Karaoke Forums

I wrote to Dan to see what was up with him & his law suit and I got this response from him.

I don't have time to mess with boards anymore, since I now have primary custody or my 2 year old daughter and have 6 karaoke shows a week. Business has never been better for me.

A whole lot of not much is happening in the karaoke lawsuit. The time for discovery has run out and Sound Choice has failed to disclose anything or make any discovery requests, so they're going to be unable to present a case. One of the other defendants has filed a Motion To Dismiss based upon that, so we're just waiting for it to be dismissed. The people who paid off Sound Choice and settled were foolish, as Sound Choice never actually bothered to do any real litigation action at all against the people who filed answers to the court and contested them. As for the second case in Phoenix, the judge ruled that to put so many defendants into a single case was improper joinder, and dismissed the case against every defendant but the first listed, and ordered that they needed to file against each defendant individually. It's pretty much fallen apart in court for Sound Choice, but their scare tactics have still amazingly convinced many KJs who are ignorant of the law and their rights into making settlements and submitting to audits they didn't have to.
Every now and again I still browse the KJ boards, and I just laugh at the KJs who are proud to have wasted their time and effort to undergo Sound Choice audits.

_________________
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

This is interesting - a (near as I can tell) legitimate comment from someone in the teeth of this whole legal snafu, who seems to have come out of the legal dealings with Sound Choice without a scrape and nobody is commenting on it beside diafel? I find this to be very strange. Where are the SC followers?

I'm pretty sure it's a totally legit copy of his email. I've had my own behind the scenes communication with Dan and the details of what he says are too close to even think it's made up. Glad he finally got custody of his daughter.
As for the SC cheerleaders, really, what can they say?

Guaranteed it's copied and pasted right from his email to me without changing a word.
I wrote to him asking if he could tell me what was going on with his law suit and if I could post it and he said yes I could.

_________________
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

I figured as much. I did the same quite some time ago and he also gave me permission to copy and post here, which I did. Thanks for the update. I emailed him a couple of weeks ago but didn't get an answer. I think my mail was lost in him spam folder. It happened once before...

it is interesting to see. glad somebody else got to say what happened in the AZ suits. i wonder if the suits will be refiled individually. i still want to see a pirate hanged from the mainsail.

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

If they are hanging from the mainsail it'll be with a brand spanking new set of Sound Choice Gems hanging from their belt. Pirates are potential customers, not to be punished, but to be treasured.

I already knew this- though SC supporters will claim great falsehoods. To those who agree with them I say post ANY link that says otherwise...

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

This SC fan says: If you are legit, you are legit. Congratulations.

And this SC fan still things it stinks for someone to buy an illegal hard drive full of karaoke songs and not pay for the music, like the legit KJ's have. Weather SC can continue to pursue this litigation, only time will tell. I still hate to see someone with a illegal HD full of stolen music, get away with it, and laugh in the face of the company they stole from.

While the letter was an interesting read, I think it only hinders SC ability to recoup some of the lost revenues they so badly need to recover. I'm sure many of you will consider this a victory for the nay-sayers, but it's just wrong.

Just sayin'

_________________
My first choice IS Sound Choice.

So you're the official judge here? You've decided that Dan Dan is guilty of stealing with no proof of anything? How "North Carolinian" of you!

I look at it this way:
Dan Dan doesn't need to be in a hurry to do anything... The burden of proof is still on the plaintiff.

SC is (and has) done very little in the 2 YEARS since this case was filed. If their case is such an easy slam dunk, what's the problem?

The problem is that Dan Dan actually owns the discs. He refused to cave to SC's strong arm tactics that they employed and decided to fight it out in court. Except SC clearly doesn't want to go to court, as can be evidenced by their lack of action, despite Dan doing everything in his power to get things moving. The end result will likely be that the motion to dismiss will be granted. Too bad.
The way it looks to me is that by allowing this to happen, it clearly shows that even SC knows that their case has no teeth and that these lawsuits are what I originally stated they were: nothing more than extortion to get unsuspecting and uneducated KJs to fill SC's pockets, irregardless of guilt and whether they deserve to or not.

Chip, nowhere in my post did I mention Dan Dan. Only people in general who buy a loaded hard drive, use it in a show, and not have the original disks to back it up. Not a judgement. Only an opinion.

What's your opinion of people buying a loaded hard drive and using it in a show. (Without original disks to back it up)?

_________________
My first choice IS Sound Choice.

This thread however, is specifically about Dan Dan and no one else. The implication was clear.

What is Dan Dan's goal in taking this to court?

To prove SC wrong. They accused him of not having all the discs that he ripped to his HD.

I think he wants it to go to court so he can prove them wrong and to get a ruling on shifting.

If he gets a positive ruling then SC is SOL

_________________
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

The reason I asked is because I have seen him say he wants a ruling on shifting in the past. But this doesn't seem to be the type of case that would obtain that. While shifting without permission may be the leverage they are using to check a library, the bottom line has been shifting without paying for the music and those are the damages they have been seeking. If he wants to try to prove their methods of investigation are wrong, I could see that but I don't see how this is about winning a victory for computer use unless the court rules that computer use is not grounds for suspicion. It just doesn't seem to be the type of case that would establish a precedent on that.

followed by


SC is suing for their Trademark as being counterfeit in the SHIFT.

As if a "Windows" logo would be counterfeit moving it from a disc to a computer Hard Drive...and good luck with that.

It's not proving that media-shifting is legal. It's getting a judgement on whether or not a Trademark, contained on a disc, is counterfeit when moved to a Hard Drive. <---LMFAO.

And, in the end, how would SC show damages? <-----LMFAO

Especially, if I have witnesses that will testify that they bought SC discs as a direct result of seeing a Hard Drive SC Trademark. Seems that SC profited.

If I recall correctly, Dan would have settled because he believed it would have been cheaper for him to do so in the long run (but not because he was guilty and didn't own the discs. He still maintains that he owns all his discs). However, the settlement agreement at that time required that he admit guilt, which he wasn't willing to do, since he owns all his discs. At that time, in order to settle, it was required that you admit guilt in writing. No if, ands, or buts. And because he did not make things easy for SC, he was not offered the settlement again when SC changed the wording. Nice, huh?