Karaoke Forums

They were orignally on the Spotlight 8700-8735 and a handful of reprints spanning all the series .[/quote]

Actually, I think a large portion of the 8400s were made that way as well, had other unannounced bugs, so they stopped and re-started with the 8700s.

Note: This is only something I was told when I ran into Media Cloq on some of my 8400s. Not passing it off as a fact.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

With all this talk about suing KJ's, I found this thread interesting.

Is there any more news on what has gone on with this case and what the protective order means?

Slep-Tone filed a motion to dismiss based upon a lack of personal jurisdiction, since the suit was filed in California and all of Slep-Tone's operations are based in North Carolina. CAVS is being given the opportunity to conduct limited discovery on the subject of personal jurisdiction. Because that discovery involves examining highly confidential business records, the parties agreed to a protective order that prevents those records from being publicly disclosed. CAVS has not yet responded to the motion but will do so soon.

It would be inappropriate for me to comment on the substantive aspects of the suit, but you are welcome to obtain copies of the pleadings to see precisely what our position is regarding personal jurisdiction.

Both are tasteless or awful tasting imitations of each other, and I no longer drink the stuff. Mass produced junk.

Want to try actual beer?

Pisner Urquell from Czechoslavakia

Helles from Germany

If I HAD to drink something made here, I would say the best shot- other than micro-breweries- would probably be Sam Adams. Not close to the two above, but palatable.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Ya know, it really does, doesn't it...?

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

And I'll guess, speculate or whatever you want to call it, that SC will lose the motion. SC's "offices" might be in NC, however they regularly "conduct business in California," sell discs there, ships products there, etc....

This is factually incorrect. SC does not now and never has "conducted business in California." It does not sell discs in CA. It does ship products to customers in CA, but those products are shipped F.O.B. Charlotte, NC, and always have been. It would be far more accurate to say that it does business with companies and individuals who do business in California.

Whatever.... I'll still bet you a doughnut it's denied.

What we Americans call Molson and Canadians call Canadian. My preference anyway! Laker is ok.

_________________
KingBing Entertainment C'mon Up! I have a song for you!!! [font=MS Sans Serif][/font]

So this is the thread that was repeated a couple times? To me annoying, but nothing to get my panties in a bunch over, I'll just ignore it.

_________________
KingBing Entertainment C'mon Up! I have a song for you!!! [font=MS Sans Serif][/font]

Panties? I would have guessed you'd sport a thong.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

ummmm.....eeeew.
wait.......zebra stripe or leopard skin?

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

Gotta be leopard skin- no room for stripes on a thong

{singing} .... and you can tell everybody.....this is your thong.....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

i am so using this tonight.

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

hummm....well I can so imagine many here in a thong.....the mental images make me giggle as far as beer hate the stuff always have.....love the statement my youngest daughter came home from catholic school 3rd grade with "Mom did you know beer is yeast pee?"

_________________
"Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain."
Unknown
"if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters."
Lee McGuffey

Interesting how
#1. on one hand, SC can file a motion to dismiss the case against them on the grounds of jurisdiction (claiming they don't do business there) and

#2. on the other hand, file a suit against several dozen entities in the same state? (claiming they were damaged where they don't do business?)

It's like saying; "you can't sue me in California, But I CAN sue anyone in California."

Sorry, it doesn't work that way in real life.... If you have the jurisdiction to sue, you also have the jurisdiction to BE sued as well.

Sounds like some ammo for the #2 people, if #1 gets dismissed.

This is absolutely incorrect. In fact, it is diametrically opposite from the way things work "in real life."

Jurisdiction over an out-of-district plaintiff is by consent with respect to that suit only. Any party can consent to jurisdiction in any particular suit, and by filing the suit in a particular place, the plaintiff is consenting to jurisdiction there for that suit only, and does not waive its constitutional rights in all cases by doing so.

Jurisdiction over an out-of-district defendant implicates the Due Process clauses of the U.S. Constitution, which set up substantive rights that a defendant cannot be forced to waive.

When it comes to jurisdiction, it's a matter of degree counsel... you know that. No one is tromping on their Constitutional rights to keep these actions seperate, but it certainly sets a substantial case for proper jurisdiction in California. The fact that SC does business in California is in BOTH cases... where they are a plaintiff as well as a defendant. So they obviously do business in California by selling their products there to KJ's and through distributors, contact customers, place advertising, license music, etc.

And they want to now say they "don't do business in California?" (How can they possibly be damaged where they claim they've never done business?)

Which is where they claim they've been damaged. They sent an email directly to (over 70 is it?) "customers" in California in the CAVS case. Just because SC doesn't charge California sales tax is not an easy-out at all - they still do business there. You know it, I know it and every single KJ in California that has purchased their products knows it - whether or not they are being sued now for making that obvious mistake.

It will be interesting to see if the court upholds or denies the whole jurisdiction matter.

Once again, Let's get the popcorn ready....

Looks like a jury at trial will see the arguments CAVS has brought against Slep-Tone for libel in California if CAVS U.S.A. decides to take it to trial.

Judge Pregerson denied the summary judgement motion yesterday, March 21st 2013, finding that the evidence brought by CAVS is ambiguous and that a jury needs to decide the case.

See Doc# 86 ~ http://dockets.justia.com/docket/califo ... 74/506315/

The Judge has been denying other motions by CAVS recently as well. (Doc#'s 78, 80)

This is related to the Karaoke Kandy Store case. A recent reversal of a summary judgement the Karaoke Kandy Store was granted is discussed in this other thread:

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=27423

Also here is the original thread from when CAVS first filed suit against Slep-Tone:

viewtopic.php?f=26&t=21897

_________________
-- Mark