|
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
| Author |
Message |
|
jclaydon
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 9:30 am |
|
 |
| Super Duper Poster |
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 11:16 pm
Posts: 2027
Location: HIgh River, AB
Been Liked: 268 times
|
|
so as far as anyone knows, Soundchoice might have gotten approval from a publisher who had a part stake in a song and Warner knew nothing about it.
Mind you I am just speculating here, as I'm not the one who produced the tracks in the first place.
James
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 11:58 am |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm
Posts: 4094
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Been Liked: 309 times
|
|
It's possible. You've heard of the saying "The left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing".
_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 11:59 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
timberlea wrote: It's possible. You've heard of the saying "The left hand didn't know what the right hand was doing". That sounds like a Johnny Reverb punchline. _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:03 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
mightywiz wrote: you all seem to forget sound choice isn't sueing over the music....
they are sueing for the displaying of their logo on a media shifted pc!
that in itself has nothing to do with the liscensing of the music in question.
harrington law should make this point everytime they answer a question.... their vague responses are just that way on purpose. I agree that what you say above is true, but in this case the subject was about Karaoke Express BEING Sued for distributing unlicensed music.
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
Last edited by JoeChartreuse on Wed Jun 06, 2012 10:50 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:10 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: Good to know. I was under the impression that neither of these two artists' tracks were ever licensed to any karaoke producer...
Learn something new every day, I guess.... Well, remember that while we think of Rod Stewart and Michael Jackson as singer-songwriters--which they are/were--each of those three songs had a co-writer, and the Copyright Act gives each joint author the right to license. Rights may therefore end up in the hands of several publishers, any of whom can license the track. Single-publisher tracks are uncommon. So, as explained in regard to "Hotel California", we could both be right? The single artists named may not have licensed anything, but collaborators may have? No debate here, I'm just saying that is how I'm understanding it.
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Paradigm Karaoke
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:35 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm
Posts: 5107
Location: Phoenix Az
Been Liked: 1279 times
|
|
won't it just be as easy as sending copies of the license paperwork to the opposing attorney? kinda like an audit, just show you have the disc (license) and pay the man for their time and you will be dismissed.
_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:54 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: mightywiz wrote: you all seem to forget sound choice isn't sueing over the music....
they are sueing for the displaying of their logo on a media shifted pc!
that in itself has nothing to do with the liscensing of the music in question.
harrington law should make this point everytime they answer a question.... their vague responses are just that way on purpose. I agree that what you say above is true, but in this case the subject was about Sound Choice BEING Sued for music. Where did it say SC was 'being sued' (referring to OP)? _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 1:55 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Paradigm Karaoke wrote: won't it just be as easy as sending copies of the license paperwork to the opposing attorney? kinda like an audit, just show you have the disc (license) and pay the man for their time and you will be dismissed. Then we get publishers suing the opposing publisher for releasing  . _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:15 pm |
|
|
| Extreme Poster |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 3011
Been Liked: 1003 times
|
Lonman wrote: Paradigm Karaoke wrote: won't it just be as easy as sending copies of the license paperwork to the opposing attorney? kinda like an audit, just show you have the disc (license) and pay the man for their time and you will be dismissed. Then we get publishers suing the opposing publisher for releasing . First, SC has not been sued insofar as I am aware, and certainly not in that suit. Second, your premise doesn't make sense because even though a joint author can independently license the work, the pro rata royalty must be paid to each rights holder. That occurs as a matter of routine. As I said before, we don't have enough information from the lawsuit itself to know what Warner is talking about. Perhaps more information will come to light.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed Jun 06, 2012 4:18 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Lonman wrote: Paradigm Karaoke wrote: won't it just be as easy as sending copies of the license paperwork to the opposing attorney? kinda like an audit, just show you have the disc (license) and pay the man for their time and you will be dismissed. Then we get publishers suing the opposing publisher for releasing . First, SC has not been sued insofar as I am aware, and certainly not in that suit. Second, your premise doesn't make sense because even though a joint author can independently license the work, the pro rata royalty must be paid to each rights holder. That occurs as a matter of routine. As I said before, we don't have enough information from the lawsuit itself to know what Warner is talking about. Perhaps more information will come to light. Huh? I was just making a joke.  _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 248 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
|
|
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
