Karaoke Forums

So we've all seen manu's sling mud at each other in regards to licensing. You and I (the end user) are caught in the middle, and we end up at each others throats over it as one side defends the other (and more sinister things like astroturfing)

I propose this..

Manu's start making a KIDB akin to the IMDB (internet movie database).

On the IMDB, I can see the names of all the actors, producers, writers, the soundtrack, everything. I can drill down, and track a productions music back to the original artist AND if I buy the premium service, actually get in touch with their agents.


I think the same thing needs to happen with karaoke production. We can name names, not name prices, not name contact info (except for premium users, like karaoke producers)

Thing is, I think it's time the entire licensing debacle was put out in the open. Side A, you said you got license? Show me. Same thing goes for Side B. Put up or shut up so to speak.

Granted, I'm sure folks are going to squawk, "Well, it's going to take a long time to compile all that data!" Not really. I think a company like KJPro already has most tracks indexed, adding a new table or two to link tracks to the parties involved in its production would be a no-brainer. I'm sure KJPro, seeing the potential revenue they could make from this, would happily import old data for the karaoke manu's. From there, just create new entries as songs come out.

I don't think it would take long (or a lot of resources) to create, and I think we (as KJ's/end users) could definitely gain benefit from it.

_________________
Living my life as Robert Cortese, 162 E. Jackson St, San Jose CA.

It's like the difference between high and low budget toilet paper, it really doesn't matter in the end. -exweedfarmer

Which is smarter? Just sticking to making/selling karaoke, while people all over the world create software FOR FREE that helps you sell it, or trying to compete with them and keeping it a closed loop while you blow your money into an industry (software) that you(the karaoke manu) knows nothing about?
-me

So what if a disc (or track) just listed it's KIDB number? Would that be enough to act as a stamp of "approval"?

_________________
Living my life as Robert Cortese, 162 E. Jackson St, San Jose CA.

It's like the difference between high and low budget toilet paper, it really doesn't matter in the end. -exweedfarmer

Which is smarter? Just sticking to making/selling karaoke, while people all over the world create software FOR FREE that helps you sell it, or trying to compete with them and keeping it a closed loop while you blow your money into an industry (software) that you(the karaoke manu) knows nothing about?
-me

I think it would be good and simple. The only problem I foresee is if there is a challenge or change in the licensing agreement after the stamp of approval is given. But perhaps I have lawsuits on the brain lately......

So you are saying that someone/something like KJPro would oversee researching the licensing and we would buy into the service? I guess the main thing people would want is to know it was an unbiased and somehow official overseer of the process. Otherwise, more arguing....

Well, just like IMDB, there would be a basic set of "free info". Just to get basic info about licensees

and just like the IMDB, there would be a paid set of "professional info" (actual contact info for licensees)

Wait a second.. I just had a crazy thought here.

What are the laws concerning movies that they MUST include credits? (including licensing info, like "LICENSED FROM BMI")

Why isn't karaoke doing the same? I think some do (I remember ALOT of my DK songs have licensing info on them at the beginning or end of a song) Why did they stop that practice?

I think we should demand they start including it again on their tracks.

(edit: i gotta turn off my signature, getting annoying re-editing to get rid of it)

I'm going to ruffle a few feathers with my comment but I think it needs doing.

I don't particularly care about the licensing. The licensing is up to those who create and sell karaoke tracks. If a manufacturer or their agent sells me a bum track without proper licensing, they hold the liability for it.

If an artist or producer approaches me about his song that i'm playing in a show, I'll just point him to the guy who sold it to me and is selling more than the one copy I use. If I have to stop using it, I'll join the artist in the lawsuit.

As KJs we are small potatoes to the artists.
Just as the manufacturers will try to sue KJs into becoming customers, the artists can go sue the manufacturers into becoming customers.

In fact, I think that's how a lot of this sue them into customership started except it started at the top and rolled downhill.

What we really need is a way for the KJ to sue the home user for singing karaoke without the use of a certified KJ.

As far as data bases go, I'd like a community driven (wiki) data base of karaoke songs in which the fields are:
Title
Artist
Manufacturer (label)
Release date
Sellers (where it can be purchased)
CD name
Available for download
Private use only
Public use

I think that would be very useful in finding new music.

Then the artists and producers would have an easy place to look to verify that their work is not being infringed on and then could force proper licensing from the manufacturers and sellers if needed. And we would be left out of the legal side of things. All we would do is input the data on our latest find if it's not already on the list.

I'd put that together myself, but my resourses are too small.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Not trustworthy. Many pirated tracks are plainly marked "Used By Permission." when in fact they are not.

What you are proposing (IMHO) needs to be a third party not associated with KJ's OR manufacturers where licensing information must be submitted (and held confidentially) before being "approved" for use.

This would require that ALL manufacturers selling in the U.S. submit licensing information for every track they sell/sold. Each Track can THEN - and ONLY then - be issued a verifiable "license number."

It still doesn't stop mfg's from "overpressing" their licensed amounts however.

It is a sticky web...

Since licenses are negotiated, everything is private from the advance you pay to the per track value you settle on. It is private industry, so no one will reveal this information. And besides, all YOU need to know is that the manufacturers have the license, you don't need to know if it was for each song. If a manufacturer releases a song they shouldn't, the publishers will take care of that manufacturer - this is not your problem. What you need is the associations/agencies to list the valid members, which they do but not for karaoke suppliers. SOCAN is one agency that we are members of and they list us as a download service, because we are a good role model. But if the other agencies we use did that then you wouldn't need to ask them or us, it would be listed and obvious. I asked our reps once to check to see if another of the competitors is under their wing eventhough it was obvious, but they answered it was private information. So unless alot of people start wondering and asking the agency, is this really your client then will they only inform you. The bigger issue is the illegal reseller, and I've talked to many reps and they seem to also ask the publishers "why", why aren't they doing anything against them, well simply they aren't important enough. They prefer to keep the manufacturer in check - this is why the USA manufacturers are disgruntled, they have been hit so many times for doing the wrong thing that they've decided to kick it back to the KJ. Their approach to attack downloads for KJs and manufacturers outside the USA is not the answer - what needs to change is how publishers and agencies identify the legal providers. I am sad to say that will not happen soon. You need to find a trusted source for this information - NO, do not ask the manufacturers who will always respond YES. NO, DO NOT ask me, because 1) I don't want the heavy responsibility, and 2) I will always be seen as biased. NO, don't ask the publishers, they will always say that it is confidential or deny everything because it doesn't need to be public knowledge.

You all should understand that if none of the manufacturers were denying you use of their tracks as KJs and for no reason going after you, you would never have needed to know any of this. Infact none of this information is any of a KJs business - NONE OF IT. You just need to know the manufacturer you got it from, show proof of receipt. If the manufacturer was illegal the publisher needs to sue them, not you - you bought it from a manufacturer which claimed to be legal and the publisher didn't take measures to shut them down. But the publishers sued the manufacturers for things they saw wrong so to get back at the publishers and get back the money, they now involved the KJ. Prove to me that this is not true, and that all this running around you are doing which never happened ever before is even a requirement - the system hasn't changed so why has the KJs role all of a sudden included checking for licensing and wondering if the songs are licensed??!! When ws it the responsibility of the KJ to go after the reseller to ensure the manufacturer is licensed and giving permission to use the song?? I understand promoting and selling legal content and hiring KJs that have the legal content, but it should be as easy as "please show me your receipts", I see you have bought from "Joe Shmo", let me check the agency list and see if Joe Shmo is a registered legal manufacturer/reseller - if yes, thank you I will hire you because you are a real KJ -- if no, sorry you must atleast have songs from legal resellers or please have the reseller drop us a note to provide us account/license numbers. But it's not, it's buy my song twice and I will not sue you, OR be fearful of everyone except us OR we are the best association and if you don't subscribe to us then you are all being sued - you would all agree this has to stop.

I would recommend an associated of KJs made for KJs with a rep from either one of the agencies (because they cover multiple publishers) who holds a list of valid and legal manufacturers/distributors - they know who to call and they know who to contact to confirm - then a list on the website for the respetive. KJs are members of this and cover the cost, ofcourse it will be non-profit. Confirmed members are added for free. You may also be able to get funding from member publishers and labels. Or just ask one of the agencies to make some kind of list available and maintained (again, pay them moeny they will do anything for you). It CAN NOT be a biased group opened by the manufacturer and CAN NOT be anyone related to any of the distributors (Sorry, not me). Someone has to step up. I already see a leader in Toqer (Robert) so maybe you want to follow him on this.

Thank you.

_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"

I have a slight problem with this:


And that is that while you want to force "compliance" on a KJ by requesting a receipt, there is nothing that has prevented other manufacturers from suing KJ's regarding tracks which were not only not licensed, but are STILL not licensed....

I don't know about other KJ's but I would like the same "receipt requirement" on the manufacturers regarding licensing as you want on a KJ purchasing a track. I don't care what they paid for it, or what the scope is, but I want to know that it is IN FACT, in place.

It's simply a similar requirement on the same manufacturers that are requiring receipts from us. I can't understand why any manufacturer would feel that this would be unfair.

CB "claims" they purchased the catalog for SGB and even that they have "registered the copyrights" however upon inspection, there is nothing of the sort to be found and they are nothing but evasive about it when asked for it. Not even licensing information but simply for them to substantiate their own claims. which they refuse to do.

If that doesn't send up any red flags, what does?

As much as you want that, it is confidential - you need a "neutral" party who has the list. That is all you need. Manufacturers sue you on the use, and yes they can sue you for using their content even if they didn't license it - this has nothing to do with licensing and you knowing if it is valid. Here is an example:

1. I go to Cuba and buy cigars
2. I bring them to you in the USA and you decide not to pay me
3. I take you to court and sue you for stealing my cigars and win
4. But no one here bothered to sue me for bringing in illegal cigars into the country

Can you distinguish the difference? We are not talking about the manufacturer suing you for random reasons, no one can stop that unless you intend to rewrite USA law - unfortunately the one with more money wins this. If a manufacturer does not want to sell you content, don't buy it (you should get the hint after they sue you the first time) - probably a good suggestion. What we are talking about is how to identify that the provider has given you legal content. If the provider changes their mind, you want to atleast see on the receipt their name, a tracking code, and a note somewhere (website, receipt, anywhere) that they give you permission for your particular use. If they don't then you can't use their stuff, don't start looking for a way around it or an excuse - you CAN'T end of story. So you start with;

1. is this manufacturer/supplier legal, check the list on the association website which is trusted
2. check the terms and conditions of the manufacturer/supplier, do they allow KJs to use the content
3. can you afford the songs they provide

How does a venue owner check the KJ;

1. Please show me a receipt (atleast one)
2. visit non-profit website, check for manufacturer/supplier
3. can ask association to email privately contact of manufacturer/supplier to confirm receipt tracking code -- if association is not a member, a dedicated member will attempt to contact X supplier or contact appropriate industry reps to confirm (the reps KNOW!)
4. Hire KJ if the answer is; this person is cool

How does an agency check the venue owner (with ASCAP as an example);

1. Hello owner, did you pay your ASCAP blanket license and report karaoke at your venue and mark an entertainer
2. Yes and yes
3. I see you hired a new KJ, did you check his receipts
4. Absolutely, I-AM-A-LEGAL-KJ.com clears them 100%
5. Superb, carry on

-OR-

4. No, I-AM-A-LEGAL-KJ.com does not have any clue who he bought songs from and no one can confirm it
5. If they have no proof receipts, did they atleast have some sort of evidence of purchase
6. No
7. Please ask the KJ to show some form of proof or you will have to let them go or be fined
8. Understood

-OR-

4. No, I-AM-A-LEGAL-KJ.com does not have any of his suppliers listed
5. But he has alternate formats from manufacturers
6. Do they list as legal under I-AM-A-LEGAL-KJ.com, yes
7. Superb, carry on

That's really it. No sueing, A PROPER check for piracy, no getting in trouble, and no gray area. You don't even need to carry or show the whole disc/download collection if you have the receipts. You might also want to have a list of which manufacturers and suppliers have "USE" for HOME and ENTERTAINMENT (or a checkbox of each on the main list). Who wants to start this? Work together and make chapters nation wide - you might want to ask CDJA and ADJA to take care of this, they are a neutral party and have chapters. CDJA is also non-profit and accepts USA residents -- maybe it should be a member benefit. Understand that these associations alone cover you by offering you licenses with discounts, insurance, certifications, and an association to protect you.

You know the answer may just be that you should join a proper DJ association/group.

We should hammer on all interested parties. This includes Manu's, KIAA, ASCAP/BMI/SESAC. Should also hammer on any software or hardware vendors and distributors as well.

If we stand united, we can squash all this squabbling that's plagued our industry.. We're so divided, we can't get anyone to put anything in print or in writing. I think it's time to take action. Time to make them put up, or shut up.

I think even the KIAA supporters can agree.


Tricera:
I know the manu's would have a hard time giving up their contact info, but in the bigger picture of things, this creates an open marketplace for direct licensing. Every company would pay for that. Someone just needs to "seed the tipjar" so to speak with some starter info(in KJ terms, nobody puts anything in an empty tipjar, fill it with a buck or two, and people are compelled to look at it)

The trick would be though, once seeded, word needs to get out to the licensees, "Hey guys, we got this awesome new site if you ever want to license your stuff for karaoke, just sign in, and tell us what songs you own the copyright for"

See, this way you're not asking any companies to give up any info. Hopefully (with the right marketing, and partnerships between licensing agencies) we could even get some mentions in the monthly newsletters the licensing agencies (ascap/bmi/sesac) send out.

Artist would be getting double pay (live ascap/bmi/sesac) in addition to whatever karaoke licensing they sell.

I could see the karaoke manu's drooling at the mouth to have direct access to licensees. We don't charge the artist for the listing, don't charge the venue for researching a KJ, don't charge the KJ for researching the basic licensing of a track, we DO charge for access to a direct licensees contact info.

As far as enforcement goes...

If the manu's are funding this (through the model I describe above) there's no reason we couldn't do real investigations (the right way, not breaking laws) Hire state licensed PI's, and lawyers in the actual area where the case takes place, instead of the tactic of throwing mud at the wall and seeing what sticks. (There could be some preliminary investigation by a local KJ before it's handed off to a state licensed PI)

I've never agreed with keeping pirates in business via settlements. I think if I were king for a day, I'd say the only settlement we give them is a non-compete agreement for 4 years (as long as the state supports that) Barring non-competes, just make sure to sue the KJ to oblivion. Give the venue a chance to hire another KJ, one that's been starving because some knucklehead down the street has been stealing his business.

I'm pretty hardline against pirates. As a KJ, I have no interest in keeping them in business whatsoever. A manufacturer has an interest in settling, but I don't.

I would like to point out that the simple data base model I descibed earlier resolves much of the licensing issue.

As KJs we report our newest finds of music and where we aquired it. The owners of the rights would be able to search the data base for their property and if they find something they have not released rights to, they can easily see who they need to go after for compensation.

Since this data base would be publicly veiwable, as KJs we would be insulated from liabilty for using unlicensed material if a rights owner did not post an objection and persue the seller.



Amen



Amen Again

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Absolutely. Cuban cigars are illegal to bring into this country - even through Canada. U.S. Customs would want to have a word with you. It's similar to suing a drug dealer for stealing your marijuana, cocaine or meth. See how far you get with it EVEN IF, through "discovery" it is determined that the contraband has not been destroyed. Do you think you'd get it back? Nope. Do you think it would confiscated by Customs? Yep, and you'd get prosecuted for it. So it's not anything close to what we are dealing with here. Your lawsuit would be an admission that you violated U.S. Customs laws... good luck with that one because you wouldn't get anywhere.

You're taking the same position as a manufacturer in all this:
"We'll take your money and you show us a receipt whenever we decide to demand one and we don't ever have to do anything.... ever."

Sorry, but that's unacceptable. Why don't YOU permanently mark and register your product? YOU "keep track" of the products "you sell" and "you get paid for." Why is it suddenly acceptable for manufacturers to demand proof-of-payment?

Besides the famous Eagles disc, there are plenty of other discs from manufacturers that were not only produced illegally, but some that are STILL on the market that were produced illegally. Are you suggesting that because it's simply none of our business that a manufacturer can now come back years later and sue a KJ for using a disc/track they had NO RIGHT TO PRODUCE in the first place? An unlicensed karaoke track is a counterfeit track - pure and simple - designed to "look authentic" but without any rights to exist in the first place - that's called "fraud."

You are suggesting that it's simply "none of our business" whether or not it's "legal?"

I disagree. I haven't made millions off playing these illegal karaoke tracks, but manufacturers have made millions producing and selling them and so have distributors from selling them as well. But of course you wouldn't want anyone to look closer at either of them would you?

And why should a venue owner become involved in the purchasing practices of a vendor?

As a distributor of karaoke tracks, did you check your vendor to see if it was acceptable merchandise for you to pass along to your customers and not counterfeit, stolen or anything else illegal? No, you don't, but you want venue owners to do what you are unwilling to do:


Really? How do we KJ's know that the merchandise YOU want to sell us legal? Wouldn't it be fair and equitable to do the very same with you?":

How does a KJ check a distributor?
1. Please show us a receipt (at least ONE) or authorization that permits you to sell us the protected works of others in question.
2. visit non-profit website, check for manufacturer/publisher authorization
3. can ask association to email privately contact of manufacturer/publisher to confirm receipt tracking code -- if association is not a member, a dedicated member will attempt to contact X manufacturer or contact appropriate industry publishers.
4. Purchase tracks if the answer is; this person is cool

You see, it's a whole bunch of work that no one wants to do: publishers don't, you don't, manufacturer's don't, KJ's don't and last but not least: venue owners don't and won't. It's simply easier to plop a few more dart machines or hire a one man band or even hold a trivia night because karaoke has become a hot potato.

With all this squabbling and suing, I see this business destroying itself now from the inside out...

I agree wholeheartedly, but remember, there has to be a 2 way street here. Manu's need something, some sort of guarantee they get something out of this.

Let's say a manu wants to start a round of lawsuits against pirates. They check the list of KJ's in the area that are actively buying content, and compare that to a list of all KJ's in the area. The ones not actively buying content, are the ones you go after (none of this see what sticks BS, and it cuts down on the amount of "false positives")


I feel the same way, which is why I've been pretty direct in my posts (notice, the KIAA has suddenly become strangely quiet after my astroturfing post, and they're strangely absent from this one)

I think venues would be interested in checking a KJ if they were educated a bit. I sold my first client outside of bamboo this week because I pointed out "You could lose your liquor license hiring the wrong guy" Thing is, most venue owners don't know this.

And don't sue venues (unless they repeatedly hire pirate KJ's) The venue is where KJ's make their money, to buy the tracks, that pay the licensing, that pays the artist.

Overall though, we as KJ's have to stop squabbling amongst ourselves, and start demanding that the publishers "show us the money" instead of pitting us against one another.

I've often thought there was a strategy behind this. Keep us fighting so we stay so un-organised, we don't have time (or the will) to come together to demand they provide documentation to their claims.

Also, if we want this, we will have to create it c.staley. All of us will have to dedicate at least a little time (hour a week maybe?) doing data entry.

Earthling, your idea makes sense. I've done a few wikimedia installs, so maybe I'll look at that as a framework. Problem is wikimedia is TOO customisable, and what we need could really be broken down into just a few, easy to use fields (instead of infinite formatting options as provided by wikimedia)

Thing is though guys (kj's) is this is going to have to be a 2 way street, and some level of trust has to be established between the KJ's, manus, and whoever is put in charge of this beast.