Karaoke Forums

LOL

Disc purchased at retail is not "authorized" for duplication.

It's that simple.

Screaming that the sky is falling doesn't make it true no matter how loud you scream.

SC/PEP is not controlling me in any way. I have the discs. I proved it. I have had ZERO interference from them, period.

Instead of spreading FUD... how about you provide ANY evidence that SC/PEP has "controlled" a Host/KJ that has complied with their policies.

Remember, you simply DID NOT purchase the right to make copies of those CD+G's for use in commerce. That is a FACT.

_________________
Never the same show twice!

I am not talking about bit rate quality, I am talking about complete background track quality. There is an obvious difference between the quality of Music Maestro backing tracks and Sound Choice backing tracks.

_________________
-Chris

I agree that there is a noticeable difference in the quality of Music Maestro backing tracks vs Sound Choice backing tracks, BUT, that has nothing to do with a Pirate KJ vs a Legit KJ. If I were to see MM vs SC up on a TV screen, I still would NOT be able to tell whether it was a pirated version or a legit version.

This is indeed our principal motivation for acquiring the trademark. Piracy Recovery has done some enforcement work, but not a lot of it. CB is easily the second most-played brand we encounter in our investigations. The back catalog is large. It must not be allowed to fall into freeware status--that would be bad for the entire legitimate industry.

Incorrect. ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC do not hold any special place in federal law. They are merely agents for their members.



They represent the owners and creators of some of the underlying intellectual property used in karaoke tracks.



You can't have it both ways. PEP is the successor to Slep-Tone, which certainly did create a substantial portion of the underlying intellectual property. Either PEP is the creator (by succession), or it represents the creator.



I guess those thousands of tracks just sprang, fully formed, from thin air, without any creative effort from anyone beyond "the owner," whoever that might be.

(Never mind that "the owner" is in most instances a publishing company that very specifically didn't do anything creative at all.)



Yes, that's right...no creativity in figuring out how exactly to produce a professional-quality, authentic sound; no creativity in how to convey the lyric swipes and the cueing information, either. Right. Which is why everybody with a MIDI encoder and a keyboard can do it as well as we did (and do).



I don't know what you mean by "one-time-per-venue." ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC rates are all calculated based on the volume of use--the size of the venue, the type of equipment used, the type of use (DJ music, karaoke, TV, atmospheric music, jukebox, etc.), and the duration.



Actually, we have no interest in anyone paying us for use, if they have already paid full retail for the product (or even something less than full retail). What we have an interest in is in people paying for the cost of making sure they follow the rules when they convert to a different medium or format. Unfortunately, most people don't follow the rules, so we can't just trust them. Even more unfortunately, you're so angry at what we did to your business that you can't see or think straight.

If pirate hosts are forced out of using SC and CB and into using MM and other brands with lower production quality, THAT will be the quality difference I am referring to. It has nothing to do with identifying a pirate based on brand used (though that could potentially happen).

If, as a legitimate host, the experience I provide is better, including brands that have better production, better sound, better graphics, then I should enjoy more success provided I do the rest of my job as well or better than a pirate.

_________________
-Chris

I believe that the main culprit of piracy was the ex-Major league baseball pitcher and that most drives or portions of drives (or copies of tracks) that has been shared among pirates stem from him. Kind of like maybe we're all an offspring of Noah. Like a certain portion of DNA each of us has is a match. Yet, we all have differing fingerprints.

We've all seen at shows that certain tracks have graphic inconsistencies at certain places within the track. I've seen that myself at the same place in a track at different shows owned by different hosts. Do you think possibly investigators see the same things I have? That would be clue number one and raise strong suspicion, would it not? Especially when several tracks continue to match up the same.

Then placing the 'Forensic' thumb drive on the laptop or external HD would discover more. I believe each CDG has its own fingerprint simply because I have several CDGs from the same manu that are duplicates (i.e. two SC7513's , example) and it does not matter how many times I shift them using one of my programs they continue to come up with the same CRC hexa-decimal bits that appear to be associated with the particular CDG and they are not the same from one CDG to the other. I also notice that there is another field that says either 'deflate' or 'store' which I believe designates something else which may be used in conjunction with CRC.

So, if that is true, then the same CRC bits that were originally pirated will show up on the drive of pirate hosts and the 'Forensic' drive reveals that. Aha, a CLONE !

Brian at SC/PEP once stated to me that pirate Karaoke hosts think they can pull the wool over their eyes but they really can not. I wholeheartedly agree.

I'm just sayin'.

_________________
You can never argue with a crazy mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mind ----B. Joel
I have great faith in fools; My friends call it self-confidence ---- E.A. Poe
I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity ----E.A. Poe
I don't know, I don't care, and it doesn't make any difference! ----A. Einstein
Double bubble, toil and trouble ----W. Shakespeare & Walt Disney
I hate it when I get on FaceBook ----Me
Karaoke might be Groundhog Day ----?
Of All the Martial Arts, Karaoke Inflicts the Most Pain ----?

Personally, I can't wait for Party Tyme to get going. They will be putting out quality tracks, and there will be no need for SC OR CB. WHY?? Party Tyme is looking to make all those pesky SC only songs, so there will be alternate versions. Works for me. Outside of my single Dave Matthews disk, I have no use for CB. Little by Little, I have been replacing old SC songs with new versions, that sound great. I have 2 PMH discs, which I am not impressed with. I have my UK brands, which I like better than the big three. I have Karaoke Version. Soon I will have Party Tyme, I have my DK, and plenty of other good brands.

So now we are back to having cheerleaders.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

This is how I can tell you're not paying attention: I wasn't talking about discs... I was talking about DIGITAL FILES... sold by CB for playback through a computer. They have no way of knowing, nor even grounds for suspecting that anyone who bought DIGITAL FILES are doing anything wrong.

And we should just believe you why?

Gee, I didn't happen to see anything about PEP, or even SC in this list.... Are you now claiming that you're a performance rights society too? For what? A trademark? Really?


"Mr. Twisty" is back I see.... Let me dumb this down for you: Without THEIR "underlying intellectual property" you have nothing either to stamp your precious logo on or paint THEIR LYRICS in pretty colors -- as a matter of fact, you yourself said it was fine to stamp your logo on counterfeit material and still have trademark protection. (how ethical is that?)


Simply another untruth. Slep-Tone sold the catalog to Stingray remember? Or have you conveniently forgotten that? That "substantial portion" (which wasn't substantial at all) was kissed away when the check was cashed. You have no claim to any underlying musical or lyrical or even synchronization of the original creative work. Not even to the sound recordings.... anymore. You can't sell something and claim you still own it.

And this is a perfect example of how you want it both ways: You think "mimicking" a creative work is somehow creative in itself? Wrong. It may take some trade skills to come close to the original work in sound, but it's not certainly "creative" at all. No Karaoke manufacturer "writes the music and the lyrics"... ever. They are a nothing more than a copy machine attempting to make the most "true-to-original COPY" of the original creative work. Some manufacturers are better than others at this "craft." NONE of them are "creative." Including SC.

And you do "have to mind" that the "owner" is a publishing company (like Stingray?) that didn't do anything creative at all... also happens to be a perfect description of PEP doesn't it? Except PEP doesn't own anything but a trademark. Funny how that happens, ain't it?


How "well" it was done (and not by PEP by the way), has absolutely no bearing on the "creativity" to author the track in the first place. You are seeking to confuse readers by convincing them that just because "company a" has "figured out how to copy" it better than "company b" that somehow there is creativity involved? Skill perhaps, but certainly not "creativity." Even though you'd like it to be.


You are purposely confusing "categories of performance" with performance in general. You client wants to be paid once when the disc is purchased and again when they demand to see the receipt that you purchased it in the first place. Try not to be an idiot and claim that you don't sue without evidence of any kind.


Now you're fibbing... You want every single KJ to pay you an audit fee and sign a contract. If you see a computer, you sue, if you don't see a disc player, you sue. Now, with CB it doesn't matter - you'll sue just to demand to see a receipt.

And you haven't done diddly-squat to my business and I know how that really drives you up a wall. Sound Choice is the one that is dead and buried and I'm still in business... No need to sell my assets... to myself... to hide them in the face of an impending judgment -- like your client and Chartbuster.

You're the ones that have had to "change your identity" with a brand new shiny, hood....

not all hosts are dependent on SC and CB to make their shows quality. to say that I, Chris, Lonnie, Mtnkaraoke, mrmarog, etc would not be professional and high quality show providers without those labels is insulting. just because YOUR shows would cease if you did not have those two labels does not mean everyone is as inept. most of us have been to shows that have "lesser" labels as their majority and have had more enjoyable nights than at other shows with SC and CB labels.

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

Get off your horse, Athena!! I have been running successful shows for two years, now, without the help of SC and CB. I have taken customers from other shows in my area that DO use SC and CB. I get plenty of good singers, too. I have had only a few snobs that had to have Sound Choice, and they are welcome to go sing at other shows. I have PLENTY of regulars, with more all the time that like my shows better than the others in the area. I treat my singers like family. That is what keeps them coming back to my shows. You know, if you came back here to show off some Holier Than Thou attitude, maybe you should have just stayed in the shadows. We don't need that nonsense here.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

I have all the work I want, as well. I am not just at one place. BUT, I am at one of my places three days a week, PLUS a family show on Saturdays. Full house, every night. No SC!! No CB!! No PMH!! Get over yourself!!

I work what I need to work. I pay my bills. I am not looking to get rich. I am looking to have a decent life, and be happy. That is what I have. I didn't need SC to do that. And BTW, Zoom, SBI, and Karaoke Version ARE quality brands!! If the new stuff from Party Tyme is any indicator, THEY will be a quality brand, too, and will putting out many of those SC only songs. What you seem to be ignoring is the FACT that I have gained many customers from other shows that DO use SC and CB! It is NOT all about brand around here. But you keep believing that brand is the only thing that matters.

You do it YOUR way, I'll do it mine. I will STILL be in business, and so will you. I don't NEED nor WANT 10 rigs and 30 shows a week. I can't stand people that look down their noses at others. It seems you have become a bit of a KJ snob. I have no use for that!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Perhaps a moderator can confirm if this person ("KJathena1") is posting from the same IP address as the original "kjathena" and if it is, why is there a different (new) account instead of logging in under he original ID?

This is a good example of how "a little learning is a dangerous thing." First, we never claimed to be a performing rights society. I was responding to your misleading statement.

Second, the reason why that term is defined in the Copyright Act is because of a 1998 law, the Fairness in Music Licensing Act, that clarified the mechanism by which digital performance rights for sound recordings are licensed. The law clarified that where there is a digital performance of a sound recording, permission is required from both the owner of the copyright in the composition and the owner of the copyright in the sound recording. That was already the law, but there was some uncertainty as to whether the new digital performance right for the sound recording would replace or supplement the right in the composition. This law clarified that the permission of both the owner of the sound recording and the owner of the composition copyright is required and prohibited the performance unless the composition copyright owner gave permission--and clarified that permission from a performing rights society operating on behalf of the composition copyright owner is sufficient for that end of the transaction.

If you actually read the part of the Copyright Act that deals with this issue, you'll see that it is an exceptionally narrow set of circumstances that don't apply in any way to karaoke.

Third, the Copyright Act does not confer any sort of special status or authority on ASCAP, BMI, or SESAC. The definition merely gives them as examples of what a "performing rights society" is. The authority is conferred by the copyright owners in the exercise of their exclusive rights.



Is "Mr. Twisty" a self-reference?

Without the inventor of the CD+G format, or of the CD, or of recording apparatus, or of musical instruments, we also have nothing. That's irrelevant. What we created is still our creation, even if it relied on something that came before.



Not all of the sound recordings were sold. But, even beyond that, it was our work that turned the SC brand into a valuable
commodity. That brand was not sold. So keep digging.



There were so many negatives in that last sentence, I'm having trouble following you.

You seem to be operating under the impression that we want to be paid for the use of discs. We're not interested in that at all. I don't think we've ever charged, for example, for certification of an original disc user.

But here's the thing: As regard the SC brand, if operators want to use something other than the original disc--a hard drive, or whatever--then that involves making a new product. That product can differ wildly from what's on the CD+G. I know you don't think that a trademark is valuable, but the rest of the business world and the court system disagrees. Trademarks gain value from the quality control that is applied to their use. If you, as a karaoke operator, want to make a new product with our logo and trade dress on it, legally you have to get our permission. And for our purposes of quality control, we have to have the right to examine that new product to make sure that it meets our standards.

We are more than happy for you to use original discs. Please go ahead. If you want to use something else, you're going to have to pay a portion of the cost of making that happen. We don't make money on audits. We lose money on audits as it is. If we didn't charge for audits, we'd lose a lot more money. Since those audits benefit the operator, it's only fair that the operator pay for some of the cost associated with it.



I want every single KJ who makes a new product to use in his commercial karaoke show, using our product as a template, to pay for a part of the cost of conforming that to our quality standards if they are able to pay. (We frequently waive or reduce the fee for various reasons.) I don't know of any way to conduct a commercial transaction like that without having a contract. I have a feeling that if we didn't require a contract to be signed, you'd complain that we were trying to do business on the sly without a contract.


[/quote]

Nope. Doesn't work that way.



Doesn't work that way, either.



Well, let's see...

1) In 2009, you were swimming along with 7 rigs. Cite (see page 10)
2) In 2009, we started suing people for, among other things, multi-rigging from a single set of discs.
3) All of a sudden, you didn't have 7 rigs anymore and you're posting signs at your show about how you will never play our product.

There are lots of reasonable explanations for that sequence of events, of course. I know which one I prefer. I haven't heard from you is one that contradicts it, and you have thus far declined to offer one when prompted.

But even if you have a reasonable explanation for your particular situation, the simple fact is that we did affect your business. Because you don't like that we actually enforce our rights, you pulled the brand from your systems. You did that after we started suing. So I guess you weren't telling the truth about our not doing "diddly-squat" to your business.

Just like you weren't telling the truth about individual watermarks on the karaoke tracks you produced.

You seem to be tremendously concerned with the identities of people who make a habit of disagreeing with you.

For example, after I changed by handle from "HarringtonLaw" to "JimHarrington" (which is my actual name), you began making a point of pointing it out, as though there was some nefarious intent behind it. (I am confused by the existence of a world in which it is somehow more evasive to start using your own actual name.)

Now you're concerned that "KJathena1" isn't the "kjathena" of yore. Did it occur to you that she might be locked out of her old account because it is tied to an email address she no longer has? What twisted fantasy will you come up with to explain why that's a defect of character? ("She can't even keep something as simple as an email address! WHARRRRRGARBLLL!")

You changed your name simply to soften your appearance when you became the "marketing person for PEP" as well as the attorney that sues venues and KJ's. Not so much the emphasis on "LAW" anymore... you just want to be everyone's "pal."


This is a perfect example of how you will outright lie in an attempt to make yourself look better.
"Might be locked out?" Really? I was banned from here for 3 years remember? My same login worked.... which is NOT dependent on an "email address" at all.

Your willingness to spew any kind of lie like a badly-behaving child on the schoolyard is really sad.

Gee, perhaps we should extend this "flawless legal logic" right onto your trademark shall we?

Without the inventor of painting programs, conversion programs, or even ripping programs, we also have nothing. But that's irrelevant right? When we rip a disc to our computer systems,: what we created is still OUR creation, even if it relied on something that came before...... like your trademark... right?

We just "copied" it as "our creation" and if it's good enough for the goose.....

Not yet, but if there was the slimmest chance you could troll that in court, you'd be right there. And you're the one that said you would not sue me "for playing discs" but you might "make a mistake" and sue me if I play them in a club... commercially. (your well-used "words mean things" statement)

This is wrong on so many levels it's not even funny. Even YOU have refused to grant an ironclad guarantee that you won't sue someone who is using original media. And those are your words, not mine.

Flat out bull****! Creating the parameters for your self-fulfilling prophecy makes it easy to act like an innocent victim doesn't it?

Can you give us only ONE verifiable instance where you've actually checked on this "quality control" of ANYONE you've collected money from and had them comply with your "standards of quality control?"

In 6 years?... anyone.... Bueller? Anyone?.... I didn't think so...
Of course it does and you've said so yourself. As a matter of fact, you're the one that suggest I wave a disc in the air an announce to everyone that "this song is being played off original Sound Choice media" if your investigator can't see a disc player....


Keep throwing the crap on the wall though, it's amusing to watch you dance and maybe something, someday will stick.


AND???? Is there anything illegal or infringing with that? Did you fail to mention the 7 custom discs I purchased from your client at $50 each?... How about the manufacturer rebate of $3.00 per disc when we purchased more than 100 at a time? Amazing how you conveniently leave out those facts in your deranged quest isn't it?


Bulls*** again. Your definition of "reasonable explanation" is nothing more than your speculations wrapped up in fantasy and the fairytale of your choosing. Because you've decided to conveniently forget or ignore it, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.... you're hoping your empty insinuations will stick to something.


You "guess?" We asked you nicely remember? What did we get back from YOU? We got the promise that there was NO WAY you would guarantee that an original disc user would NOT get sued. So it's a pretty simple business decision at that point isn't it? If you use the product in any form at all, you run the risk that you -- and your venue -- of being sued. Period.

No guarantee means we don't use your product... this was YOUR decision, not ours. So yes, we pulled your brand entirely. And the venues thanked us for being proactive and looking out for their benefit. So don't blame us for not wanting to have our venues -- much less ourselves -- in your trolling cross-hairs for making the mistake of purchasing the product in the first place.

So, in the end, you haven't done "diddly-squat" to our business.
We're still in business.
We operate it the way WE want to.. as we always have... free from your threats and without your interference.

Here's a free sign you can use for Slep-Tone:

No I said i'd be stupid to drop the brand as I have somewhere around 600 or 700 discs (can't remember) and wasn't going to drop them just to spend money to re-buy the library on other brands. But on the same note, I did get a lot of people coming in strictly because I still had SC in my library as some of the other kj's dropped the brand (granted that was about the time they did their lawsuits in this area and other kj's were panicking and dropped the brand - many have since resumed use).
HOWEVER, If I were going into the business today, I probably wouldn't worry so much about SC being as important - I still might get the GEM as a basic 'core' set but rely on other manus for everything else. Back when I was starting in the early to mid 90's, SC was the best because is was cheap (comparitively to the $120-150 per laserdisc I was paying) and the quality was top notch with no real competition (MM, Standing Ovation, Back Stage, type manus). Today there are MANY more QUALITY brands that can do the trick & as many have stated - today most people simply don't care & just want to sing.

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