Karaoke Forums

Sounds like permission granted to transfer a trademark onto another medium:

http://dkusa.com/images/kslep.jpg

We will now take any comments from the floor....

The fact that it was posted more than 10 years ago... for a person to make a backup copy of his library and keep the originals in archive - no, I don't think it's a big issue.

Yeah I don't think one statement 10 years ago when computer karaoke really wasn't an issue yet is going to hold any merit.

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

But that's part of the point - the statement is about making a copy of the CD and using the backup at the show. It has NOTHING to do with moving those tracks to computer.

In other words, I wouldn't think that this statement would be a valid argument as a defense.

I would think it sets a president as far as transferring medium, and keeping original safe. But I am not a lawyer.

And anyway isn't SC just bustin the "true" pirates so far for copyright infringement of the SC logo?

Read it again. there's nothing that refers to "computer" or "disc" it simply states "backup copy."

And in either case, in order to make any kind of backup copy, you would automatically be transferring the trademark.

It's inferred. What backup copy would you make of media if they only offer it on CD+G? The assumption, particularly since this comment was made 12 years ago, would be that the discussion was about a backup copy of a disc.

That being said, IIRC Sound Choice implemented MediaCloq AFTER this statement was made. Coupled with statements I've seen about NOT using backups because they replace any discs that's broken (provided it's not out of print or suffers other issues like 8125) and I would say that it carries no weight on any of the current proceedings.

I'd also add that we don't see the rest of the thread. It could be referring only to out of print discs that can't be replaced under their replacement program or something else entirely. Without the context of the statement it's hard to know exactly what they're talking about.

Nothing else in that thread was relevant.

My stance is a "copy" is a "copy" and it doesn't matter what medium is used. Do you make office copies with a machine that produces "wet" copies? Or is it a "dry copier?" Or better yet; is it a fax/scanner/printer that you use to make copies?

The technology may be different, the end result is the same.