|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
chrisavis
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:03 am |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
c. staley wrote: chrisavis wrote: Not taking the bait, Chip. There is nothing to answer. I am not going to concern myself with something that has a probablity of occuring that is basically nil.
-Chris It's a fair question regarding a hypothetical (but entirely possible) situation and not bait at all. Have you ever dreamed what you would do if you won the lottery? Most people have... and that's also a situation that has a (mathematical) probability of occurring that is also basically nil. I don't play the lottery so there isn't much reason to think about what I would do if I won because it is impossible for me to win. Even if I did play the lottery, winning is a personal windfall that doesn't take something away from another party. It is substantially different than resolving a lawsuit/employment situation. Fair question or not, I don't have to answer. Let the assumptions begin.... -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 10:25 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
PyleDriver wrote: The old answer a question with a question Chip. Do I feel better I got that out? My statement had nothing to do with my feelings, rather my observations... Example being, why are you prodding Chis for an answer to a hypothetical situation you present to him, merely because you present it?... My answer to your question is, the product has a warning on its label. I never read it before two weeks ago when a guy gave me two CD's. Now I know, and it changes how I view this whole public performance issue. So if those KJ's are out in public using their product, making money, without their permission, oh well they ignored the warning... Many on this forum have choose to get their permission, myself included. Now If we profit from doing so, more power to us...
Jon Do you have any All Hits discs too?.... did you read them? I believe some of them say something to the effect of "Not Authorized Unless Played At Full Volume" Does your amp go to 11?
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 11:08 am |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
PyleDriver wrote: The old answer a question with a question Chip. Do I feel better I got that out? My statement had nothing to do with my feelings, rather my observations... Example being, why are you prodding Chis for an answer to a hypothetical situation you present to him, merely because you present it?... My answer to your question is, the product has a warning on its label. I never read it before two weeks ago when a guy gave me two CD's. Now I know, and it changes how I view this whole public performance issue. So if those KJ's are out in public using their product, making money, without their permission, oh well they ignored the warning... Many on this forum have choose to get their permission, myself included. Now If we profit from doing so, more power to us...
Jon I don't understand. Are you suggesting that the purpose of the public performance warning on the disc is so that a KJ who purchases the disc must ask soundchoice after that purchase for permission to use it in a show?
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:30 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm Posts: 4094 Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada Been Liked: 309 times
|
No, SC wants to be reimbursed for those who copy their product for commercial use. Using original discs in the way they're intended doesn't have any extra cost.
_________________ You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:32 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
timberlea wrote: Using original discs in the way they're intended doesn't have any extra cost. Only if you consider the risk of you and your venue(s) being sued for doing so as "no extra cost."
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 12:59 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: Sound Choice wants to control what KJs do. It's simple. They are a despicable company, to say the least. You really have no idea what you are talking about. Sound Choice doesn't control anything about what I do. They have no say over how I run my show and they don't interfere. In fact, they have assisted me because of the certification I received. -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:13 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
c. staley wrote: timberlea wrote: Using original discs in the way they're intended doesn't have any extra cost. Only if you consider the risk of you and your venue(s) being sued for doing so as "no extra cost." I still don't understand what risk you are referring to. Under what circumstances do you think Sound Choice would sue me, a certified KJ that maintains an open and positive dialog with them and provides them updates when I have a 2% variance in my library? Wait, this must be one of those "lottery" type scenarios where no matter how slight the odds of something occurring, I should be dedoicating a portion of my valuable time to thinking about it. I have in fact thought about it and concluded - I am under no risk as long as I do the right thing. I no longer need to worry about it. You on the other hand are overly concerned with it when there is a very simple solution at hand. You simply refuse to adhere to the solution and instead mitigate the risk by removing the music. I get to use their music and satisfy my needs as well as my customers. You have an investment that is collecting dust. I believe I am the winner here. I am beginning to think you are confusing risk with phobia. -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
PyleDriver
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:29 pm |
|
|
Advanced Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 12:35 am Posts: 361 Location: Occupied Mexico aka Rio Grand Valley, S.Texas Been Liked: 8 times
|
I'm not debating if they should or shouldn't. The truth is they can and they are... All the crying and whining isn't going to change a thing. So it's put up or shut up time...Your left with three choices, it's yours to make...
Jon
|
|
Top |
|
|
MtnKaraoke
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:48 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:40 pm Posts: 1052 Images: 1 Been Liked: 204 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: Sound Choice wants to control what KJs do. It's simple. They are a despicable company, to say the least. So says someone who publicly declared their intention to steal their way into this industry. It would seem that you are unaware that the "hoops" you're taking issue with are actually LAWS and the rights associated with INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, including both copyrights and trademarks. I'd be surprised if Chartbuster would sell you a KJPro HD without you already having a verifiable, regular, paying gig (look out for that hoop). As it is with the GEM series, the KJPro is not for sale to the general public.
_________________ Never the same show twice!
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 1:51 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
MtnKaraoke wrote: I'd be surprised if Chartbuster would sell you a KJPro HD without you already having a verifiable, regular, paying gig (look out for that hoop). As it is with the GEM series, the KJPro is not for sale to the general public. What were to happen if you lease the Gem and then stopped doing karaoke commercially?..... You would then be a member of "the general public" with a Gem series.... what safeguards are in place to avoid that?
|
|
Top |
|
|
MtnKaraoke
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:10 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:40 pm Posts: 1052 Images: 1 Been Liked: 204 times
|
c. staley wrote: MtnKaraoke wrote: I'd be surprised if Chartbuster would sell you a KJPro HD without you already having a verifiable, regular, paying gig (look out for that hoop). As it is with the GEM series, the KJPro is not for sale to the general public. What were to happen if you lease the Gem and then stopped doing karaoke commercially?..... You would then be a member of "the general public" with a Gem series.... what safeguards are in place to avoid that? The GEM series license agreement is the safeguard.
_________________ Never the same show twice!
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:19 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
MtnKaraoke wrote: c. staley wrote: MtnKaraoke wrote: I'd be surprised if Chartbuster would sell you a KJPro HD without you already having a verifiable, regular, paying gig (look out for that hoop). As it is with the GEM series, the KJPro is not for sale to the general public. What were to happen if you lease the Gem and then stopped doing karaoke commercially?..... You would then be a member of "the general public" with a Gem series.... what safeguards are in place to avoid that? The GEM series license agreement is the safeguard. I don't think so. You forget the parameters: (a) You ARE running karaoke when you lease the Gem series.... And we'll even add that you do this for entire time of the finance period.... (b) Once paid for, you -for one reason or another- lose all your gigs and decide you don't want to do it commercially anymore but you don't have a problem paying $100 for the continued license period. (c) Because you are no longer "in the business" you are technically a "member of the general public" with the Gem series. There's no safeguard in the license for that from what I see.... please point it out if I've missed it somehow.
|
|
Top |
|
|
MtnKaraoke
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:29 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:40 pm Posts: 1052 Images: 1 Been Liked: 204 times
|
c. staley wrote: I don't think so. You forget the parameters:
(a) You ARE running karaoke when you lease the Gem series.... And we'll even add that you do this for entire time of the finance period....
(b) Once paid for, you -for one reason or another- lose all your gigs and decide you don't want to do it commercially anymore but you don't have a problem paying $100 for the continued license period.
(c) Because you are no longer "in the business" you are technically a "member of the general public" with the Gem series.
There's no safeguard in the license for that from what I see.... please point it out if I've missed it somehow.
I will point it out: "...you don't have a problem paying $100 for the continued license period."Frankly, you would not have the option to continue the licensing period. You will not meet the necessary conditions nor comply with the terms if you are no longer engaged in the prerequisite commercial activity. It would no longer be up to you and SC could very well opt out. You'd no longer be in lawful possession of the GEM series.
_________________ Never the same show twice!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:33 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
MtnKaraoke wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: Sound Choice wants to control what KJs do. It's simple. They are a despicable company, to say the least. So says someone who publicly declared their intention to steal their way into this industry. It would seem that you are unaware that the "hoops" you're taking issue with are actually LAWS and the rights associated with INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, including both copyrights and trademarks. I'd be surprised if Chartbuster would sell you a KJPro HD without you already having a verifiable, regular, paying gig (look out for that hoop). As it is with the GEM series, the KJPro is not for sale to the general public.There is NO specification on their website about that, since you aren't leasing the product. Stop lying.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:35 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
MtnKaraoke wrote: c. staley wrote: I don't think so. You forget the parameters:
(a) You ARE running karaoke when you lease the Gem series.... And we'll even add that you do this for entire time of the finance period....
(b) Once paid for, you -for one reason or another- lose all your gigs and decide you don't want to do it commercially anymore but you don't have a problem paying $100 for the continued license period.
(c) Because you are no longer "in the business" you are technically a "member of the general public" with the Gem series.
There's no safeguard in the license for that from what I see.... please point it out if I've missed it somehow.
I will point it out: "...you don't have a problem paying $100 for the continued license period."Frankly, you would not have the option to continue the licensing period. You will not meet the necessary conditions nor comply with the terms if you are no longer engaged in the prerequisite commercial activity. It would no longer be up to you and SC could very well opt out. You'd no longer be in lawful possession of the GEM series. And would they come to your house and take back the discs the GEM series is on??
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 2:36 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
MtnKaraoke wrote: Frankly, you would not have the option to continue the licensing period. You will not meet the necessary conditions nor comply with the terms if you are no longer engaged in the prerequisite commercial activity. It would no longer be up to you and SC could very well opt out. You'd no longer be in lawful possession of the GEM series. You missed (or avoided) the point. There are no remedies in the Gem agreement (I just re-read it) that terminates a contract for not being in the business after acquiring the set. Even an "audit" doesn't require that you be actively employed by anyone but only that you are in compliance....
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:00 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
A GEM licensee who is inactive as a host can keep his set or, with our approval, transfer the license to another professional. At renewal, that host's license will be renewed if he pays the fee.
A professional who retires is still a professional.
Honestly, the stuff you come up with...
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 3:36 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: A GEM licensee who is inactive as a host can keep his set or, with our approval, transfer the license to another professional. At renewal, that host's license will be renewed if he pays the fee.
A professional who retires is still a professional.
Honestly, the stuff you come up with... A "retired professional" is not a professional... they are a "former professional" as in "former President Jimmy Carter.." A retired General is no longer a general even though they retain the title - with "retired" appended to it. But I was just checking..... so it is possible for the general public to have the Gem. And you still haven't answered the question regarding personal financials that you'd want to see.... and you know how I hate to make assumptions. Is there some reason why you'd want to keep the range and/or scope of those records you retain the right to inspect unclear to your own lessee's? Inquiring minds are growing weary...
|
|
Top |
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:03 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm Posts: 4094 Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada Been Liked: 309 times
|
Rational minds grow weary from the paranoid.
_________________ You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Sun Mar 25, 2012 4:57 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
If you're going to apply your own definitions, then I guess it means whatever you want it to mean. For the rational world, it means what I said.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 157 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|