|
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
| Author |
Message |
|
Steven Kaplan
|
 Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 12:55 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
Quote: That is, the law spells out what the damages are for each violation without the Plaintiff having to prove any monetary loss. Quote: Damages in copyright cases, assuming the copyright at issue has been registered with the U.S. Copyright Office, are statutory. Since context has been backing up investment, and 1:1 ratio This is what I mean when I use terms such as "specious", and "Likelihood". It is my understanding that "statutory" damages are ONE of two elective methods the Plaintiff *may* wish to pursue in cases of Copyright Law, Statutory (as opposed to actual damages) requires deliberate intent has been proven by the Plaintiff. AND, this is where current loopholes exist ! What constitutes evidence of a violation that likely would not be ruled as de minimus in CURRENT law in cases of the 1:1 copier (without intent to defraud) though Tom LOL ? Quote: While there may be slight local variation in procedure, the substantive law (as well as related things like the law of evidence) is going to be the same whether the case is litigated in New York or Kansas. Quote: like the law of evidence
Exactly what is protecting these small guys, burdon of proof always rests on the Plaintiff to show cause, not to mention cost to pursue.
The key here being substantive, as of yet how would this apply to the 1:1 KJ at present ? We are discussing cases where evidence has YET to be established.
I know there are certain areas that should not be broached on on the internet LMAO
I too try not to get pulled into this. But you have to admit, it's food for thought, and what you are still admitting is that MONETARY compensation (although it MAY be 150K etc) *ARE* how such cases are settled. Settlement can be either "Actual" or "Statutory".
DISCLAIMER:
*This is my own understanding of this specific area*
.
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
exweedfarmer
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 1:46 pm |
|
 |
| Super Poster |
 |
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Posts: 1227
Location: Completely Lost
Been Liked: 15 times
|
timberlea @ Thu May 17, 2007 2:37 am wrote: Ex-weed, it's simple. A CDG player is designed to play CDGs. It is not copying or format shifting to save the media, it is only playing it. But nice try. Computer software written for the purpose is also designed to play CDGs. It is not copying or format shifting to save the media, it is only playing it but it has a bigger cache than the other players. See, not so silly after all.
_________________
Okay, who took my pants?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 1:56 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
|
I think Tom Eaton gave us credible info in a prior post where he posted info regarding his discussion with a Copyright Atty. I don't understand why his post has fallen on so many deaf ears.
There aren't guarantees regarding this type case outcome in the context we are batting back and forth ! You will not get credible assurance ! Just likelihoods based on what people do or do not understand. Assuming somebody on the Internet states "I guarantee you" they will win (given such nebulous criteria) be VERY leery of the posting party. LMAO
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 2:02 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm
Posts: 4094
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Been Liked: 309 times
|
|
If it's used as a player and is not copying it to the hard drive, then it is a player. Once it copies and saves to the hard drive it is no longer a player.
In Copyright cases the Plaintiff can be either the copyright holder or the state or federal government. Again no monetary loss needs to be proven, only that the Copyright Act has been violated.
_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 2:10 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
|
Are they "state" or "Federal District" cases though Tim ? Pending higher court decision ?
There's a difference !
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
karyoker
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 2:13 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:43 pm
Posts: 6784
Location: Fort Collins Colorado USA
Been Liked: 5 times
|
|
Due to trends in this area I got out of the habit of buying new cd's every month. Now that Im back gigging I will need a very good reason to buy more. I have bought 1000's of cd's that were never used or bought one for a certain song and the other 14 songs were never used. Any small business cannot put up with a profit loss like this and claim to be a prudent and efficient businessman. Any other business would not put up with unecessary expenses such as this., And any company that expects a customer to endure these expenses and threaten them with litigation I have no respect for whatsoever. Do you understand why gas and drugs (legal) are so expensive? Government control and corruption...If any cd manu litigated against any KJ it would be the public relations boo-boo of the century. They know it and anybody with maturity or common sense and experience in business 101 knows it too.
Most of the singers around here that sing the current new songs are buying the cd as soon as its availible and putting them on a flash drive. This is strictly personal use and there is nothing illegal about using them. It is not my responsibilty or the venues to ascertain whether they are legal or not. I can vision a show where the kj doesnt have any music at all..
Due to laws in the last 5 years 30% of the small bars in this country has closed down. Some of them is reopened by somebody that doesnt have a clue how to run one. I doubt very serioususly if there is one poster here that can walk into a club and tell if its owned by organized crime or not. I have been going into bars since 1946 I have serviced bars in about every fashion I have been in bars all over the world either as a drunk or on shore patrol. I know what it takes to have a successful pool or dart league. I know what it takes to promote any aspect of a venues enticements.
Why am I ranting ? I am sick and tired and tired of this chidish discussion and info given by rank amatuers If I want legal advise I will go to the family attorney. You can sit and type till the cows come home and it is no more significant than one snowflake in a blinding blizzard and it sure as hell isnt helping our industry or promoting a thing except your enemic ego or extreme opinion.
Now ya want to argue these points and pick at them like a buzzard with 3 heads? Bring it on
_________________
Join The Karaokle Singers Social Network. Upload Your Music!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 2:20 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
Quote: I am sick and tired and tired of this chidish discussion and info given by rank amatuers If I want legal advise I will go to the family attorney.
Actually I'm quite certain the "family" Atty will tell you to specifically converse with a Copyright Atty (assuming this isn't his area of expertise) but that is only coming from me *Kappy* 
I agree with you Ollie. Most of us that have had Internet acounts for MANY years realize that at best online Atty's, Doctors, and Rocket Scientists give out info that is commensurate with the income they receive for providing such advice, especially considering most are either NOT allowed, or would never wish to do-so on the Internet LMAO. MOST have heard of things such as liability, and realize that they are not fortune tellers. it's entirely unprofessional in MOST areas. HOWEVER, I believe some good advice and tips HAVE been given here, the problem is people are selective in what they choose to read, and how they construe such advice..
While somebody will likely say, based upon a vague statement..
"You see, you will be busted in Federal Court"
another person will realize
"That's not what was stated".
As to how much discussion is permissible I guess that too is up to the powers that be.
(meaning the mods and site administration)
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
karyoker
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:10 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:43 pm
Posts: 6784
Location: Fort Collins Colorado USA
Been Liked: 5 times
|
|
Kappy years ago I was in a mutual marketing scheme They put on a weekend seminar in Denver and had the the top ten inspirational speakers in this country. When I walked out sun aft I was 4 feet off the the ground!! These kids here have never been in sales or had a job which was mostly public relations. There are many factors of runnin a good karaoke business I could break them down in percentages which might require a different thread but it seems like this forum is totally incensed with the legal aspect. As far as I'm concerned this comprises about 5 % of the total equation which deals with a true business.
If one cant compete with amateurs then you are not qualified to demand your charges. This is called competition Hone thy skills then come back and cry to me.
_________________
Join The Karaokle Singers Social Network. Upload Your Music!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Revenge Entertainment
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:16 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:35 pm
Posts: 62
Location: Columbus, OH
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
WONDERFUL!!!! Someone finally gets it. It is a FEDERAL LAW!!
For burden of proof...ummm...you walk into a show and there are no discs being put into the computer and the computer is being used to run the show and Sound Choice's logo comes up on the screen. THERE is your proof.
And, maybe this needs to be explained again, IF YOU RIPPED THE SONGS INTO THE COMPUTER IT IS A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION!!!!!!!! NOWHERE in the copyright laws regarding copying copyrighted material does it EVER say that there has to be intent to defraud. It says if you copy it, you are in violation of the law. THAT is all that has to be proven and if they seize your computer at your show, the computer itself IS the proof that you have violated the law. Sound Choice and Stellar are not going to be the ones coming into your show. It will be U.S. Marshals. And I don't remember Sound Choice saying they were doing this for money. They are doing it to shut down illegal karaoke. The fines, if I am not mistaken, go to the government. AFTER the federal case, then SC and Stellar would be able to take you to civil court if they wanted to, but I really think once they shut you down, they would be satisfied.
And as for your "I didn't know" defense...WE HAVE BEEN WARNED BY THE MANUFACTURERS FOR YEARS NOT TO COPY THEIR DISCS. You DID know and chose not to listen. There is a reason that the phrase, "Ignorance of the law excuses no man," exists. It's to let you know that, just because YOU didn't know it was a law doesn't mean you are going to get away with breaking it.
Ripping your discs into your computer and using that computer and NOT your original discs at a show where money is being made (by YOU or by the establishment where you are playing) IS ILLEGAL. You can debate it all you want, but the law is VERY, VERY clear if you actually take the time to read it. Why am I so adamant about this? Mainly, I don't want some new KJ to read Steven Kaplan's posts and end up in prison for believing one single word of anything he posted. Steven, if I am not mistaken, you do not run shows. YOU will not be in peril because of any lawsuits against KJs or club owners. WE are the ones who have to comply. WE chose this business and, as such, have to abide by ALL of the laws governing it whether we like the laws or not. YES, ripping it into a computer makes a show run smoother, makes set up easier and keeps the original discs safe. SO WHAT??!!?? It is STILL AGAINST THE LAWS that WE, professional KJs, have to follow or we risk being shut down, fined and sent to prison. I wish you DID run shows so they could come to one of your shows, seize your stuff, take you to court and hand your butt to you. I would pay good money to see that.
As for those of you who think SC and Stellar are against the KJs. BULL. You screamed for years for the manufacturers to do something about all of the illegal companies out there. Do you think they are going after the illegal companies now to appease the "home" user. Are you all that daft? They are doing this for YOU. It is NOT the manufacturers' fault that YOU chose to do something illegal. It is NOT the manufacturers' fault that YOU chose to use a technology that violates existing FEDERAL copyright law. THAT was YOUR choice and YOUR fault. To blame the manufacturers is wrong and stupid. YOU made a choice. You asked for their help, they gave it. They went after the illegal KJs...YOU just happened to be one of them. Put the blame where it belongs. YOU broke the law. KJs that are still 100% legal are thanking the manufacturers for this. Here in Ohio, the bars have already started firing illegal operators and started hiring legal ones and they ARE paying more. Why? Because their customers want karaoke and they want to keep their customers. They are willing to pay because they want to keep the entertainment and they understand the danger an illegal company poses to their liquor license. So, YES, this IS helping the LEGAL companies to make more money.
I have posted this before and I will say it again. Go back to using your ORIGINAL discs (if you have them...) and let this run it's course. YOU will be safe. Your VENUES will be safe. AND it will make it easier for the illegals to be rounded up. Like it or not, at this point in the game, ANYONE running a computer show IS ILLEGAL. 1:1 or 1:1000 makes no difference. It IS a copyright violation. If you want to see the REALLY illegal KJs go down, make them easier to spot. By continuing to run your shows illegally, you are only making yourselves and your venues targets.
I just don't see why this is so hard for everyone to understand. There is a law against ripping your music into a computer and using it for commercial use. YOU ripped your music into a computer and use it for commercial use. YOU BROKE THE LAW. That is REALLY simple to understand. No matter what reasoning you use to justify what you did, YOU BROKE THE LAW. And as a couple of others AND I have stated, monetary loss is not a part of this. With the copyright law, it only has to be proven that you broke the law. And you DID break the law as soon as you did what it told you not to do. There is no halfway here. You KNEW (or SHOULD have known, as it is your profession) that you were not allowed to copy your discs in any way. You CHOSE to ignore that. Even if you claim you didn't know, you ARE guilty. And, once again, the manufacturers told us for YEARS not to copy their music. If you own original discs, the warning is ON THE DISCS. (Well...at least on the SC discs...not always on the others, but it IS on the CASES of most of the others and on the face of some.)
Now...if you don't believe me...CALL A COPYRIGHT LAWYER. SHOW HIM/HER THESE POSTS AND SEE WHAT HE/SHE SAYS ABOUT IT. OR...CALL SOUND CHOICE AND TELL THEM TO COME TO YOUR COMPUTER SHOW AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU AND LET US KNOW. (Can you post to this forum from federal prison?)
So, to all the 100% legal KJs still out there...good luck, stick with it and good luck on your new upcoming shows. To all of you refusing to comply with the laws governing your chosen profession...send me your show schedules and we will watch this play out together. Dare ya!
Oh well...whatever. Steven Kaplan is going to post some more about how the law isn't a law until a court says it's a law (WRONG) and tell us how SC and Stellar won't make any money at this (ALREADY COVERED) and tell me how I don't know the law (WRONG). Before that happens, to any NEW KJs out there...Check on the laws for yourself. DO NOT listen to anything any of us have to tell you about this. It's YOUR butt on the line. To any venue owners...same thing. LOOK IT UP, CALL A LAWYER. To Steven Kaplan...if you aren't running shows, what the heck does this have to do with you anyway? I'm done for awhile. Have a good one, all.
_________________
Keep it legal!!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:35 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
Quote: Oh well...whatever. Steven Kaplan is going to post some more about how the law isn't a law until a court says it's a law (WRONG)
Where did I ever state this ? Please refer me to MY post where I stated the aforementioned paragraph. I recall stating something *may* currently be illegal but that within itself may or may not deter me from breaking the law. I will be guided by what I consider "reasonable" and "Good Faith", and realise that *I TOO* have certain reasonable rights to existence that will not be predicated by you, a big business, or the Federal Government. Life is about living Grey area; and I initially stated there are times I WILL KNOWINGLY take calculated risks regarding current "laws" for a multitude of reasons.
What I do that's illegal will have sound reasoning behind it (TO ME), Just because something is currently written as "law" or "illegal", such terminology within itself (as an adult living in a country where PRESIDENTS are breaking laws) and living within a country where I am allowed marginal freedoms, will within itself not act as the total deterrent depending on the weighing of circumstances (FOR ME). While an act may be illegal; Risking "Guilt" and "penalty" phase may in SOME cases be a risk worth MY taking (when factoring in"REASON" for my actions). I will also assume 100% responsibility for my actions assuming there ARE in fact ramifications of such actions.... This has been my premise all along. My MOTIVE will NOT be to deliberately break a law. This will NOT be my intent. If I do-so, I do-so for what I believe is a reasonable grounds to do-so.
Finally I stated NOT ALL THAT IS LAW IS REASONABLE (TO ME), when given certain options, You find that much of the time certain religious beliefs, big businesses and MONEY and GREED and EGO are what dictate laws. I can get into medical ethics but I won't. NOT all that is law is reasonable, fair, and works in ALL cases. IE.. Current law in my state would force me to stay alive in a state of terminal illness enduring suffering and pain, incontinent, in a vegetative existence, REASON BEING ? Medically assisted Euthenasia isn't current legal in CT.. So I don't have a right to  ignity during Life:, and ignity regarding end of life decisions:. The law tells me and you ANY assistance in a suicide for ANY reason is deemed a degree of homocide since attempted "suicide is illegal", and the main proponant behind this is the Catholic Church using terms such as "Suicides will go to Hell and not Heaven despite reason" hence there is not grey, but assuming I don't subscribe to such a system of beliefs,. WHAT binds me to following such a law ? This is MY life !... Why should this deter a suffering Athiest or Agnostic ? THINK ABOUT THIS.. NOT all laws are practical for ALL.. Read about the quest of Hemlock USA. I believe in "free choice", and I wish NOT to live in a police state.
"Extent", "intent", and "reasonable" will not be determined or dictated in MANY cases regarding behaviour of others when there are many variables involved. Guilt is determined by our current legal system weighing factors, NOT by either you or myself regarding *this* area of the law, It will be a court system (PROVIDING a court system wishes to allow a de minimus case *illegal or not*). I recall stating "An individual IN THIS sense is determined Guilty of Copyright Infringement by the court system and this is based on different factors". Neither you or I are at liberty to deliver a "judgement" of guilt in a specious area of law.
Where there is DELIBERATELY left a margin of allowance yet to be determined.
I believe this is what I've consistently stated, although I may have strayed at times inadvertently.
Sorry, I'm multitasking now LOL
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
karyoker
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 3:59 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Jun 30, 2004 3:43 pm
Posts: 6784
Location: Fort Collins Colorado USA
Been Liked: 5 times
|
Quote: WONDERFUL!!!! Someone finally gets it. It is a FEDERAL LAW!!
For burden of proof...ummm...you walk into a show and there are no discs being put into the computer and the computer is being used to run the show and Sound Choice's logo comes up on the screen. THERE is your proof.
And, maybe this needs to be explained again, IF YOU RIPPED THE SONGS INTO THE COMPUTER IT IS A COPYRIGHT VIOLATION!!!!!!!! NOWHERE in the copyright laws regarding copying copyrighted material does it EVER say that there has to be intent to defraud. It says if you copy it, you are in violation of the law. THAT is all that has to be proven and if they seize your computer at your show, the computer itself IS the proof that you have violated the law. Sound Choice and Stellar are not going to be the ones coming into your show. It will be U.S. Marshals. And I don't remember Sound Choice saying they were doing this for money. They are doing it to shut down illegal karaoke. The fines, if I am not mistaken, go to the government. AFTER the federal case, then SC and Stellar would be able to take you to civil court if they wanted to, but I really think once they shut you down, they would be satisfied.
And as for your "I didn't know" defense...WE HAVE BEEN WARNED BY THE MANUFACTURERS FOR YEARS NOT TO COPY THEIR DISCS. You DID know and chose not to listen. There is a reason that the phrase, "Ignorance of the law excuses no man," exists. It's to let you know that, just because YOU didn't know it was a law doesn't mean you are going to get away with breaking it.
Ripping your discs into your computer and using that computer and NOT your original discs at a show where money is being made (by YOU or by the establishment where you are playing) IS ILLEGAL. You can debate it all you want, but the law is VERY, VERY clear if you actually take the time to read it. Why am I so adamant about this? Mainly, I don't want some new KJ to read Steven Kaplan's posts and end up in prison for believing one single word of anything he posted. Steven, if I am not mistaken, you do not run shows. YOU will not be in peril because of any lawsuits against KJs or club owners. WE are the ones who have to comply. WE chose this business and, as such, have to abide by ALL of the laws governing it whether we like the laws or not. YES, ripping it into a computer makes a show run smoother, makes set up easier and keeps the original discs safe. SO WHAT??!!?? It is STILL AGAINST THE LAWS that WE, professional KJs, have to follow or we risk being shut down, fined and sent to prison. I wish you DID run shows so they could come to one of your shows, seize your stuff, take you to court and hand your butt to you. I would pay good money to see that.
As for those of you who think SC and Stellar are against the KJs. BULL. You screamed for years for the manufacturers to do something about all of the illegal companies out there. Do you think they are going after the illegal companies now to appease the "home" user. Are you all that daft? They are doing this for YOU. It is NOT the manufacturers' fault that YOU chose to do something illegal. It is NOT the manufacturers' fault that YOU chose to use a technology that violates existing FEDERAL copyright law. THAT was YOUR choice and YOUR fault. To blame the manufacturers is wrong and stupid. YOU made a choice. You asked for their help, they gave it. They went after the illegal KJs...YOU just happened to be one of them. Put the blame where it belongs. YOU broke the law. KJs that are still 100% legal are thanking the manufacturers for this. Here in Ohio, the bars have already started firing illegal operators and started hiring legal ones and they ARE paying more. Why? Because their customers want karaoke and they want to keep their customers. They are willing to pay because they want to keep the entertainment and they understand the danger an illegal company poses to their liquor license. So, YES, this IS helping the LEGAL companies to make more money.
I have posted this before and I will say it again. Go back to using your ORIGINAL discs (if you have them...) and let this run it's course. YOU will be safe. Your VENUES will be safe. AND it will make it easier for the illegals to be rounded up. Like it or not, at this point in the game, ANYONE running a computer show IS ILLEGAL. 1:1 or 1:1000 makes no difference. It IS a copyright violation. If you want to see the REALLY illegal KJs go down, make them easier to spot. By continuing to run your shows illegally, you are only making yourselves and your venues targets.
I just don't see why this is so hard for everyone to understand. There is a law against ripping your music into a computer and using it for commercial use. YOU ripped your music into a computer and use it for commercial use. YOU BROKE THE LAW. That is REALLY simple to understand. No matter what reasoning you use to justify what you did, YOU BROKE THE LAW. And as a couple of others AND I have stated, monetary loss is not a part of this. With the copyright law, it only has to be proven that you broke the law. And you DID break the law as soon as you did what it told you not to do. There is no halfway here. You KNEW (or SHOULD have known, as it is your profession) that you were not allowed to copy your discs in any way. You CHOSE to ignore that. Even if you claim you didn't know, you ARE guilty. And, once again, the manufacturers told us for YEARS not to copy their music. If you own original discs, the warning is ON THE DISCS. (Well...at least on the SC discs...not always on the others, but it IS on the CASES of most of the others and on the face of some.)
Now...if you don't believe me...CALL A COPYRIGHT LAWYER. SHOW HIM/HER THESE POSTS AND SEE WHAT HE/SHE SAYS ABOUT IT. OR...CALL SOUND CHOICE AND TELL THEM TO COME TO YOUR COMPUTER SHOW AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS TO YOU AND LET US KNOW. (Can you post to this forum from federal prison?)
So, to all the 100% legal KJs still out there...good luck, stick with it and good luck on your new upcoming shows. To all of you refusing to comply with the laws governing your chosen profession...send me your show schedules and we will watch this play out together. Dare ya!
Oh well...whatever. Steven Kaplan is going to post some more about how the law isn't a law until a court says it's a law (WRONG) and tell us how SC and Stellar won't make any money at this (ALREADY COVERED) and tell me how I don't know the law (WRONG). Before that happens, to any NEW KJs out there...Check on the laws for yourself. DO NOT listen to anything any of us have to tell you about this. It's YOUR butt on the line. To any venue owners...same thing. LOOK IT UP, CALL A LAWYER. To Steven Kaplan...if you aren't running shows, what the heck does this have to do with you anyway? I'm done for awhile. Have a good one, all.
Back to top Revenge Entertainment is offline View user's profile Send private message Add user to your Buddy List
Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic
View previous topic View posts since last visitTell A FriendPrintable versionDownload TopicStop watching this topicSubscribe to this topicList users that have viewed this topicPrivate MessagesRefresh pageAdd this topic to your bookmarks (CTRL-D) View next topic
Navigation: All Forums » Open Forums, Karaoke Discussion Forum
Page 11 of 11 [ 269 Posts ]
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 ... 9, 10, 11
Karaoke Scene monitors this forum, in order to best assist our members. We value our members' opinions and ideas, but must reserve the right to remove any information or materials that are of commercial intent, unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, profane, indecent, or otherwise objectionable to us at our sole discretion. We also reserve the right to permanently block any member who violates these terms. Please be respectfu
Son I am in Greeley Co Shorty's grill sat nights You got a problem with me son? Call the karaoke police and have them walk in Let me
me tell what son The owner of this venue will hang you from the tallest tree in the city. When somebody accuses me of being illegal You better hire a good attoeney and give me a real name and and the address of your attornbey I am tired of this BS
You wan to challenge me ? Give me real real name and address and the address of your attorney..
_________________
Join The Karaokle Singers Social Network. Upload Your Music!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 4:07 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
Quote: To Steven Kaplan...if you aren't running shows, what the heck does this have to do with you anyway? I'm done for awhile. Have a good one, all.
and I of course can turn this around Revenge Karaoke, and say EVEN if you are running shows, under WHO's authority and WHAT authority do you have to denounce the general actions of others, and deem them as being Guillty of Copyright infringement ? Why are you so vigiliant in this area ? What do YOU gain from being Judge, Jury, and final decision in cases that have yet to come before a court of law ?
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Revenge Entertainment
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 4:55 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:35 pm
Posts: 62
Location: Columbus, OH
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
I think I might like to see a bar owner hang a U.S. Marshal from the tallest tree. How many years would THAT get him? I will forward the information to SC and Stellar and the U.S. Marshal service and we will see what happens. Now, one question...and I HOPE the answer is yes. Are you using a computer to run your show?? Because that is the only reason they might come after you. As for the U.S. Marshal service, I believe a threat of hanging MIGHT just be illegal too. But, I'll give them the information and you can let us know. And...once again...I am a woman, therefor I could not be your son. And thank God. My dad is ALOT smarter and would never threaten a U.S. Marshal. Good luck now.
_________________
Keep it legal!!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 5:48 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
|
I'm sorry, but would you kindly explain where you are going with this current line of reasoning ? and how murdering a person you do not like pertains to my example of medically assisted euthanasia ? I am using an example of how what is currently established law DOES NOT benefit all. In fact it arguably makes life tougher for many, and WHY ? What is the actual purpose of such laws ? Does LEGAL always mean right ? Does Illegal ALWAYS mean wrong ?
After all, in our society we treat our pets better than we often treat our elderly that are forced to remain alive in an indignant state suffering (as in the cases of the individual with ALS, who's terminally ill) and will almost definitely end up choking on his or her own saliva. Terminally Ill means likelihood of no greater period than 6 months to live in which final stages almost always (in certain specific cases) assure a degree of suffering and certainly indignance. However I am talking about *Medically* assisted euthanasia as an option to a loved one having to suffer because of what amounts to superstitious belief in the eyes of many, and it is religious fear that is the greatest opponent of "individual choice" in THIS specific case. Fear tactics are used to dissuade and make an individual feel that something that is clearly NOT always wrong IS wrong, and for such reasons fear keeps certain aspects of "free choice" illegal by campaigning. The Catholic church is extremely wealthy. But should a church and fear based orthodox belief be something that impedes individual choice for ALL ? (specifically a statement such as suicide is NEVER a viable option to suffering). My example is to cite that NOT all that is currently "legal" is necessarily GOOD for all. Should big business ALWAYS tell small bars that NO SMOKING is allowed in their bar, and the same government that LOVES getting fat and happy off've taxation from sales of cigarettes condones the sale of cigarettes, yet ALSO has a right to turn around and prosecute a small bar owner enforcing "Indoor clean air" act ? My question to you is , Does something that is ILLEGAL always mean EVERYBODY gains by strict adherence to current law ?
The Hemlock tree is a living will that is signed and witnessed when the ill person is in a sane and lucid frame of mind. NOBODY will KILL anybody. It allows for individual choice regarding quality of life, and is an exit choice only. It does not condone killing anybody, nor does it condone "encouraging that each time a person is depressed taking ones life is the right thing to do by any stretch of ones imagination. There are certain conditions, and these are defined to protect ALL involved, decisions must be witnessed and signed by many during a lucid earlier period.
There are certain "Acts of Kindness", that you might not be able to understand currently, and when these decisions involve a loved one, the decision is one made out've love, not dispassion or hate... Another example of "Illegal hence wrong" WAS california laws keeping terminally ill and suffering CANCER patients from off-setting the affects of Chemotherapy using THC.. Is this right ? Considering what OTHER drugs ARE deemed legal ? Think about some laws prior to determining ALL that is ILLEGAL is "reasonable" for ALL. I am attempting to give you reasonable examples of where laws fall short and HAVE hinder human life quality, and for what actual purpose ? THe examples I am giving you are real. Oregon is the only state that gives terminally ill, and suffering individuals the right to take a pill that will terminate their suffering. Is this "decent" law for those forced to stay alive gagging in an indignant state suffering from certain dystrophy conditions ?
Think about this. I am ONLY using this for purposes of trying to explain that something being "legal" does not ALWAYS mean reasonable for ALL, hence we can debate whether Legal is "right" in such cases !
If you opt to poo hoo my example Revenge Karaoke, there is little I can reason with regarding your extreme views. I'm attempting to hold a CIVIL conversation with you without reverting to our past ad hominem retorts to one-another.
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:37 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm
Posts: 4094
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Been Liked: 309 times
|
|
Now who would be the attorneys. Simple, D.A.s in the US and Crown Prosecutors in Canada and their respective counterparts in other countries. Who will be going in? US Marshals, FBI, local and state police in the US. RCMP, Provincial, and local police in Canada. So if you want to be stupid enough to threaten them, then be my guest.
Euthanization and assisted suicide in Canada is illegal (as I'm sure it is in the US, remember Kevorkian). There have been sentences ranging from 10 years in prison to probation. The problem of "mercy killing" is trying to write a law on it. Who decides, under what circumstances. What is the motive, etc. Is it only for disease, mental problems, a lost limb. It would be a dog's breakfast. With the current laws, a judge can make a decision based on the individual case. Which is why sentencing can be anywhere from probation to 14 years imprisonment here in Canada.
_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
exweedfarmer
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:55 pm |
|
|
| Super Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jan 24, 2006 7:34 pm
Posts: 1227
Location: Completely Lost
Been Liked: 15 times
|
timberlea @ Thu May 17, 2007 2:02 pm wrote: If it's used as a player and is not copying it to the hard drive, then it is a player. Once it copies and saves to the hard drive it is no longer a player.
So your objection is the type of cache that the player uses? Simple enough, rip the tunes to RAM and leave the laptop turned on in standby mode. It never hits the hard drive. Or, you could just realize that there is no copying, the 1s and 0s on the CD do not relate to the 1s and 0s on the hardrive in any humanly meaningful way. The CD is copyrighted, the sound produced is copyrighted but you bought a license to play it. Anything else is a process of playing. I do not see it as a copyright infringement for that reason and others. Or did we get back to silly?
_________________
Okay, who took my pants?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Steven Kaplan
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 6:58 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2005 6:48 pm
Posts: 13645
Been Liked: 11 times
|
Quote: Who decides, under what circumstances This is ALL clearly defined in the living will known as "The Hemlock Twig". All conditions. This is filled out during a lucid time, and witnessed by family who also sign EXACT terms, and a friend or two.. Type coma, etc. What conditions etc. Quote: [Euthanization and assisted suicide in Canada is illegal (as I'm sure it is in the US, remember Kevorkian). There have been sentences ranging from 10 years in prison to probation.
I'm very familiar with Michigan law in this area Tim. In fact Jack Kevorkian was trying to make a strong statement by showing the televised "Mercy Killing" of Thomas Youk who was in the terminal stages of "ALS", and he did-so against J Feigers wishes. You can be sure Jeffrey Feiger is VERY frustrated, in fact we KNOW he is. BUT, despite the assisted euthanasia of a terminal "ALS" patient *WAS* Kevorkian NECESSARILY wrong in wishing to show that death in a suffering person CAN be more peaceful than the alternative ? Thomas York PLEADED for this. He was in FULL control of his fate up until the end. There was no "killing" (yes, I understand this is ARGUABLE LOL ), Youk opted not to suffer. In a sense, we love our pets. Don't we treat our pets in a kinder manner when suffer towards the end of life than we treat OUR loved ones currently, assuming this is ALL their signed and witnessed choice (signed during lucid times and mind never changes) ? It's those that "rebel" against certain laws (and of course deal with the ramifications which in Jacks case will be life in prison) that are often the only ones who implement changes. Now Michigan is a state with a very strong Catholic population. This is a reason Kevorkian did what he did. New Hampshire has rejected legislative attempts to change similar laws. Oregon views this differently. Oregon allows a suffering person an end of life option. and there is A LOT of dissidence going on as a result.
Changing law is often an ugly process.
Now out've due deference to your views Tim, I believe it's fair to assume since you are a more religious person than I am, you believe "Hospice" is viable as an option. MANY do. Many do not wish to live their end of life in a vegetative state however, they don't wish to be kept alive in such an indignant state of existence. I believe there should be choice allowed during LUCID thought out times.
There's currently more opposition to the legislature of this as well. Some view this as in direct conflict with a physicians Hypocratic Oath. Meaning there is no current area of medicine that would allow for this, since the oath is a vow to protect and preserve life.
Others view this as something more ominous. Meaning in Western Culture "Right to die", becomes twisted into "Obligation of our elder to die". These are more scare tactics used by opponants of "Medically Assisted Euthenasia".
Anyway, as stated, my example was merely to bring to light what appears to be "legal" and RIGHT for me, might not be right for another individual, and vice-versa.. Often law impedes ones freedom to chose regarding important aspects of ones life..
JMHO
_________________
Northeast United States runner up for the "Singing Hall of Shame".
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
johnbaum
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 7:00 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 20, 2006 4:28 pm
Posts: 27
Songs: 1
Location: Lashmeet, WV
Been Liked: 5 times
|
|
Ok, I've been away from the forum for a while and have missed most of this stuff. Now I am not a rich KJ and can't afford the Sound Choice Disc's and perhaps they have a different disclaimer than the one that I purchase at Wal Mart. The ones at Wal Mart say:
WARNING:Use of the pre-recorded material contained herin in any manner for the reproduction of recordings and or tape for sale, rental, broadcasting or distribution without prior consent of the Copyright owner of the rights herin is a violation of the US Copyright law.
reproduction of recordings and or tape for sale, rental, broadcasting or distribution
I guess I'm stupid but I don't see anywhere that I can't make a personal back up copy or that I can't convert it to a MP3+G and play them through my computer? Do the SC discs actually say that you can't swap the format?
In all actuality the copywright is not owned by the manufacturer of the discs rather the writers of the actual songs. The disc manufacturers have to pay the royalties to the writers. So.... In this case I suppose it is buyer beware. If Sound Choice won't let me swap the format then I won't buy their product... As if I could afford them anyway....
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
SwingcatKurt
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 11:48 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 25, 2003 10:35 pm
Posts: 1889
Images: 1
Location: portland, oregon
Been Liked: 59 times
|
|
the key is your HOME computer. Thats personal use. Put them on a puter and play them off that puter at your show---Thats for COMMERCIAL use and would not be protected under fair-use. But its pretty clear in the the statement about---unathorized REPRODUCTION and/or taping. REPRODUCTION. When you format shift--you REPRODUCE. Play it safe---use your original discs for your show.
_________________
"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
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Revenge Entertainment
|
Posted: Thu May 17, 2007 11:49 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2004 10:35 pm
Posts: 62
Location: Columbus, OH
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
Steven Kaplan...Read the post from Karyoker. Karyoker made a statement that the owner of the bar he runs karaoke in would hang whoever came after him from a tree out back or some such nonsense. So my quip about hanging a U.S. Marshal had nothing to do with what you said about assisted suicide. Sorry you misinterpreted. I have no problem with what you said about that. Don't get your panties in a bunch.
_________________
Keep it legal!!!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 546 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
