Karaoke Forums

The simple fact that Slep-tone has not been paid does not mean that she stole the money. Don't lawyers have trust accounts which hold funds that arrive to them in a case? What if there is a dispute between Slep-tone and APS over who is entitled to the funds that arrived? Based on Slep-tone's lawsuit against APS, there clearly is and she was receiving the funds. Is she supposed to distribute the funds to Slep-tone just because Slep-tone demands them and risk a lawsuit from APS/Brophy for improperly doing so? Are you sure she is not holding the funds in her trust account until your dispute with APS and Brophy is resolved? The fact the you accuse her of stealing money is a very serious accusation against her. Thus far you have presented no proof of it. Without such proof don't you think your accusation is slanderous?

Libel? Slander? Glad you at least agree Insane.

No comprehension problem just a problem with trying to spin things that cannot be spun. SC asks for the money, it is refused and no proof shown that it is in a trust account. If it were she would have immediately shown the proof and there the matter would have ended, at least at that point. But hey why use logic when it is more fun to try and smear people.

I did not agree. Do you have a reading comprehension problem?

First it would be libel, not slander if not true.

Raoke, if you knew anything about trust accounts, you would realize more lawyers get disbarred because they misuse them. Now do you really expect that anyone here would believe that any lawyer would refuse to show their trust accounts to their clients on demand? There is no explanation, it is cut and dry, Client: I want to see the trust account, Lawyer: Here it is. No explanations, no delays, no nothing.

There, I fixed my comment to be more understandable to the laymen, which we assume you are not. It was obvious what I meant.

BTW, have you read these forum rules?

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=21939

Thanks for clarifying Insane. And yes, I have read them, but you keep insisting on trying to post personal data in violation of the rules.

If these ^^^ type of "Off Topic" posts continue, you will reap the consequences of your actions.

Last warning!

I was given bad treatment from your husband, diafel, JoeC, and others almost immediately from my first posts regarding the very first SC lawsuit in 2009 and any mention of KIAA. I was the first to report here on KS about that lawsuit which began this entire discussion on SC going after pirates in the courts, so please stop playing the victim. Many members here immediately ganged up on me for posting the anti-piracy efforts of KIAA and the SC lawsuits. No wonder that I went on the defensive because people like you and your husband treated me like sh!t. So again, please stop playing the victim bird. Your husband brought on his woes himself by his "vile" posts causing reactions from others.

BTW, leading up to my banning from KS in January 2010, the thread that I started on that very first lawsuit was deleted because I posted information about Dan Dan's criminal background, which was of public record and had nothing to do with the SC lawsuit he was involved in. Now RoakeBoy has posted about Harrington's dealings in other cases, which are of public record and have nothing to do with the SC lawsuits that he is involved in.

My anonymity has to do with the amount of reporting alleged pirates in our market share, beginning in 2009, and not tipping our hand. We are still waiting for lawsuits in our area. I post on forums as an individual, not representing the company I work for, thus more reason to remain anonymous. My posts are mine alone, not the view of the companies.

So if my anonymity is viewed as being non-credible, so be it. You can say the same of RoakeBoy's credibility in the same vein. Is there really any difference? There may be a difference. Me, I'm just a guy, who by the way is not on the Slep-Tone payroll, who works for a humble karaoke company and has a passion for getting rid of pirates in our area. My opinion is that RoakeBoy seems to appear that he is more involved in these lawsuits, which ARE of public record. As Harrington said, "He has an agenda".

I could really give a fu<k about what you and others think about my credibility in all this, and how it may effect my job ethically, but if my suspicions are correct, RoakeBoy's credibility could have disastrous effects in his field of work, and in the ethics that are required.

Have a chipper day in Suite 1300!

I was given bad treatment from your husband, diafel, JoeC, and others .....

Just to clear the record: I have certainly disagreed with you, but you would be hard-pressed to find any flames or ill treatment from me directed at you- and it hasn't been easy.

He was given "bad treatment" by me, for sure. If you count my protests at him starting 50 threads all about the same thing, promoting the now-moribund KIAA in the general discussion forum. This was the cause of the creation of the piracy forum -- outcry against this being the all-piracy, all-the-time channel.

Indeed, that is the reason that most people have been banned around this topic for the past year or two -- the insistence in carrying the same argument and topic into many, many, threads. No one likes Johnny One Note singing the same song over the top of other people's musical discussions.

You do realize, contrary what you might believe, they are entirely different circumstances and cases.