|
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
| Author |
Message |
|
JoeChartreuse
|
 Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:24 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:30 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
|
Interesting.
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 3:36 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm
Posts: 6086
Images: 1
Location: Redmond, WA
Been Liked: 1665 times
|
|
There is nothing about the recent Chartbuster circumstances that is "sudden". The Domains for the current DigiTrax and Karaoke Cloud sites were registered quite a while before Chartbuster announced they were closing down. The DigiTrax web site looks to be pretty sophisticated on the surface using modern day coding technologies but was certainly in development also well before Chartbuster annouced anything. In restrospect, the late 2011 fire sales were the big warnign that something was going to be happening soon, but the signs existed for a while before. They just weren't as obvious.
-Chris
_________________
-Chris
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
BruceFan4Life
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:23 pm |
|
 |
| Super Duper Poster |
 |
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:03 pm
Posts: 2674
Location: Jersey
Been Liked: 160 times
|
|
OR........... Documents have been back dated to make it seem that Chartbuster didn't own any assets at the time of the CAVS judgement being handed down. Wouldn't be their first shady deal........IMHO
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 5:28 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
|
Doubtful that they could backdate a federal trademark application.
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
BruceFan4Life
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 6:28 pm |
|
|
| Super Duper Poster |
|
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:03 pm
Posts: 2674
Location: Jersey
Been Liked: 160 times
|
|
It would be very interesting to find out the date that Chartbuster found out that they were being sued by CAVS. I bet that Chip would probabaly have that information. Selling off assets in anticipation of losing a law suit would seem to be illegal.....but what's one more infraction?
My mom used to say...."Do as I say; not as I do". It usually pertained to smoking cigarettes. Sound Choice and Chartbuster seem to be saying the same thing to everyone who enjoys karaoke. They can break the rules when it is convenient for them to do so but nobody else better try it or they will be sued.
Obviously, Chartbuser couldn't pass an audit and that is why they lost to CAVS. Now they want to force others to pass an audit. I can't wait to see that case get to a court room.
What was I thinking? These cases never get to a court room. That would kill the golden goose.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 6:46 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm
Posts: 1609
Location: Earth
Been Liked: 307 times
|
|
What you see there is an automatic update of records to reflect the recent transfer of the trademark to Piracy Recovery. The original application shows Tennessee Production Center as the owner/applicant with zero mention of Piracy Recovery.
There is nothing sinister or unusual here.
However, if there were no library assets to go with the trademark transfer, then one could assert there was no "goodwill" in the trademark and it would be an illegal trademark with no value.
_________________
KNOW THYSELF
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
BruceFan4Life
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 6:57 pm |
|
|
| Super Duper Poster |
|
Joined: Wed May 18, 2005 10:03 pm
Posts: 2674
Location: Jersey
Been Liked: 160 times
|
|
I just hope that CAVS is paying as close attention to what Chartbuster is doing.
Maybe someone should send them an e-mail about this whole CB to Digitrax transfer of tracks.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Fri May 18, 2012 11:04 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
chrisavis wrote: There is nothing about the recent Chartbuster circumstances that is "sudden". -Chris While I agree with the above, the point was that Chartbuster was giving the impression that it WAS sudden. Gretchen was posting that all was well, CB was demanding audit fees, and telling everyone how they were going to handle new releases. My point: If anyone has a question about legalities ( media shift, downloads, whatever....) one does NOT ask the karaoke producers, who will say anything to sell/promote their product. One asks an independent, VERIFIABLE source.
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lone Wolf
|
Posted: Sat May 19, 2012 3:44 pm |
|
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 10:11 am
Posts: 1832
Location: TX
Been Liked: 59 times
|
|
Just wondering what CB's Certification is worth now?
CB won't (can't?) sue you for shifting/trademark but who's to say that Digitrax won't.
Kinda like having a warranty from a company that goes bankrupt.... It's a worthless piece of paper.
_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 1:17 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
Lone Wolf wrote: Just wondering what CB's Certification is worth now?.....
Kinda like having a warranty from a company that goes bankrupt.... It's a worthless piece of paper. Worth precisely what it was before- nothing. Just more proof of that now. Keep in mind that CB knew what their situation was when they began selling audits. Something else: If Piracy Recovery is a completely separate company, THEY have owned the trademark since 2009- NOT Chartbuster. If that is the case, Chartbuster was selling for a logo that they held no rights to. ONLY Piracy Recovery could actually have a problem with media shifting. In other words, it really looks to me as if those who paid for the audits got scammed. Kind of like me selling a bridge that I don't own. Since the corporate entity is defunct, the money is gone, and I don't believe anyone who bought into what I think was a con has any recourse. Again, Check all facts with a legitimate INDEPENDENT source, NOT the party trying to sell you something.
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
mightywiz
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 3:49 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 1351
Images: 1
Location: Idaho
Been Liked: 180 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: Lone Wolf wrote: Just wondering what CB's Certification is worth now?.....
Kinda like having a warranty from a company that goes bankrupt.... It's a worthless piece of paper. Worth precisely what it was before- nothing. Just more proof of that now. Keep in mind that CB knew what their situation was when they began selling audits. Something else: If Piracy Recovery is a completely separate company, THEY have owned the trademark since 2009- NOT Chartbuster. If that is the case, Chartbuster was selling for a logo that they held no rights to. ONLY Piracy Recovery could actually have a problem with media shifting. In other words, it really looks to me as if those who paid for the audits got scammed. Kind of like me selling a bridge that I don't own. Since the corporate entity is defunct, the money is gone, and I don't believe anyone who bought into what I think was a con has any recourse. Again, Check all facts with a legitimate INDEPENDENT source, NOT the party trying to sell you something.quit bitching about the cb audit, everyone that did it got a $200 product credit ($200 was the cost of the audit), if you didn't act on it in time that's your own fault.... no one is happy unless they are complaining about something.......
_________________
It's all good!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Paradigm Karaoke
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 4:54 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm
Posts: 5107
Location: Phoenix Az
Been Liked: 1279 times
|
mightywiz wrote: quit bitching about the cb audit, everyone that did it got a $200 product credit ($200 was the cost of the audit), if you didn't act on it in time that's your own fault....
no one is happy unless they are complaining about something....... so how do people go about getting their discs with that credit.....that is gone.....because CB didnt want to say they were going under........ send me $200.00 and i will give you a credit to Sweet Georgia Brown discs.
_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
johnreynolds
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 8:18 pm |
|
|
| Super Poster |
 |
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2009 11:06 am
Posts: 844
Been Liked: 226 times
|
I don't think Joe was bitchin' about anything Wiz. Just giving food for thought to everyone as well as his own opinion on this.  I found his information quite interesting and thought provoking myself, didn't you?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
mightywiz
|
Posted: Mon May 21, 2012 9:16 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:35 pm
Posts: 1351
Images: 1
Location: Idaho
Been Liked: 180 times
|
|
no!
started getting suspicious in november & december when new releases stopped. and took the hint then. i was going to do the audit back then and glad i decided to see what was going to happen with releases... i made a good choice. and i know others that cancelled subscriptions and tied up loose ends early on..
the signs were there!
_________________
It's all good!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 1:27 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
mightywiz wrote: and i know others that cancelled subscriptions and tied up loose ends early on.. ! I never cancelled any subscriptions, they quit on me - sending anything that is back in Oct. I did get a phone message in Jan asking if I wanted to continue with the Jan & feb releases, however they never returned my calls to let them know either way. _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 7:41 am |
|
|
| Extreme Poster |
 |
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 3011
Been Liked: 1003 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: Something else: If Piracy Recovery is a completely separate company, THEY have owned the trademark since 2009- NOT Chartbuster. If that is the case, Chartbuster was selling for a logo that they held no rights to. ONLY Piracy Recovery could actually have a problem with media shifting. This is not accurate, and you have already been corrected on it in this thread. When a transfer of rights in a federally registered trademark (referred to as an "assignment") is recorded with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, the USPTO updates the online registration record to reflect the new owner. Although the record in the USPTO's online search reflects both the original registrant and the new owner, it can appear to a casual user that the new owner was the original registrant. To be certain, you need to look at the complete assignment record. Here is a link: http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignment ... o=77648984That shows that the formal document assigning rights was signed on 4/18/12 (the actual assignment may, of course, have occurred earlier) and recorded the next day. JoeChartreuse wrote: In other words, it really looks to me as if those who paid for the audits got scammed. Kind of like me selling a bridge that I don't own. Since the corporate entity is defunct, the money is gone, and I don't believe anyone who bought into what I think was a con has any recourse.
Again, Check all facts with a legitimate INDEPENDENT source, NOT the party trying to sell you something. I agree that facts should be checked with a legitimate independent source, but (1) you aren't independent, (2) your analysis is flawed, and (3) even when you do check things, sometimes it requires a knowledgeable expert to help you understand what you're seeing.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 3:22 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
mightywiz wrote: no!
started getting suspicious in november & december when new releases stopped. and took the hint then. i was going to do the audit back then and glad i decided to see what was going to happen with releases... i made a good choice. and i know others that cancelled subscriptions and tied up loose ends early on..
the signs were there! Yup, they were- and you were smart enough to do the right thing. However, this happened because your suspicions were aroused., not because CB was forthcoming. Not all could "read the signs" as well as you, or maybe they weren't able to access them. If CB was forthcoming, no one would have bought the audit, and "credits" for tracks no longer available would have been issued.
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Tue May 22, 2012 3:37 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: JoeChartreuse wrote: Something else: If Piracy Recovery is a completely separate company, THEY have owned the trademark since 2009- NOT Chartbuster. If that is the case, Chartbuster was selling for a logo that they held no rights to. ONLY Piracy Recovery could actually have a problem with media shifting. 1) This is not accurate, and you have already been corrected on it in this thread. When a transfer of rights in a federally registered trademark (referred to as an "assignment") is recorded with the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, the USPTO updates the online registration record to reflect the new owner. Although the record in the USPTO's online search reflects both the original registrant and the new owner, it can appear to a casual user that the new owner was the original registrant. To be certain, you need to look at the complete assignment record. Here is a link: http://assignments.uspto.gov/assignment ... o=77648984That shows that the formal document assigning rights was signed on 4/18/12 (the actual assignment may, of course, have occurred earlier) and recorded the next day. JoeChartreuse wrote: In other words, it really looks to me as if those who paid for the audits got scammed. Kind of like me selling a bridge that I don't own. Since the corporate entity is defunct, the money is gone, and I don't believe anyone who bought into what I think was a con has any recourse.
Again, Check all facts with a legitimate INDEPENDENT source, NOT the party trying to sell you something. 2) I agree that facts should be checked with a legitimate independent source, but (1) you aren't independent, (2) your analysis is flawed, and (3) even when you do check things, sometimes it requires a knowledgeable expert to help you understand what you're seeing. 1) A- Please note the word "if" in the front of my first sentence- I was positing a possible situation. B- I was NEVER "corrected" in this thread. Someone else posted something similar to yours, but I had yet to verify it. 2) A- At no time did I ever suggest that I was the independent and verifiable source to which others should come. I have no idea what process you used to reach the conclusion that I did. What I always said here was that it is up to those here to do their own research. Then they would KNOW, without arguing. This is why, unlike Chip, I don't provide the information with a spoon. B- As for my flaws, some might check out the thread about SC and Australia..
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Bazza
|
Posted: Wed May 23, 2012 5:25 am |
|
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 8:00 am
Posts: 3312
Images: 0
Been Liked: 610 times
|
JoeChartreuse wrote: What I always said here was that it is up to those here to do their own research. Then they would KNOW, without arguing. This is why, unlike Chip, I don't provide the information with a spoon. How convenient. Kind of like saying "Bigfoot exists. I know. I have seen one multiple times. But I am not going to spoon-feed you proof, you have to dig that up on your own". 
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 174 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
