Karaoke Forums

That's one for us Luddites...

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Thank you Harrington I just talked to SC and have an audit in the works. They didn't say I had to have the receipts... though I didn't ask. I don't have them. We were the 1st in our area to offer karaoke... before cdg....we used cassette tapes with printed lyrics! Pioneer laser disc's were next, then DK & SC Foundation.. the receipts are gone. But since SC didn't tell me to have them ready for the audit, I'm not going to worry about it. They did tell me to media shift the disc's before the audit and I told them I already had.. so I guess I'm good to go there.
I'm excited to get the certification and they told me if I'm 'real sweet', I might be able to talk them out of a banner!!

Thank you again for your answer!! I now know more about all this than I ever thought I'd need! But am looking forward to the illegal KJ's disappearing and the karaoke manu's getting back to producing music!!

_________________
SoundChoice Certification coming soon!

Thanks for your cooperation. They are usually pretty good about taking care of you once the audit is in the works, but if you run into any problems, please let me know, and I can check on the process and get information for you.

1) This has already happened in my neck of the woods. However, the suppliers like Ace are price gouging SC for those library dependent KJs in other areas, so this may be a good time to sell.

2) Proving that a good Karaoke Host is not library or brand dependent.

3) If someone spots a PC being used at the show ( or more likely doesn't, but guesses at it from a listing somewhere) and a logo being displayed from it, you will be sued anyway. AFTER you are sued, they will demand an audit. This is how they fish up some sort of case without any prior evidence. If you submit to the audit and show you are disc based, THEN they MAY drop the suit. Annoying, huh?

On the technical side, a PC drive really isn't built to take that kind of constant use, and could well crap out on you. If disc based, I strongly suggest a player.

4) Good idea. You've already shown that they are not needed, and any good businessman limits liability.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Wouldn't fear it, but would expect to be compensated for my time, which is equally as valuable as SC's. If an audit were to be failed, then SC could add the cost to the settlement/suit. If the audit were passed, the KJ will have been compensated for time and effort used to appease SC for no reason.

This would have the added benefit of forcing SC to actually investigate- cutting WAY back on hassling the INNOCENT- in order to reduce costs..

Why doesn't that seem fair to everyone?

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

For one thing, it's the KJ who wants to use the material on a different medium. Why should SC pay the KJ so that the KJ can have the privilege of media-shifting for his own convenience? It's not a question of the value of the time.

That's like saying:

For one thing, it's SC who has an issue with a KJ wanting to use the tracks they paid for on a different medium. Why should the KJ pay SC again just because SC didn't originally offer the tracks in mp3+g format? It's not a question of the value of the time.

_________________
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.

Or it could simply mean the singers aren't educated enough to know the difference! Or that they aren't great singers and the quality doesn't matter to begin with. Doesn't prove a thing in any direction.

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

No offense taken.

First - We have all bought discs for "that one song". We all have thousands of tracks that will never get played. So we can toss that out right now. I have my reasons for why I paid for the CB 12000+ vs the KJMP Drive.

I am not going to post my detailed investment because I have already had a few people beat me up for boasting and for not being considerate of those that don't have the same means as me. The stuff I have publicly noted already:

$3200 - Stellar CAP
~$6000 - (2)12000+drives
$125 - SC Audit (say what????? The evil empire cost less than anyone?!?!?!?)
Several thousand in misc disc purchases

Call it $13,000-$15,000

In short, I already know that if I don't do anyting different *and* I invest ZERO more dollars in additional music/equipment upgrades/replaces/marketing that it will take me two total years to get it back.

But I also know that I have picked up some invaluable experience, and that I WILL be doing things differently, and I will have additional expenses. I am adding a 2nd and possibly 3rd night at the location I am at in two weeks. That alone accelerates my pay off greatly. I already have the gear and enough music to quickly add a second rig if I want and then it all starts making money very quickly. I can't quit my day job but it is positive cash flow. Then it is a matter of scale.

But everyone that has been doing this for more than a year knows that already.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

The payment is for the audit, not the media shift. Also, it is most certainly a question of the value of the time. That and expertise are what the KJ makes his living from. Our fees are time based, or mostly so.

A good SC customer who is what SC desribes as 1:1 should not be charged further, and should be compensated, ESPECIALLY if he as been sued first, with absolutely no evidence of wrongdoing.

Remember, it is those that STOLE SC's tracks that cost them the money they are supposedly only trying to recoup. Media shifters cost them nothing.

Again, SC would still make money on failed audits.

Also, you mention the media shifters. Are you saying that SC will audit and certify disc based hosts free of charge? Even those not involved in a suit? It is my understanding that SC charges for all voluntary audits. Has this changed?

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Why doesn't anyone think that there is a cost to doing business?

I had to pay a fee to get a business license to even operate a karaoke show.
I have to pay insurance to cover hardware/discs.
I have to pay for the fuel to transport me to/from the venues.
I have to replace damaged/broken hardware.
I have to buy new music for customers.

This is a business. Treat it like one. Accept the costs or ___________ (my answer to the blank is "Get out". Others will just complain and come up with reasons why they should not have to pay to play.)

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I think being a "good host" does involve providing quality and selection of music. That is somewhat dependent upon the size of the library and the brand.

Ryan Seacrest wouldn't last very long if he played only Lady Gaga all day.......wait......I take that back.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Wait a minute......do you know who Joe has shared a stage with????.... ......makes his time almost priceless... I'm sorry Joe, I couldn't stop myself....

I need a little more clarification.





Why wouldn’t the “Betamax case” also cover the “media shift” of soundchoice discs? The shifting of the content of a soundchoice disc seems very much the same as the recording of a television program. Universal Studios places their trademark on all of their product that is allowed to be recorded and “time shifted”, so does just about every television station and network.

In addition to the copyright law protection outlined above, there is also trademark law protection for “nominative fair use” as outlined by the court in the New Kids on the Block v. News America Publishing, Inc., 971 F.2d 302 (9th Cir. 1992) in which the court stated “where a defendant uses a trademark to describe the plaintiff’s product, rather than its own, we hold that a commercial user is entitled to a nominative fair use defense provided he meets the following three requirements:
First, the product or service in question must be one not readily identifiable without use of the trademark;
Second, only so much of the mark or marks may be used as is reasonably necessary to identify the product or service; and
Third, the user must do nothing that would, in conjunction with the mark, suggest sponsorship or endorsement by the trademark holder.”

It seems to me a 1:1 KJ would easily meet all three of those requirements.


This is according to soundchoice, the courts seem to have a different point of view.



Being sued and being guilty, or liable for damages are two different things. Being sued : Being unjustly sued



Only covered from being sued by soundchoice.



I was surprised when soundchoice started suing 1:1 KJs, I will be less surprised when others do the same.

Under the same logic used to support auditing prior to suit (paying for a freedom you should already have) shouldn’t a 1:1 KJ be seeking audits from music producers as well - since the window of liability is about the same?

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

What's with the snooping around on the hard drive?

If the point of the audit is to verify that you own the discs, why wouldn't producing discs be enough?
After all, you are going to mark them and declare them useless on any future audits. So why wouldn't being certified on the discs produced be enough?

It's the intrusive nature of the current auditing process that seems unneccessary. I consider the contents of my hard drive (not just the music, but also my hosting details, purchasing logs, marketing materials, personal information, surfing habits, etc.) to be trade secrets of the same magnitude of soundchoice's licensing and settlement secrets. I see no reasonable need for soundchoice to examine a hard drive during a voluntary audit.

It's bad enough to have to pay for it, but a rectal examination as well?

Once the disks are produced you will know what is owned and what is not and should be able to base your certification on that. So what else are you really looking for?

Come on, this doesn't make any sense.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Doesn't the Betamax ruling only hold in regards to personal private use and not for commercial use?

Say if a bar owner, who has no NFL broadcast in his bar, recorded the Superbowl at home & replayed it in his bar while people sat there, spending money, watching it, wouldn't that be a different situation that wouldn't be covered as fair use?

Earthling, again, for COMMERCIAL use, not private use.

Those who gripe about the time it take to do an audit (2 hours average), do you expect the government to compensate you for your time on things THEY want you to do, whether waiting in line for your vehicle registration or sitting on a jury (jury pay doesn't cover a whole lot). or making a witness statement, either to a government agency or a private enterprise?

The person who said I paid the money for something, it's mine, I guess hasn't heard of the words rent or lease.

I also think after the first time I register my vehicle and pay for the plates, I shouldn't have to do it every year or two but I have to. Why should the government be able to do that and no one else?

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

no offense Timberlea this is America Not canada. Kinda feels abit like China though.

I thought most hosts just have their songs on a working show computer with nothing else installed but s/w to play said music.

Having personal details or documents on the show machine seems unnecessary.

It was Soundchoice's lawyer that brought up the Betamax case as a valid defense for a KJ to media shift karaoke music.
I simply agreed.
Your argument is with HarringtonLaw.

However I would contend as I have before that there is copyright case law that allows for "fair use" in a commercial application.
As I recall HarringtonLaw and I agreed on that as well.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF