even Jim will tell you that SC has had to PAY settlements over the years, and has beenbrought to task WAY more often. In my original post I also said that though I may have any the Pocket suits ( and it seems that I DO have way less time for this stuff than Insane), any suits would be rare to the point od being negligible. What Insane cited WAS negligible.

SC has proven that anyone can sue anyone for anything- but you saw how the suit Insane cited turned out.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

That bites! Too bad they can't go through Digitrax too.

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

So Jimbo, when do you expect the judge to comply with your request? On what facts and elements do you think the jury and judge failed to find in SC's favor?

Here is the complete list of cases in which MMO Music Group, Inc., which is the legal name of Pocket Songs, has been sued for copyright infringement:

MMO Music Group Inc v. Warner Chappell Music Inc et al, C.D.Calif., 2:2012-cv-03300, 04/16/2012
Music et al v. MMO Music Group, Inc. et al., S.D.N.Y., 1:2005-cv-04427, 05/05/2005
Zomba Enterprises, Inc. et al v. MMO Music Group, Inc., S.D.N.Y., 1:2004-cv-03021, 04/20/2004
Zomba Enterprises, et al v. MMO Music Group, Inc., M.D.Tenn., 3:2003-cv-00038, 01/13/2003
Osborn v. MMO Music Group, Inc., M.D.Tenn., 3:2001-cv-00574, 06/28/2001
MMO Music Group,Inc. v. Studio East, et al., S.D.N.Y., 7:1998-cv-06415, 09/10/1998
FOX v. MMO MUSIC GROUP, INC, et al., E.D.Pa., 2:1997-cv-03980, 06/11/1997
Pierre Jaubert v. Teddy Riley, et al, C.D.Calif.,2:1996-cv-01738, 03/11/1996

(In some cases, they sued for declaratory judgment or breach of contract and the copyright claim was a counterclaim.)

I point this out not to denigrate Pocket Songs--most significant businesses get sued from time to time--but to point out that PS has been sued with greater frequency than SC, yet is held up as a paragon of virtue on the basis that it (supposedly) gets sued less.

At one point, SC was the largest producer of karaoke music in the U.S., maybe the world, and even today it has a historical catalog larger than just about anyone. If SC really were the kind of company that is most common in the karaoke industry, skirting or disregarding the licensing obligation completely, then SC, given its prominence in the marketplace, its market share, and its relatively deep pockets, should have been sued more often than anybody--and maybe it was sued more than a lot of companies who had less to lose and could more easily shut their doors. Yet here's PS, with a much more limited catalog, being sued repeatedly, and certainly more frequently than SC.

I think there is a conclusion to be drawn, but it's not the one Joe wants to draw.

Thank you Jim for posting citation of the FACTS above.

It proves again, to me at least and hopefully the readership, that Joe would rather make stuff up instead of taking the time like you, or myself, in researching facts and giving citation to claims.

I know the intelligent readership understands Joe's folly, but the newbies to this forum need to understand that Joe's posts are to be taken as mis-information most of the time.

_________________
-- Mark

I really don't care which company has been sued the most, it would seem that all manus involved in the production end of the business have been sued. They have been sued by the publishers for making product without the proper licensing and payment of fees. They have been guilty of the same crime they want to punish others for. What is more the average hosts is merely running their little business, they are not making product and selling it. Product that is illegal that has been passed off as legal, therefore creating confusion in the marketplace. It seems to me the manus have no morale high ground to be preaching to others from.

Even if the benefit of the doubt was given that most situations that were basis for filing suit were due to "jumping the gun" on alleged agreements, one thing I have concluded is that the process for song approval has not come anywhere near the relative speed by which the original music is made available to the public. Of course, the gun-jumping, according to the bulk of lawsuit dates I have seen, was before the accelerated iTunes world we live in now, so the justification for it seems a bit disproportionate. Apparently, Europe actually figured out something before the USA did, whether purposefully or accidentally, in that their process seems to be a bit more timely and maybe a bit more cut-and-dried. One thing is certain: the consumer should not be deterred unnecessarily, especially in the global economy we have now...

What you're talking about is a false equivalency.

It is entirely reasonable for publishers and manufacturers to have disputes about products that get released because licensing is an inherently nebulous process with many individuals, both internal and external to the publishers, who want to get paid and choose to assert their rights at various points in time.

But unless you're talking about a manufacturer who has abdicated its licensing obligations entirely, and SC does NOT fall into that category, then you're trying to equate what amount to contractual disputes to outright theft. They simply aren't the same thing. When I go to a karaoke show and find a guy with 130,000 tracks who has everything SC ever recorded, not a disc in sight, and by the way that's one of three shows his company is running that night with the same setup, we're so far beyond a contractual dispute that it's laughable to suggest otherwise.

So when the manus take material without paying for it is a contractual dispute, and when a host is operating his or her rig it is suspected theft. They are both operating a business without paying for the materials, so to me there is no difference. What is worse the manu is selling the product as being legal when it really isn't. Thus creating confusion in the market place. Of that 130,000 not all is SC product, so really all you are concerned with is the SC product, that is the limit of your authority. So it really makes no difference how many tracks any host has as long as they are not using SC's tracks. Then the manu compounds the situation by attempting to sue for the same crime, they are committing, and are supposed to be battling. That is what I think is really laughable, the trouble is the joke is on the unsuspecting host who is hoodwinked by all of this.

I read something recently on the old JOLTERS Forum on Facebook. It claims that a former employee of Slep Tone admits that it was common policy for Sound Choice to not license tracks until they were caught by a publisher and then their policy was to settle after the fact which would, in the end, be cheaper than licensing the tracks up front. I guess their business plan was: "Catch Me If You Can". It's no wonder why the publishers are trying to price them out of the karaoke business. Should be interesting to see how this all pans out.

Would be nice to see.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Boy, that was definitive with lots of evidence. It's more of a friend of a friend of a friend who had an acquaintance type of story. Absolutely no validity.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

I have no knowledge of this in relation to SlepTone, however, many in business follow this same business plan, in effect, asking forgiveness instead of permission..

The astounding lack of ethics in business today seems to spread it's black heart to all that observe it.. (I blame the Socialist College Professors teaching the MBA classes)

Big Pharma is foremost in this arena, and not a CD+G in sight..

Apples iTunes crushed the CD business in a few years.. DVDs are almost obsolete..

NetFlix and Spotify are gaining ground on the entire industry..

Wait, let me spend a lot of money for a karaoke track that is already 10 years obsolete..

As you all know, blank CDs, are taxed so the rights holders of songs can be paid for the supposed "Copying" that must occur if blanks are sold.

Ha! I believe this is called "Slippery Slope Logic".

Nobody buys blank CDs anymore.. And if they did, where is the money they taxed us on the sale?

Did those funds get passed on the the copyright holders? Where is the audit? Who controls the millions that were collected?

Inquiring minds want to know..

Time for my nap..

I see FIVE suits against Pocket ( 2 listed were Pocket suing others). More importantly, I note that the RESULTS of those suits are conspicuously missing.

Care to put up a comparison list of suits against SC????

LOVE to see it, as I think folks will notice a MUCH longer list.

I KNOW YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THAT LIST. So, in the interest of fairness, I DARE YOU to post it. Of course, you realize that I will add- and call you out on- anything you miss....
Go ahead, show me yours.....

Like I stated earlier, compared to SC they ARE a paragon of virtue, given the fact that even you admit suits are a fact of the music business.

Note that no one has pulled a SyberSound suit. Did I miss anyone there too?

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

That kinda sucks. I still buy blanks, I have half a sleeve of them right on my desk. I use them for pictures and files. Don't need them for music, ALTHOUGH, I do store all my karaoke zips on them for future "in case" needs.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE