Karaoke Forums

...always the same broken record playing the same half-truths, legend & lore.

that is not a half-truth, nor is it legend or lore, it is fact.
it has been stated too many times to count on this forum and others by both SC & CB that they can not give permission to media shift.
so if Kurt & Debi say they can not give you permission, and Joe says Kurt and Debi said they can not give permission, .....which part is half-truth legend or lore?

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

can we get back to the original hijacked topic.. trying to get soundschoice to get licesning to put their tracks on a HARD DRIVE legally so that this entire stupid debate become completely unecessary.. now THAT would be a real accomplishemnt..

So you are actually stating here on the forum that the major companies HAVEN'T said on their sites that they to not have the right to grant permission to media shift? Are you really saying that?

If so, I would suggest that you contact your favorite companies and ask them directly. They WILL confirm my statement. If YOU do the work ( give it a try- work won't kill you), then you will actually KNOW the facts, and won't have to question me.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

I purchased the entire GEM series from SC and during the transaction I informed them that I would be putting the music on a hard drive. They sent me stickers to apply to my system and I filled out a couple of documents stating that I was media shifting. No problems!

_________________
KODAA Enterprise Karaoke
International KJ Host
Chartbuster Certified Library 9 Jan. 2012

Exactly. I have permission, as does every GEM owner.

1.5 years with GEM set one. No audit. No increase. No fees. No demands for business records. No calls. No knocks on the door.

No problem.

So if sc said they can not give permission, and give you permission, who is getting lied to, all those on this and other forums, or the gem series customers? It must be one of the two, so which of us is getting lied to?
Or is this where you again ignore my question for it not being supportive of sc? I am awaiting, but not expecting you to answer.

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

Or is it they cannot give permission to say yes on shifting a cdg to computer. The GEM series was created for that exact intent and all the files are already in a computer format.

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!

they said media shift is not allowed, and they can not give permission to do so. example.....CB now sells their discs with CDG and MP3+G tracks. they still are not able to give permission to media shift from original media to a computer. According to SC & CB, even downloads are not legal as they transfer from one computer to another. i can see how the extortion argument came about..."i can not give you permission to do that, but if you pay me $x.00, i wont tell anyone and just look the other way. if i saw people breaking federal laws and looked the other way and did nothing, that is my right to be an uncaring a$$ hole, now if i wanted a fee to look the other way and do nothing, then i am committing extortion.

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

From what I gather, they (SC & CB etc.) can not give you permission to shift as they do not own the music or lyrics you are shifting.

What they are OVER LOOKING is you shifting their logo's and will not sue if you have permission from them to do so.

If you shift and have permission from them (SC etc.) the MUSIC OWNERS could still sue you if they wanted to.

_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet

SC has always said that they could only speak for their own rights and not the music owner's. It has recently been further explained that there are differences in seeking damages between trademark and copyright. So SC has been acting on only their own rights in saying that they wouldn't seek damages if you are 1:1.

I have not seen it written anywhere in their explanations that they were going to cover up or not tell the music publishers or in any way interfere with the music pubishers asserting their own rights. I would think with all of the publicity that the music owners are well aware of what is going on. SC HAS said in the past, that if you are 1:1, there would probably not be any damages that could be proven, as far as the copyright went. But it is still a risk that anyone shifting should be aware that they take. But so far as I have understood it, the money that SC has been seeking are for the cost of what was stolen from them plus the court costs involved in recovering it. Never seen them promise that the damages they recover would go toward not telling the music owners. That is just a twist that someone on here is trying to put on it.

Ignore again? Huh? What have I been ignoring?! Forgive me if I don't join you guy's in arguing the same BS over & over again in multiple threads. I must have missed it.

My GEM license section 4c states I can and that's good enough for me!