|
|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
| Author |
Message |
|
c. staley
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 6:50 am |
|
 |
| Extreme Poster |
 |
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4839
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 582 times
|
Paradigm Karaoke wrote: we're still here, just no point in getting riled up over this. either they did say libelous statements or they did not. no major corporation would give out information pertaining to a pending law suit, so why bother? gotta wait it out. I'm not asking for information regarding their pending lawsuit. Just a copy of the letter they've apparently mailed to dozens of others over the years. There is no injunction preventing them from continuing to send them out, so what's the problem again? Think of this just like an audit they like to use on KJ's, either you can produce or you're labeled as "guilty" and obviously hiding something nefarious....
|
|
| Top |
|
 |
|
Loneavenger
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 8:36 am |
|
|
| Novice Poster |
 |
Joined: Tue Dec 29, 2009 2:25 pm
Posts: 30
Location: Mechanicsville, VA
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
In my opinion all i've ever seen mentioned are pre-loaded CAVS units being mentioned anywhere , so i don't see how that can bring on a lawsuit. BUT, i doubt i've seen all of the documentation that's been sent out. I'm just sitting back and waiting to see how this one plays out.
_________________ Proud User of EV Tour X
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:44 am |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am
Posts: 691
Location: Carson City, NV
Been Liked: 0 time
|
c. staley wrote: Paradigm Karaoke wrote: we're still here, just no point in getting riled up over this. either they did say libelous statements or they did not. no major corporation would give out information pertaining to a pending law suit, so why bother? gotta wait it out. I'm not asking for information regarding their pending lawsuit. Just a copy of the letter they've apparently mailed to dozens of others over the years. There is no injunction preventing them from continuing to send them out, so what's the problem again? Think of this just like an audit they like to use on KJ's, either you can produce or you're labeled as "guilty" and obviously hiding something nefarious.... Start here: http://www.google.com/search?q=sound+choice+cavs+letter
_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
leopard lizard
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 10:00 am |
|
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2008 4:18 pm
Posts: 2593
Been Liked: 294 times
|
|
I haven't sprang for the lawsuit like Chip has but I am wondering if what will come out of this as a side issue is a decision on computer use, with or without manufacturer permission. It is one thing to say that buying a preloaded CAVS without the SC discs included is an illegal use (and as a true statement wouldn't be liable) but both SC and CB are also saying that to use a computer at all without their permission is illegal. As CAVS is a computer designed specifically for playing karaoke, that would imply that using a CAVS machine without SCs and CBs permission was illegal. Maybe CAVS wants to challenge that also. A computer can be used for all sorts of other uses but a CAVs is just for playing back music so they would find their sales impacted by SCs/CBs position.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:13 am |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am
Posts: 1066
Location: Madison VA
Been Liked: 0 time
|
leopard lizard wrote: I haven't sprang for the lawsuit like Chip has but I am wondering if what will come out of this as a side issue is a decision on computer use, with or without manufacturer permission. It is one thing to say that buying a preloaded CAVS without the SC discs included is an illegal use (and as a true statement wouldn't be liable) but both SC and CB are also saying that to use a computer at all without their permission is illegal. As CAVS is a computer designed specifically for playing karaoke, that would imply that using a CAVS machine without SCs and CBs permission was illegal. Maybe CAVS wants to challenge that also. A computer can be used for all sorts of other uses but a CAVs is just for playing back music so they would find their sales impacted by SCs/CBs position. Neither Sound Choice nor Chartbuster has said that computer use is illegal. and Sound Choice has never actually said that the CAVs player is illegal either. What they both have always maintained is that the shifting of their media for use on Computer and/or the CAV's hard drive systems "without their permission is a violation of trademark rules and subject to suit". There is a huge difference. SC has also stated many times (and I believe this is where the CAVs lawsuit bases it's claim) is that purchasing a CAVs system preloaded with SC material and operating it in a public venue is illegal because SC never authorized CAVs to load SC material. (sort of makes it an illegal system doesn't it?) Where the sticker comes for CAVs in this case is that it really doesn't make any difference if it was done by CAVs themselves or one of their dealers before it was sold.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:37 am |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am
Posts: 691
Location: Carson City, NV
Been Liked: 0 time
|
Thunder wrote: leopard lizard wrote: I haven't sprang for the lawsuit like Chip has but I am wondering if what will come out of this as a side issue is a decision on computer use, with or without manufacturer permission. It is one thing to say that buying a preloaded CAVS without the SC discs included is an illegal use (and as a true statement wouldn't be liable) but both SC and CB are also saying that to use a computer at all without their permission is illegal. As CAVS is a computer designed specifically for playing karaoke, that would imply that using a CAVS machine without SCs and CBs permission was illegal. Maybe CAVS wants to challenge that also. A computer can be used for all sorts of other uses but a CAVs is just for playing back music so they would find their sales impacted by SCs/CBs position. Neither Sound Choice nor Chartbuster has said that computer use is illegal. and Sound Choice has never actually said that the CAVs player is illegal either. What they both have always maintained is that the shifting of their media for use on Computer and/or the CAV's hard drive systems "without their permission is a violation of trademark rules and subject to suit". There is a huge difference. SC has also stated many times (and I believe this is where the CAVs lawsuit bases it's claim) is that purchasing a CAVs system preloaded with SC material and operating it in a public venue is illegal because SC never authorized CAVs to load SC material. (sort of makes it an illegal system doesn't it?) Where the sticker comes for CAVs in this case is that it really doesn't make any difference if it was done by CAVs themselves or one of their dealers before it was sold. Tom Turner, GM of SC at the time said the following in February 2003 in a private email posted on MTU's site which you will find a link on top of the Google search I posted above. At least it appears first today. "The first is that it is completely illegal. Copyright law (for all copyrighted materials - books, music, artwork, etc.) expressly prohibits the use of copies for ANY commercial use. That means that a copy -either onto a disc or a hard drive - cannot be used for any commercial purpose. A copy cannot be sold, given away as a promotional item, played on a for hire or promotional basis, and so forth."
_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 11:59 am |
|
|
| Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4839
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 582 times
|
Wall Of Sound wrote: That's nice and I appreciate the search link, however I was looking for SC to respond to you (all of us) regarding this matter. Have you asked SC for a copy of the letters sent? If it's a simple misunderstanding that can be cleared up pretty easy, I don't see why they wouldn't be forthright in providing that at least to their "best" customers... the ones that traveled to their meeting. Or is there some other reason to keep it hidden until the court forces it out in the public?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
timberlea
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:25 pm |
|
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 12:41 pm
Posts: 4094
Location: Dartmouth, Nova Scotia, Canada
Been Liked: 309 times
|
|
Chip why should they? Just to satisfy you? I think not. I certainly wouldn't release any information (either as a Complainant or Defendant) in any legal proceddings and if people don't like it - too darn bad. At that point it is between me, the other parties, and the judge (and jury, if applicable).
_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:35 pm |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am
Posts: 691
Location: Carson City, NV
Been Liked: 0 time
|
c. staley wrote: Wall Of Sound wrote: That's nice and I appreciate the search link, however I was looking for SC to respond to you (all of us) regarding this matter. Have you asked SC for a copy of the letters sent? Have you asked Cavs USA Inc. for a copy of the alleged libelous content in their exhibits? Don't you have the entire lawsuit you pulled off PACER? Why not post it in it's entirety?
_________________
"Just Say NO, To Justin Bieber & His Beatle Haircut"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 12:50 pm |
|
|
| Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4839
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 582 times
|
Wall Of Sound wrote: Have you asked Cavs USA Inc. for a copy of the alleged libelous content in their exhibits? You really don't know how lawsuits work do you? Exhibits are NOT filed with the complaint and will come at a later date. And they will come. I was just wondering if SC would be transparent enough to even bother to admit that perhaps this was all a misunderstanding. If they are so sure that it's just a misunderstanding or error on the part of CAVs, they should at least tell you so. The letters will appear as "evidence" and we can all judge that later. Again, I'm just wondering why there is so much silence here? Wall Of Sound wrote: Don't you have the entire lawsuit you pulled off PACER? I do, thanks for asking and I'm still monitoring their other active suits... Wall Of Sound wrote: Why not post it in it's entirety? At a mere 8 CENTS a page, you can do that yourself. And if you don't even download $10 worth, it's FREE... This suit is only 12 pages or 96 pennies. Surely you can do that will all the money you save with the special deals you get right? That "certification" should be making you lots of money.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Paradigm Karaoke
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 3:11 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm
Posts: 5107
Location: Phoenix Az
Been Liked: 1279 times
|
so Wall needs to present information you demand, but anything asks you to present is not your problem? 
_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Wall Of Sound
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 4:09 pm |
|
Joined: Thu May 06, 2010 10:35 am
Posts: 691
Location: Carson City, NV
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 5:01 pm |
|
|
| Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4839
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 582 times
|
Paradigm Karaoke wrote: so Wall needs to present information you demand, but anything asks you to present is not your problem? I'm not asking wall to present anything. I'm simply asking him to ask Sound Choice. He seems to be in contact regularly with the their investigators and them... he should be able to get at least a response... I'm certainly not asking him to answer anything for Sound Choice and as far as the copy of the suit is concerned it IS available to EVERYONE right now. Nothing's being hidden or ignored. And you can get it free or at the most, 96 CENTS.... Is 96 cents too much for a "Nevada's First Certified?"
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Mon Jul 11, 2011 9:56 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am
Posts: 1066
Location: Madison VA
Been Liked: 0 time
|
Wall Of Sound wrote: Thunder wrote: leopard lizard wrote: I haven't sprang for the lawsuit like Chip has but I am wondering if what will come out of this as a side issue is a decision on computer use, with or without manufacturer permission. It is one thing to say that buying a preloaded CAVS without the SC discs included is an illegal use (and as a true statement wouldn't be liable) but both SC and CB are also saying that to use a computer at all without their permission is illegal. As CAVS is a computer designed specifically for playing karaoke, that would imply that using a CAVS machine without SCs and CBs permission was illegal. Maybe CAVS wants to challenge that also. A computer can be used for all sorts of other uses but a CAVs is just for playing back music so they would find their sales impacted by SCs/CBs position. Neither Sound Choice nor Chartbuster has said that computer use is illegal. and Sound Choice has never actually said that the CAVs player is illegal either. What they both have always maintained is that the shifting of their media for use on Computer and/or the CAV's hard drive systems "without their permission is a violation of trademark rules and subject to suit". There is a huge difference. SC has also stated many times (and I believe this is where the CAVs lawsuit bases it's claim) is that purchasing a CAVs system preloaded with SC material and operating it in a public venue is illegal because SC never authorized CAVs to load SC material. (sort of makes it an illegal system doesn't it?) Where the sticker comes for CAVs in this case is that it really doesn't make any difference if it was done by CAVs themselves or one of their dealers before it was sold. Tom Turner, GM of SC at the time said the following in February 2003 in a private email posted on MTU's site which you will find a link on top of the Google search I posted above. At least it appears first today. "The first is that it is completely illegal. Copyright law (for all copyrighted materials - books, music, artwork, etc.) expressly prohibits the use of copies for ANY commercial use. That means that a copy -either onto a disc or a hard drive - cannot be used for any commercial purpose. A copy cannot be sold, given away as a promotional item, played on a for hire or promotional basis, and so forth."Opps someone posted a "private e-mail" then it wasn't a public statement and can not be considered in a libel case, I hope CAVs insn't hanging their hat on that one! Also something I noticed on the MTU site was someone making a statement about the 60 disc Sound Choice released using media clog and one guy ended up buying them all. I was a very regular SC buyer during the "mediaclog era" and only ended up with 3 disc with it on them. Does anyone know how many different SC disc had mediaclog? And now when did it really get started to the extent that it has almost put the manus out of business. Quote: Re: Copying A CD+G
Posted by Relay on Tue, 04/30/2002 - 02:12.
: : How do I copy a CD+G using Clone CD 3.3.2.1?
Just dropping a note about cd+g (karaoke) discs and how they can
easily be backed up.
First of all, CD+G format is used primarily for Karaoke discs. It
is extra data on the r-w channels on a cd that decodes to video.
Copying has prooven to be a task in the past. You needed an
expensive cdr/cdrw, special discs, scsi only, etc, etc.. but
things have come so far recently. We (the cd+g community) feel
the time is right for the rest of the world to get in on this new
technology.
To date, we can effectively take a cd+g track, turn it into 2
files, a .cdg and a .mp3 - these 2 files can be played on your
computer using programs such as wincdg [tyrannosoft(dot)com] You
can also take that file and re-expand it into a .bin file and use
cdrwin to burn it back to a disc. To do any of this you need a
compatable cdr/cdrw drive.[www(dot)mtu(dot)com] has a compatable
list. Goldenhawk has a list but it's the same list from 3 years
ago. I recommend plextor.
how do i....
First of all to take a cd+g track off of a cd you need cdrw
and a cd+g compatable reader. See above website. Open cdrwin,
choose extract disc/track/sectors, choose your reader, choose a
filename, choose what tracks you want, choose cd+g, choose name
files sequentially, and your set.
You will be left with .bin files. These files can be extracted to
.cdg and .mp3 using another tool of the rrade called mp+g tools.
Finding this program is a bit of a task. The maker asked me not
to post the program in full anywhere, only a link to his download
site so he could track the downloads, but shortly thereafter the
site went down. Now its back up. This site has absolutely no spam
or ads... [karaokedj(dot)dnsalias(dot)com/Mp3GToolz/ This program
is the easiest utilities program available to date for cdg. It
will do the following:
bin to mp3+g
bin to mp3+g to zip
mp3+g to zip
mp3+g to bin
zip mp3+g to bin
unzip folder
cuesheet creator
rename files
Quite versitile. You may want to have this just for it's unzip
folder options.
All of these files, along with the actual cdg + mp3 zips can be
found on my outsiderz.com channel (established 8/25/2000) channel
name is #CD+G
thats /SERVER hellbent.outsiderz.com in Mirc
We have also found a way to beat the newest protection on the
Soundchoice brand discs, but thats another conversation.
It was during this time period 2001 to 2003 when piracy began to really take off and a lot of honest KJs suddenly went from one to six systems in a matter of a few weeks this is also the time frame when Sound Choice sales hit a peak, this was because every KJ out there who was expanding from 1 to six or more systems were buying up everything they could get their hands on to copy. Around 2005 - 2006 the bottom dropped out for Sound Choice and the rest of the manus, as well as legitimate KJs, because the pirates were by now selling hard drives to anyone and everyone to make extra money on top of their $75 gigs and now we are where we are at today! The manus are now suing to try and recover some of what was stolen from them!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 12:14 am |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
|
I believe we will see at least two other suits regarding different issues before the end of the year. However, at this time it's mere rumor. Gonna wait and see....
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:13 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 22978
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Thunder wrote: Also something I noticed on the MTU site was someone making a statement about the 60 disc Sound Choice released using media clog and one guy ended up buying them all. I was a very regular SC buyer during the "mediaclog era" and only ended up with 3 disc with it on them. Does anyone know how many different SC disc had mediaclog? They were orignally on the Spotlight 8700-8735 and a handful of reprints spanning all the series but all were discontinued when they found legitimate players (all DVD hybrids) couldn't play them either. After that they (SC) did offer non-mediacloq replacements for the cost of shipping. Don't know if that is still in effect or not. I have 1 disc I need replaced but never pursued it. _________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
Thunder
|
Posted: Tue Jul 12, 2011 1:34 pm |
|
Joined: Thu Dec 23, 2010 9:36 am
Posts: 1066
Location: Madison VA
Been Liked: 0 time
|
|
Yes all three of mine were in the 8700 series, but I have many others from that series that did not have mediaclog on them.
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
The Lone Ranger
|
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 7:53 am |
|
|
| Extreme Plus Poster |
 |
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 6103
Been Liked: 634 times
|
[quote="Thunder"] Neither Sound Choice nor Chartbuster has said that computer use is illegal. and Sound Choice has never actually said that the CAVs player is illegal either. What they both have always maintained is that the shifting of their media for use on Computer and/or the CAV's hard drive systems "without their permission is a violation of trademark rules and subject to suit".  I have kept all my old Sound Choice and Chartbuster , plastic containers and disc cases and no mention of media shifting is printed on them. Is this only an after thought, when the technology became available to do so?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
The Lone Ranger
|
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 8:06 am |
|
|
| Extreme Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 8:22 am
Posts: 6103
Been Liked: 634 times
|
[quote="Thunder It was during this time period 2001 to 2003 when piracy began to really take off and a lot of honest KJs suddenly went from one to six systems in a matter of a few weeks this is also the time frame when Sound Choice sales hit a peak, this was because every KJ out there who was expanding from 1 to six or more systems were buying up everything they could get their hands on to copy. Around 2005 - 2006 the bottom dropped out for Sound Choice and the rest of the manus, as well as legitimate KJs, because the pirates were by now selling hard drives to anyone and everyone to make extra money on top of their $75 gigs and now we are where we are at today! The manus are now suing to try and recover some of what was stolen from them![/quote]  Thanks for making the point that the manus have been losing sales and market share for almost 11 years now. The question is now how much longer can they continue, I don't know of many business's that could lose money for that many quarters and still be in business. With all the money they are paying on these suits, how long will it be if none are settled, that they will become bankrupt themselves? Is that why both Sound Choice and Chartbuster are charging for their audits now, they simply cannot afford to do them for free?
|
|
| Top |
|
|
|
JoeChartreuse
|
Posted: Sat Jul 16, 2011 9:41 am |
|
Joined: Wed Feb 07, 2007 1:12 pm
Posts: 5046
Been Liked: 334 times
|
Bazza wrote: 1) All mass marketed yellow lagers are horse tinkle. 2) When home, I drink my own Bazza brew.  1) Actually, I don't drink beer at all, because if it looks the same going in as coming out, it hardly seems worth the effort..  2) Considering my first statement, I get an icky image of you drinking Bazza Brew at home.....  
_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"
" Disc based and loving it..."
|
|
| Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 176 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
