Karaoke Forums

My guess is it's a computer-generated reproduction of the trademark. Maybe it could even be considered a colorable imitation of the trademark.

So anyone who is using (for commercial use) any format other than what was purchased on manufacturers medium without consent from the manufacturer is a pirate, because of trademark infringement and/or copyright infringement?

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

How is that any different than using a cdg player to reproduce or create a colorable imitation from the cdg?

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

Technically, yes.

It is this technicality that allows them to file a suit against you. They are also betting that you will not spend the money to challenge them in court and if you do, it will simply be put on ice with one delay after another... You'll notice that the case against an Arizona KJ filed in 2009 is still pretty much frozen. There have been no less than SIX time extensions on this case with no appreciable movement at all. SC does not want to take the risk of having this media shifting issue decided against them in any court because they would then have a much harder time suing anyone.

Some might consider that to be the case. But, as I said above, nobody is guilty of infringement until proven so. A registrant/copyright holder has the right to file suit against those whom they believe have infringed their legal rights. It may be that a manufacturer would choose not to do so providing the alleged infringer can show mitigating factors. (eg. 1:1 compliance).

EDIT: Thanks JD for reproducing the posting of one who is on ignore lists and suggests the meaning of words be understood before making ignorant comments.

Mitigating factors? So "mitigating factors" includes a search for evidence they don't already have?

Might as well say; "We don't know for certain that you've done anything wrong but we "believe" you might have illegal child porn in your house or other controlled substances that are illegal so we want to search your property to make sure. That way, we can sue you or have you arrested. You can trust us, we're here to HELP you!"

Who do they think they are? Homeland Security?

Good question! Perhaps the legal definition of "colorable imitation" would provide the answer.

http://definitions.uslegal.com/c/colora ... tion-test/

"any mark which resembles a registered mark and is likely to cause confusion or might deceive."

The CDG Player displays the trademark in conjunction with the audio/visual generated from the manufacturer's product. The computer displays the trademark in conjunction with the audio/visual generated from a copy of the manufacturer's product. Anyone viewing the trademark could be deceived into believing that they are seeing and hearing an audio/visual derived from the original manufacturer's product and not from a copy of that product.

JVC Player, CAVS Player, PIONEER Player...what do they have in common?

They have a Processor, AV ports, and a CDROM. Do you not know that these are Rudimentary Computers...on the same level as a TRS80 (Radio Shack) or Commodore 64.

Anyway, just got off the phone with my Lawyer. It looks like we are going to proceed with a Federal Action against all Karaoke Brands, that are still in business, to resolve this.

She will be researching the current Lawsuits this weekend.

We are not sure if we want a Class Action representing all the KJs, that wish to be in it, or just me. It is a possibility that, due to the effect this will have, the FED may combine all the jurisdictions into one lawsuit.

It cost $450.00 to file the initial action. She charges $200/hr but is willing to work with me on that.

She said it may take 10 Hours to do the initial research.

We are meeting tomorrow to discuss this further.

Our target is next week to file.

I told my wife, over a year ago, I would devote every penny from Karaoke to fight this BULLS@#T.

Today, I received my Chartbusters April 2011 POP and URBAN discs with the new WARNING...like SCs new discs...not to copy to a Hard Drive. Not that there aren't better choices, but this was the last straw.

Who is with me? If but in spirit only.

And that would hurt the manu how?

So gray area is enough to file suit, but may or may not be enough for a defense as the laws are currently written or until some judgment is found to dispute the gray area(s).

_________________
My statements, opinions and conclusions are based on my own personal experiences, observations, research and/or just my own $.02. I'm not a "cheerleader", but that doesn't make me a Pirate.

SUGGESTION:
#1. Set this up as a class action suit, then pull the lawsuits that SC has filed since 2009 and solicit every defendant (150?) to be part of the class and/or contribute. Also place a "contribution product" on Craigslist that everyone can donate to the cause yet remain anonymous.

#2. Subpoena statements from all the large publishers that have sued a manufacturer to verify that the products the mfg's are selling NOW, are in fact legally LICENSED in the U.S. (and that includes the Gem series) and have been since they've been sold. (including 8125)

Which is not unusual with the court system. Cases, both civil and criminal can grind on for years, hence the adage "The wheels of justice grind slowly". As for extensions, it seems that both sides have asked for them.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

When I play a karaoke work, from the disc or from mp3+g the manufacturer's trademark logo appears on screen because they put it there as part of the work. I did not add that logo to anything it exists as part of the work because the manufacturer wanted it there and put it there.

So when I play it from the mp3+g on my computer;

1. It's not likely to cause any confusion as to the maker of the work because their logo is right there where they put it.

2. It's not likely to cause any mistake about the maker of the work because the logo is still right where the manufacturer intended it to be.

3. I'm not deceiving anyone about the manufacturer of the work, because I didn't remove or change the logo from it's intended location. All manufaturers are getting appropriate acknowledgement for their work - no deception.



By playing their work either from my disk or from my unedited mp3+g, there is no intent to deceive.


I don't advertise my services using a manufacturer's logo or trademark. I use my own. - no deception - no confusion (yes, commas do make a difference when reading)

I believe these trademark laws (and copyright laws) are better applied to those who copy and sell or distribute the works (pirates). They are the ones who are causing confusion about the source of what they are selling and distributing. They are the ones deceiving. And they are the ones the manufacturers do not seem to be as worried about going after, because they apparently don't scare as easily and cough up a few bucks as quickly and easily as a KJ who is just trying to keep his head above water and support his family by doing a few gigs.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I'll chip in $500, and i'll help with the research for free (if i can be of any help). Send me info via PM.

I don't know if you're serious or not but I'm in the cheering section. I think this is a tempest in a teapot. Of what value is a CD. Blanks are a dime apiece. Of what use is the digital information on the CD? It's just tiny variation in reflectivity. The value is in the music, the analog music. KJ's buy those disks so we can play them at our shows and the manus darn well know that's who they're selling them to and for what purpose. What the manus are selling is a license to make their copyrighted noise. So long as the noise is not in more than once place at any one time, how can there be copyright issues?

_________________
Okay, who took my pants?

He's serious. Very serious.



And that's part of the problem... do you buy "songs" or do you buy "discs?"

but they are suing for "Trademark infringment" not copyright issues. I am however in agreement with you in your analogy for 1-1 copies

_________________
"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 thought in a civil matter, the burden of proof falls on the defendant?
we went over and over this months ago. if i have to prove i am innocent, than i am guilty until i can prove otherwise. from the beginning that has been one of the biggest parts that has people tinkled.

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

Consent is already granted for the use of the origional disc, it doesn't become an issue untill a copy is made!

So I take it that you are going to file a preemptive lawsuit against all of the manus to avoid a lawsuit further down the road?

It's just me but I can't help but wonder .......... why would you spend $10,000 or more to avoid paying $199 a year on a 50/50 shot that you could stop the manus from filing against pirates?

Well at least you found a cheap attorney to work on it for you!