Karaoke Forums

A couple of months back I wrote an article on piracy and sent it to the local printed and online karaoke magazine for the northwest US. I took a different approach to the article than those I have seen in the past. The printed version was spread out over 3 issues due to size. They printed the entire article online this month -

http://www.nwkaraokeguide.net/washingto ... e-industry

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Your article is nicely formatted; however, I wish to point out certain items I do not agree with.


I have to disagree with this line:

"These illegal hosts undercut the price that legitimate hosts charge which is driving them out of business."

While it is true that there are "Illegal Hosts" out there who do indeed undercut in order to obtain a gig, there are quite a few out there who charge the going rates as well. Now, what that proportion might be, I couldn't say.



In the following statement, you are now doing what Sound Choice has done:

"Look for certified hosts. Certification is optional for karaoke hosts but many are getting certified as a means of proving they are legal and differentiating themselves from the illegal hosters. Ask to see up-to-date certifications from Sound Choice, Chartbusters, and Stellar Records/Pop Hits Monthly. Any host that has gone to the trouble of getting certified will be happy to show these to you."

You are implying that if a KJ is not Certified by the above mentioned Manufacturers, then they are not legal. I am disc-based, and as you know (from the conversations in this forum), with the exception of KaraokeJerry, these companies do not have anything set in place to certify someone like me. Also, PHM does not have a true certification program set in place... rather, they are granting you amnesty for the mere cost of $3000.




Again, these are very misleading statements.

"It is absolutely illegal to use digital versions of karaoke music that was originally shipped on physical media without owning the physical media."...

..."While it is possible for some hosts to use only non-U.S. based manufacturers material which in some cases can be digital only, it is highly unlikely."

And what is so "highly unlikely" about KJs who use download sites such as SBI Karaoke, Karaoke-Version, Select-a-Track, Sing-to-the-World, and Tricerasoft?



"Insist on seeing a hosts entire physical disc collection to ensure they own what they say they own. Hosts must own the physical media or have a license to play their tracks in digital form."

And, are you saying that it should now be expected that a KJ show receipts to these Venues for all of those Custom discs that he/she had made (from sites that I just mentioned above)?



Now, while I don't condone the next statement, what you wrote here is a stereotyped comment. I know of some "Legal" KJs that do exactly this, and have been doing this long before the piracy issues that now exist even cropped up. They just did it because Karaoke is not a business for them... it's a hobby. They just wanted to get started, and this is how they did so.

"Beware of low costs hosts."...
... "If someone is offering to do a show for $50/night and a bar tab this should be a red flag for you. Real, legal hosts charge a working wage. Also, the old adage of “You get what you pay for” shines here."

Absolutely!!!! You DO get what you pay for!!! Unfortunately, there are a lot of Venues out there that just don't care (no matter how much you might try to "Educate" them).



"Get references." Get the contact information of other venues they host at or where they have been in the past"....
... "You are about to make a business decision involving money. Do your due diligence."

And if the KJ is just starting out????????? Then what???????? Are you suggesting that the Venues should not hire him/her because he/she has no references??? Didn't you say that you just started out about 1 year ago?



"When in doubt, call the manufacturers. If you are unsure about whether a karaoke host is legal or not, contact one of the “Big 3” manufacturers and ask them their opinion. They can tell you exactly what to look for considering their products."

The emphasis on this statement is "what to look for considering their products." And what about all the other products out there???... All Hits, All Star Karaoke, Back Stage, Dangerous, DK, Disney, Doctor Music, Fast Trax (Oooo Ah Icky-Poo), HelluvaDisc, Just Tracks, JVC, Karaoke Classics, Legends, Lost Classics, Music Maestro, Nikkodo, NuTech, Performance Tracks, Pioneer, Pocket Songs, Priddis, RCA, Sound Images, Stage Stars, Standing Ovation, Sunfly, Sweet Georgia Brown, Top Hits Monthly (Panorama Music), Zoom?????... Just to name a few.




"I would like to see singers take a more vested interest in whether the karaoke hosts are legal or not. It is a simple enough thing to ask a host if they are legal or not." ....

And it's a simple enough thing for a host to say, "None of your damned business."


"The ones that are can prove it and will be happy to."

Yeah! Right! I'm sure a KJ is going to drop everything to show every Tom, Dick, and Harry his library (that just happens to be stored on a Hard Drive), or show them his receipts to prove he bought all his music legally. Did you actually write that statement in an article???... Oh wait....


"The ones that can’t or won’t show proof are not doing the industry or the singers any favors. Stop doing them favors by finding a legal show elsewhere."

That's real nice of you to say that!!!!




Again, a very misleading statement....

"All of the Big 3 U.S. Based karaoke manufacturers have programs in place for getting hosts compliant."

With THEIR PRODUCT ONLY!!! They have NO SAY OR CONTROL over over brands.

The article was already way longer than what they normally print. It was very difficult to qualify and quantify every single point without it becoming War and Peace. Check out the comments posted to that article and you will see a comment by me about illegal hosts that charge similar wages to legal hosts.





I am not implying. I specifically state (more than once) that certification is optional. The Big 3 are the only ones that have any kind of certification program which is why they are the only ones mentioned. Anyone that goes to the trouble of being certified by even one of them is much more likely to have the rest of their house in order as well.




I stand by all of those statements. 1) If it was shipped on physical media, you can't shift it then toss/sell the media. 2) Let me know the first time you run across a host that uses ONLY (and the key word is ONLY just as it was used in my article) non-U.S. Manufacturers (no SC, CB, PHM, Party Tyme, etc...). 3) There is still plenty of lively debate around what is/isn't legal for public commercial use from the sites you mentioned. But that is not the point of the statement. the point is "it is highly unlikely that the ONLY music a KJ would use would be legally downloaded from sites online". Again, I challenge someone to come forard that has ZERO SC/CB/PHM tracks and has ONLY used the sites Cue mentioned to create a legal, digital only, library.





The word "receipts" doesn't show anywhere in my article. If you have a custom disc, then you have a physical disc to show. Just show it. But, if you are operating as a business, then you will have a record of all purchases made. I would show those on demand if it meant the difference between getting and not getting a gig I want. So, in effect, yes, I am suggesting that a host should treat their business as a business and be prepared to accomodate reasonable requests if it means the difference between picking up a new show or not.

Case in point - For the new gig I have, I voluntarily brought every single disc in, all of my certificates, and I did in fact bring receipts for my disc purchases since the majority of them were through eBay or private sale (yes....I get receipts for those even if it is only a hand-written bill of sale). I did so because I wanted to assure them they would not have to worry about getting a surprise letter from a manufacturer like they did with their previous host.





Sterotypes exist for a reason. No matter, I state it should be a "red flag". I don't suggest that Venues should stop asking questions at that point. It is just one of several possible indicators that someone may not be on the up and up.





Are you suggesting that venues should never ask for references? That they may not prefer an experienced host over a non-experienced host? Again, it isn't meant to be not does it come across as a show-stopper for hiring /not hiring a host. I am suggesting that the venues do their due diligence. That is all.





You point is taken - and - if you can provide valid contact info for any or all of those, I will happily submit it the magazine to publish as an addendum to the article. In the context of the article as well as in the grand scheme of current day karaoke, the "Big 3" are exactly that. We all know exactly who they are. They are also the most active in combatting illegal hosts.





It is in fact the business of the venue and to some degree the singers. Singers should be supporting legal hosts, not illegal ones. If a host tells me "None of your damn business" I will immediately wonder why they wouldn't want to say "Yes, I am legal". Why anyone would dodge that query makes no sense, unless......

So while"None of your damn business" is a perfectly valid response, it doesn't help the KJ out at all.




I really don't understand the animosity. My certificates are actually printed in my books. IMO, a certified KJ, should have copies of their certificates handy to show anyone that asks. Disc based hosts, can show their discs. Hybrid hosts have a little more work to do.

No matter, how many people have asked you if you are legal to date? Is it so many that you have ever had to drop everything to accomodate them? I do believe that getting as many people involved -including the singers- to combat illegal hosts is the best approach. Besides, it is a word of mouth thing anyway. Once the word gets out that you are legal, you would not have every person asking you. You are inflating this piece well beyond what would ever happen in reality.




I honestly can't tell if you are being sarcastic or not.




I don't think it is misleading much less "very" misleading. I can see modifying my line to read --

"All of the Big 3 U.S. Based karaoke manufacturers have programs in place for getting hosts compliant with their products."

The fact remains - ONLY the Big 3 have any kind of programs in place for ANY kind of compliancy.

The article is not nor do I believe that it reads like a checklist for anyone such that if someone fails one or even several of the items above that they should be dismissed as an illegal host. The venues are in business and need to approach business related matters properly. KJ/Venues/Singers all play a part and everyone has a vested interested in things being above board. Due diligence should just be done but we all know it isn't.

I considered almost all of the points you brought up. The original article was about 700 words longer so I trimmed it down. I knew that in doing so, pieces of the clarity would get clouded. I had hoped that people would be able to put two and two together and then have a healthy debate over the pieces that still needed clarification.

I hope I have clarified things here.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I didn't read the article but I'll be that it doesn't say a word about you "helping illegal hosts." Even for a profit.

But it appears to have mischaracterized a lot of hosts that have always operated legally.

I have to agree 100% with the Cueball from New York....

Chip - I would respectfully ask that if you wish to comment about the article, go read it. Otherwise, you are commenting only on snippets made by someone else with their own commentary attached to it. No offense to Cueball, but he does not provide full context with his quotes. If you wish to be taken even remotely seriously, then get the full context. I am sure you would expect that from me.


-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Birdofsong read it and Cueball read it. I don't have to. I trust their opinions because of their experience and longevity as well as their knowledge "in this industry" as you like to call it.

Birdofsong says: "it's a published piece designed once again to convince venues to discriminate against the rest of us legal KJ's that have not given in to the audits and certification."

Cueball said his peace...

I am going to agree with their decisions because they have enough credibility in my mind to be believed sight unseen.

Then your opinion on this matter is completely irrelevant. It is based solely on the opinions of others and arguably even that was taken out of context. You have incomplete information and have expressed an opinion about something you have not even seen.

Once again, respectfully ask you to read it yourself, since -

1) Cueball only makes one comment calling me to task regarding certification, which I in turn, clarified.

2) I have stated many times in the forums as well as noting on my karaoke blog that hosts don't have to be certified to be legal.

3) It is an 1800 word article. In the entirely of the article, certification is mentioned only very briefly. In fact, 70 words are involved in the certification portions. That is 3% of the article. Audits are not menitoned at all.

4) In the 3% percent I call out twice that "Certification is optional for karaoke hosts" and "While certification is optional, ownership or legal licensing of the karaoke music they use is not."

Your positioning of something you have not even seen as discriminatory demonstrates your single-minded determination to simply argue against the systems in place with no basis in fact or even first hand knowledge.

That is EXACTLY the kind of FUD that needs to be addressed in the forums.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I need to comment here and agree with Chris.

c. staley continues to hijack and continually argue the same point over and over again in these forums, as it seems, without first hand knowledge, as he has admitted to not reading the article. He has also commented in another thread where I voiced my concern of hijacking.

I too believe that this behavior needs to be addressed.

Well, for the most part... Here's two points that I still stand by.

And, btw, I may not have given a full quote to lines in your article, but I do not believe my small omissions took anything out of context here. If I did, that was not my intention.







Well, I am not just anyone. I am disc-based, and as it has been posted in this forum several times, there is NOTHING set in place to grant me Certification such as what you have. As for the rest of that quote (above), we will just have to agree to disagree, because you are outright telling a Venue to check to see if a KJ is Certified,
Quote:
"many are getting certified as a means of proving they are legal and differentiating themselves from the illegal hosters."
End quote
Even tho you state that getting Certified is optional, right there is where I see you implying that without that certification, the KJ is more than likely operating illegally (and you don't differentiate between disc-based and HD-based in that statement.






And how do you get that contact information when more than half of the brands I just mentioned are out of business? As for your constant reference to "The Big 3," PHM isn't doing anything. All they are doing is offering to give you amnesty for the mere cost of $3,000. If you pay them that fee, they don't care if you don't/didn't own one single PHM disc in your system (I think they stated somewhere that that's for discs up to and prior to the year 2007). AND, that is only for HD users... they aren't offering a single thing for someone like me (who is disc-based).

Sorry, I did not intend for you to feel as if you took things out of context. You read the article. Your reply was based on the full context whereas Chip's was only based on your quote. He does not have full context.









I agree, there should be a system in place to certify disc based hosts. You will not see any argument from me on that at all.



Fair enough. The intention is not to imply that without certification one is more likely to be illegal. I actually intended it to be the opposite - that with a certification one is even less likely to be illegal. Poor wording on my part. I will talk to the editor about updating the online version and providing an update in the next issue.








That many of the manufacturer's are out of business is somewhat to the point of all of this. Also, the only companies I or anyone else has heard of taking any kind of stance on piracy are the Big 3. I know all about what Stellar/PHM is doing since I did it. It basically is an amnesty program. In restrospect, knowing what I know now, I would not have done the CAP. I have no intention of doing a CAP on any future system.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

great piece Chris

_________________
"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 have read the article, and have mixed feelings.
These bar magazines are nice vehicles for self-promotion and little else.
I’ve never met a bar owner who reads anything in them except to verify his ad is in it.

Chris, I think it’s a good move on your part to get your name in anything that might help to advertise your shows. I think it’s a shame that you didn’t manage to get a mention about any of your shows anywhere in the article. Basically my impression of the article is that you have taken on the persona of a soundchoice mouthpiece. I understand that the lawsuits are “all the rage” and the “in thing” in your area, but I was hoping to see more original thinking from you.

Too many of the things you state as fact, are either anecdotal or just plain false:

“It is estimated that 90% of all karaoke hosts don’t pay for the karaoke music they use for their shows.”
Estimated by whom? That sounds like an interesting study.
“These illegal hosts undercut the price that legitimate hosts charge which is driving them out of business.”
While many legitimate hosts blame piracy for their woes there are many that don’t, and you are living proof that many others are still entering this business in spite of the undercutting of pirates.
“The quantity and quality of the music being produced by the karaoke song manufacturers is also seeing the effects of piracy.”
There is plenty of music being produced. There may be less of it in the USA, but piracy is even more of a problem outside of the USA than it is here yet they still produce profitably. The lack of production here may have more to do with the stupid IP and licensing laws in the USA than it has anything to do with piracy.
“However, none of the U.S. based karaoke manufacturers distribute their product in downloadable form for commercial use.”
This is false.
“If a computer based host uses Sound Choice, Chartbusters, or Pop-Hits Monthly, then they have to have written permission.”
Also false. While that may be the new policy at one or more of these companies as a basis for filing lawsuits, that has never been upheld as a legal requirement by any legal authority. In addition, as proven in this forum, the ok has been given many times through nothing more than a phone call.
“Hosts must own the physical media or have a license to play their tracks in digital form.”
Also false. The license to play comes from the venue. The KJ needs no licensing for public performance. That aside, there are also streaming services one could utilize where ownership of physical media is impossible.

I agree with Cueball that the emphasis you place on certification in your call to action is one that carelessly harms the legitimate KJ who plays directly from discs. It’s also harmful to those who have been around for a while and have a library that is not so centered on one or two manufacturers that are either unaware of the individual manufacturer certification programs or consider themselves legal without it. After all, the “Big 3” you refer to are not the only three and not even that big anymore. I can name about fifty manufacturers before I have to turn to a book to name thirty more and out of them the currently producing “Big 3” are not USA based.

Asking singers to audit karaoke hosts is a bit silly too, don’t you think?

Overall, I’m happy to see you making an effort in your area, but I think the article could have had the same impact or even better with less of the standard soundchoice propaganda and a little more self-promotion (perhaps if it was portrayed as your own experience in getting legal and why instead of portraying yourself as an industry expert). This article should be presented in the magazine as an editorial opinion piece.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Accusing someone of hijacking a thread without adding anything to the existing conversation is in itself a hijack.
Isn't it?
As for arguing the same point over and over again in the forum, c.staley is not the only one. In fact you have just confessed to the same thing.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I specifically did not want to use this article as a means of self-promotion.

There is even less in the article about lawsuits than about certification.

It truly boggles my mind that folks focus so narrowly on the miniscule portions of the article and completely ignore the rest. I suppose I should feel good that the standard anti-certification/anti-audit/anti-lawsuit trifecta is all that folks can really hold up as issues.



Estimated by Sound Choice, Chartbuster, Pop Hits Monthly - All of them have either published, spoken to, and written about priacy and used that number. I have also noted in other articles I have seen over time. With the same number.



I have watched many hosts go under over the years. It has been pointed out by many on here that they are struggling. I have spoken to many hosts in my area and areas I have traveled to over the years. I am living proff that someone that has a very good day job and expendable income to dump into a new business can get into it and through force of will and my own financial backing hopefully outlast the pirates. I wouldn't recommend anyone take on the challendge of making a full time business out of this unless they have some deep pockets.




IP laws aside, we both know that piracy has a significant impact. To place blame elsewhere is akin to just deciding to ignore the issue.




Name as many as you can.




And has been pointed out many times in these forums, no one is just going to accept a phone call as the basis for operating their business. Get it in writing or it means little. And since people are gettign sued over it, I stand by what I said.




The "license" to use the stream comes with the purchase of the streaming service. If you don't purchase that stream and otherwise stream it anyway, they you are illegally streaming. If you are playing digital media that was sourced from a physical disc and you don't own that disc, then you are using it illegally.




Emphasis on certification? In my call to action? My call to action is squarely targeted at the singers and no meniton of certification appears there. Again 3% of the entire article speaks to certification and I plainly point out it is optional.



If someone has been "around for a while" and they don't know about the programs, then they aren't doing their homework. If they have been "around for a while" the chances of them not having any of the "Big 3" is pretty slim. I will accept it is possible, but very, very unlikely. They would also account for a very, very small percentage of hosts. And since none of the non-"Big 3" are suing, then they aren't at risk.

I can name all of the same manufacturers, most of which are no longer in business. Those that reside outside of the US, aren't pursuing piracy in the US. Regardless, just because they reside outside of the US doesn't mean that hosts and venue's don't have to pay for the music and play by the rules. Theft is theft. We expect people using Sunfly to have paid Sunfly for the right to use it. The same goes for every other manufacturer.



Again - "audit" never appears on the entire article.

Yes - I absolutely feel singers play a part in this. When they walk into a bar that has a song book 3 inches thick and a host that says "you name it, I got it" and they don't question at all how that can be, then they are a part of the problem.

Yes - I believe singers can make a positive impact and if they believe someone is stelaing the music that they should inquire about it. They should also take their business elsewhere if they aren't satisfied that the KJ is operating legally.



It really does tickle me that people think I am some sort of Sound Choice megaphone. Maybe if I start now and bash everything Sound Choice does for the next 10 years, I can get folks to realize that I believe Sound Choice has some work to do and changes to make. But I would rather not bash and instead work with Sound Choice, not against them, to see changes get made. For that matter, let's not exclude ANY of the manufacturers from that. They ALL have work to do.

I am not an industry expert and I don't claim to be one. Just because I have only hosted for a year and a half doesn't preclude me from understanding the issues, how they came to pass, and what can be done to turn things around. Piracy has been around longer and occurs on a much larger scale in other industries than anything karaoke has experienced. That is something I am intimately familiar with and something I drew on for the basis of what I wrote.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

i do think the 90% number is a bit exagerated (SP?) but the point is well made. the bigger problem though is that at least 90% of singers dont care how the host gets the material as long as they have their song and their version.
Lon has stated that he is getting singers because the other hosts do not have the SC versions of songs. if Lon did not have one particular song, i bet 9 out of 10 of those singers would say "no problem" and bring in a burned copy from a download torrent the next night for him to have.
As much focus is put on the hosts, the singers are a much bigger problem and have much larger drives than we do.
you figure in any given karaoke bar there is one host with one library. in that same bar are dozens of singers, many of which have downloaded songs filling up hard drives themselves....same at every bar. you think if there's 20 bars, 20 hosts, 2 are legal, and between those 20 shows there are 50 or more singers who will gladly bring in any song for their host burned off of a torrent if they dont already have it at home.
Pirate hosts are a big issue, but only a small fraction of the stolen music that put SC out of business.

Chris, congratulations on getting your article published, weather everyone likes it in it's entirety or not, you did something, and got it out there.
good job.

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

Chris,
I really didn't want to get into a "Chip style" debate with you that would include long never ending lists of quoted rebuttals. I thought your reason for posting it here went beyond just looking for praise.

Praise is easy.
Good job getting published!
I think you have great potential in writing such articles!

It’s less easy giving you honest feedback, now knowing that you will be defensive and try to argue it away.

While the points I made, individually, may seem unimportant as miniscule portions of the article, there are enough of them to affect the message of the article.

You have stated here many times that you agree with the “why” of soundchoice’s actions, but don’t agree with the “method”. Yet your article appears to be agreeing with both by restating most of their points-of-view. That’s why I said I was hoping for something more original from you. I thought you had been holding back some wisdom for conducting the fight against piracy that you were going to relay in your article.



I am not a soundchoice basher, but I do have criticisms and when I make them known, I offer answers and solutions. I disagree with many of their tactics and have actually spelled out what they are and offered alternatives instead of just saying things like “I understand the why but disagree with the how” just to deflect criticism. If you understand the “why” and disagree with the “how”, this article would have been a good vehicle to explain a better how. You should have one if you disagree with the current one.

Oh well, on with the “Chip style” debate:






And who is focused on minuscule details?



Are you forgetting that two thirds of the article is focused on venues and hosts? Isn’t the title itself identifying the whole article as a call to action?

None of the things I mentioned as false have been proven true in your long form rebuttal.
Mostly, your answers are much like this one:



I only need to name one and your statement is still false like the rest of those I listed. Chartbuster.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Well if they did bring it in, it wouldn't go on my computer - have never done that for 'convenience' of the singer nor me. Right now I will play any disc (on a separate CDG player up where anyone can see ;c) ), after certification, that may stop if I don't know for fact the person didn't have original discs - which the majority bring me originals anyway. If it's something they want, they can always ask me and I will try to find an actual disc or legit custom with that version if possible. Or if they are a regular, I will most likely try to find it anyway.

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

I should clarify this particular point....





What I should have added was the fact that the downloads I own were not sent to me on an original disc. I ordered specific song tracks through SBI Karaoke (currently I own 26 discs with between 14-16 songs on each). They were sent to me via e-mail in MP3G and MP4G format, that I was able to download onto my Desktop, then convert them to Bin files, and then burn them onto a disc for my usage. So, in effect, I have never had an original disc for those downloads. They are on discs with paper labels (of my own making) to identify them. They were purchased from a legitimate site who has the proper permissions to sell these tracks. Now, the fact that I don't keep my receipts, and these discs are obviously burns, what am I expected to show as proof? Granted, I am playing the track from a disc, but it was purchased in a digital format, and then media-shifted (in reverse from a HD user). What licensing do you refer to, that you suggest a KJ must show to a Venue as proof?

Now, since I don't host Karaoke as a business, I do not keep any records/books. I do not keep my receipts beyond the point of needing them to make a return or exchange on an item purchased (due to any issues that may have arisen after obtaining/receiving my new purchase). Beyond that, once I receive my credit card statement and have matched up my receipt with the charge on the statement, I trash the receipt. I posted somewhere in this Forum that between the years of 1996 to 2000, I started purchasing CDGs as a personal hobby, and in that time, I accumulated about 400 discs. Since I wasn't hosting Karaoke during that time, I did not feel the need to keep my receipts. To date, I have a little over 1000 CDGs. After the year 2000, I started to host shows, but with no regularity. I basically filled in for other KJs (on the rare occasion that they needed me), and I had 1 place that hired me specifically for Halloween and New Year's Eve. In the last 2 years, I have had a gig at one place where I have done a maximum of 12 shows in the entire year. That's not a lot of shows for me to justify holding onto any receipts from the new discs I continue to purchase.

Earthling - I owe you an apology as well. I admit to having grown much more defensive because of the constant attacks that take place in the forums. I am really not interested in point by point rebuttals either yet I immediately went down that path.

I respect your feedback on this and I will take a closer look at the article and consider writing up something in the future with a different perspective. I do feel there are additional ways to approach this beyond what this article poses.

Thank you for the feedback.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I don't have a good answer for you on that one unless you can go online to the sites and see a record of the sale or kept emails with the transaction details.

Since I am doing it as a business, I do keep records of all sales.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris