Karaoke Forums

ok here we go put on your seat belts and keep your hands inside the ride at all times.
http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 1323346382
I hope I posted the Justia link properly

Happy Holidays

_________________
"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

Athena, it worked. It seems the old "I didn't know" is not enough evidence to dismiss a claim. It seems even worse when the Defendant was informed and apparently did nothing to resolve the issue. But again, we shall find out where this will end.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Yes, Timberlea SC was able to prove that the venue was informed, another of the "arguments" that have been batted around has been shown to be ineffective. I keep hoping to find a case when a venue tries to say "I was covered under BMI ,ASCAB, ect" so that can be shot down as well. We may not have a case that has been "finished" yet but a lot of invalid arguments are sure being put to bed.

_________________
"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

It appears to me that this hasn't proved or disproved anything. It simply says that the parties disagree on the facts and therefore the facts must be decided by the court.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Earthling,
What this has proved is that the "I am not responsible as a venue for a subcontractors misdeeds" argument has been put to bed so to speak or in other words dis proven Venues can be sued for vicarious liability if they are informed and do nothing.

SC still has to prove a case in court if anyone feels they have grounds to continue to fight but it will have to be on legal grounds

The more invalid excuses that are exposed as just that...the quicker the remaining cases will move in the court system and the less money people will spend on legal fees to be lost forever chasing what some want to believe is a valid legal argument when it is not.

I know that I would be really pissed if I as a bar owner listened to a KJ and thought I was not liable and ended up in a lawsuit. We all await the final outcomes of these lawsuits.

A safe and warm holidays to all

_________________
"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

SLAM-DUNK!!

_________________
"You know that I sing the Blues and I do not suffer fools. When I'm on that silver mic, it's gonna cut ya, just like a knife"-The SWINGCAT

The denial of the defendant's motion proves nothing of the sort. If anything, it proves that a venue can not be held liable unless it is proven that they were a willing participant in an unlawful activity.


Soundchoice subitted evidence that suggests the venue knowingly contracted with an infringer. Therefore, the case can not be dismissed on the defendant's claim of their detatched (independant contractor) business relationship.


The court document makes it clear that the defendant only argued that they did not have Vicarious liability for trademark infringement. But, soundchoice submitted evidence suggesting the venue may have engaged in contributory trademark infringement, and the defndant did not put forth an argument against that, so the case can not be dismissed until that evidence is examined in court.

That doesn't mean the "I didn't know" defense is invalid, it means the "I did know and didn't care" excuse is invalid. However, just because I tell a venue you are operating illegaly, that doesn't make it so, and it doesn't constitue "knowlege" on the venue's part unless I provide real convincing evidence to back it up. That is what remains to be seen.

If soundchoice can prove the venue intentionally employed pirate KJs that's when it becomes a "slam dunk". Until then this judgement is just a technicality in a case that is still undecided.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Earthling,
When a venue is presented with KIAA paperwork it informs them what they need to do to protect themselves from any chance of liability. When they are named in a Lawsuit they are given a period of days to insure that the KJ they use is 1-1 compliant and be dropped from legal action. If they fail to do so the proof of being a willing participant is pretty darned clear to see. IF the KJ in question was like most and failed to even respond to the court and a default judgment was issued this venue would not have a leg to stand on. I have not been able to track down who the KJ was for this venue or the outcome of that action but I am working on it.

Again if I were the venue owner and listened to somebody's BS, I would be angry as h-e double hockey sticks. This place isn't too far from me tempted to drive out and talk to someone there.

Happy Festivus Everyone

_________________
"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

Thank you for posting that Athena. I think I may print that case out and take that with me when I start looking for an additional venue.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Personally I think is a great marketing piece Chris and I hope it helps you land all the shows you want.

Happy Festivus Everyone

_________________
"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

Pardon me? You're saying that "a marketing piece" is some kind of legal notification of fact? You're more ignorant of how the law works than Harrington thinks I am because you are saying that the club must now be SC's "police" by conducting an bull*** "audit?" You've been so brainwashed by Harrington and Slep it's really sad....


There's a LOT you have "not been able to track down" when you state you will.


"Somebody's BS" is really coming directly from that super-investigative trademark protection team that you pray to for some unknown reason.

if they can prove that the club knew it was stolen music.....hang 'em from the rafters. i can see it going haywire if not kept under tight control though.

the client (club) has to check the contractor (KJ) to make sure all of their tools (songs) are backed by proof of purchase or be held liable for the theft.

the client (home builder) has to check the contractor (carpenter) to make sure all of their tools (power saw, nailer, etc.) are backed by proof of purchase or be held liable for the theft.

same, but the second one sounds ridiculous. if it was just the KIAA letter, to me it seems that just saying "hosts can steal music" and telling a club "your host stole our music" are two different things. it needs to be kept under control.

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

Paradiam
Let me see if I can clear it up a bit more for you
EXAMPLE
Step 1. Venues in an area providing karaoke have KIAA/ SH
packets delivered to them informing them how to avoid
any liability

Step 2. Investigations are completed.

Step 3. Venues/Hosts are served informing each of a deadline to
prove 1-1 compliance
3A Host complies....host and all venues are dropped from
any lawsuits.
3B Host does not comply but venue does....host is
pursued and venue is dropped
3C Host and Venue ignore service of lawsuit....defaults are
ordered by court.
does this way to stating the process make thing clearer for you ?

_________________
"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

I don't believe a venue has any responsibilty to do anything based on anyone's wild accusations without evidence.

How about this method:
Step 1. Prove the KJ is operating illegally with actual evidence.
Step 2. See what the venue does after the KJ is actually proven to be guilty.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I guess I'm a thief then... I have been buying CDGs for over 15 years now. At least 5 years of that, I was purchasing them as a hobby. I hadn't even considered becoming a KJ. Because of that, I never kept any receipts for those purchases. After that, when I started to dabble in KJ-ing, I continued to build up my collection, and still did not keep any receipts. I don't do this as a business, so I don't need to keep them (other than to return a disc if I had a problem with it). I guess, with no receipts, I can't prove that I bought all my discs. Therefore, I must be a thief.

that is kinda what i am saying Cue.

Athena....
step 2 does not happen, so therefore step 3 can not happen either.

first prove i am in the wrong, then sue me.

like on the other thread, just having a computer makes you liable for a law suit unless you pay for an audit of, in his case, absolutely nothing.

had step 2 actually happened, he would not be named.

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

Backed by ORIGINAL DISCS. Not "proof of purchase." Or they can register for the safe harbor program and let us do the verifications for the club.



Not the same. First of all, it's not a question of "theft." Theft is a criminal offense. This is a matter of intellectual property infringement.

But if you want to couch it in those terms, suppose the club bought beer from a distributor who had stolen it? Do you think for an instant that if the beer had been stolen, the club would be able to sell it anyway?

Or to make it more parallel, suppose a vodka distributor sold the bar homemade vodka in fake Absolut bottles. If the bar owner doesn't know he's got fake product, I don't think he can be held liable. But if Absolut tells him that he's got fake product and that if he sells it, he'll be sued...do you think it's improper to sue him if he ignores the warning and continues to sell that vodka?

But you don't do that either.... You send a letter to club that says "we BELIEVE your KJ is infringing" not what it should be: "we KNOW for a fact and have proof" do you?

Of course not because you don't have proof until you sue the KJ for evidence of that...

this all comes back to "many hosts are using illegal tracks" as a statement.
no different than "many vendors are selling stolen vodka"

blanket statements with no proof of any wrongdoing.

if you look at all of these posts all over this forum and others, the common thing that pops up is that all we are asking for is investigation. that's it, don't sue because there is a computer in the room, don't sue because he is using SC tracks. all everyone wants is proof. in any case we would bring to court it would be proper for us to have proof to present that so-and-so truly has wronged us, this does not seem to be a blasphemous thing to ask. going over and over the threads, this is what i see as the main point of contention, and the reason (as it appears to me) why the voices of SC support over the last 6 months or so have seemed to slip away in this forum save for a select few.

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

How about the open and direct approach??

"Hi, we are investigating for SC. Do you have all your ducks in a row and would you mind showing us your disks?" Boom...