Karaoke Forums

And once again.... I'm amazingly not surprised.

SC and Harrington knew exactly what Joe was expecting and what he wanted...

He didn't pay them anything, jump through hoops or anything else --- he made the mistake of thinking that he would be treated like a "customer."

No doubt he (Harrington) would want to have kept this tucked neatly in a private message closet....

Joe, I have to call you out on this one. You can read into the finer points of a statement just as good as I can (if not better), and I'm sure you were well aware of this before you even put your challenge to HL out there. The actual quote from HL said the following:

...letter to be sent to you on SC letterhead or my firm's letterhead--your choice--explaining that a host who uses original Sound Choice-branded discs only is considered by us to be a fully compliant, legal operator, and should be treated exactly the same as a Sound Choice Certified KJ....

As I had pointed out to you (in a private PM over 1 month ago), nowhere in that statement did it indicate you would be listed in SC's site as a Certified KJ. More to the point, that is one of the items I have specifically requested from HL.

I am not surprised either. It appears that Joe planned to pull some kind of "Mike Wallace Expose'" from the beginning.

Joe, you must have missed my earlier suggestion:

Go to http://www.tinypic.com and upload the file. It will give you a ready-made IMG tag string you can paste into a message.
This will work with any graphic file and bypasses the forum software.

I gave him exactly what we offered. If he wanted something different, he had an opportunity to say to me, "Hey, this isn't going to work for me, can we do something different?" Instead, he decided to use it as an opportunity to criticize us for providing exactly what was offered because it didn't meet his expectations. He's entitled to his opinion and to take it up with me, directly or publicly, as he cares to.

You last sentence is ridiculous. I responded to him on this very thread. If I "would want to have kept this tucked neatly in a private message closet" then I would have contacted him directly about it.

If you want to know why I say--jokingly, but pointedly--that you have "SCDS," it's posts like these that should demonstrate it to you in spades. You had absolutely nothing to do with what was going on in the thread or in the real world. You had no firsthand knowledge of any facts. You had nothing to contribute to the thread other than a gratuitous and ill-informed comment and and a criticism of me that was rendered false even before you posted it. Yet you found it highly important to step in and make sure you were heard.

Of course, none of that is of any import. I don't care what you have to say, but I have, in fact, publicly defended your right to be here and say what you want.

The thing that saddens me about this whole episode is that we've been trying hard to make things easier on the karaoke operators who are, or who want to be, legal operators. We've modified the way we do things in countless ways based upon feedback we've gotten here. With Joe's request I saw an opportunity to match him to something we've had available for a long time. Despite our philosophical differences, in operation Joe is the prototype for our ideal operator: someone who uses original discs and has paid for his music, who cares deeply about his business and about the industry as a whole, and who thinks logically about how to make things better for the people who make this industry great. I would much prefer to have him on our side--and in many respects (and most of the important ones), we are on the same side. I am profoundly disappointed that his point in this exercise was to rope-a-dope, when I was looking for a partner.

Chip, you and your recently arrived protege keep harping about "vendor" and "customer." Our philosophy is different. Yes, the vendor-customer relationship is important, but we're trying to move to a collaborative relationship with legit operators. We've got a great product, and we want to use it to partner with legit operators in a way that allows us both to be profitable. That includes Joe, if he wants, and it even includes you, if you can manage to set aside your anger long enough to realize how much energy you WASTE hating SC.

Thank you for keeping us updated on the progress of developing this program. I was going to photograph my discs today and now I will know not to waste the time until I get a code.

It is ironic that those who berated some for seeming to get a "Hall Pass" certification based on the semblance of having alot of discs are now upset that they can't have a "Hall Pass" letter. I know the "Hall Pass" people travelled to that meeting to show every single one of their discs to disprove that they had been given any special treatment. If I am to get on a certified list then I expect to do the same. Otherwise, the letter as is states that if a host is playing from original discs than they are legal. Without seeing every single disc what more could it say? While not as rampant as computer piracy, I do know of disc hosts who have traded burns.

Yes, I know as a disc host I shouldn't have to prove my legality. But the fact of the matter is, we compete in a computer world and a world where pirates have brought the scrutinizing of hosts down upon our heads. If there is going to be a list of the "scrutinized" then I plan to be on it just to stay competitive. That way venue owners don't have to just take it on faith that I am giving them the straight storey--I will have something to show that will both open the conversation on the issue and prove the point.

Talk about vitriolic!


Mr. Harrington, you KNEW EXACTLY what Joe was asking for and you could have -- at any moment -- told him you would not do so.

Instead, you waited a month and then decided you simply give him something else .... based on a "technicality." You would have preferred that he complained to you privately, even though you were fully aware that he intended to post the results of your actions.

You "technically" brought this on yourself, don't attempt to make me your scapegoat because you -- and/or your client-- doesn't see a "CUSTOMER" that uses discs as a "certified" whatever-you-call-it. Next time, just flat tell your customers that you won't treat them as "certified" while you proudly tell the rest of us that your client will "recommend certified KJ's" to venues.... Nice work.

You sue people on a "technicality" and you make your living on "technicalities.".... THAT'S why I'm not surprised.

You keep blaming me for issues that your client created....

What I believe that you have described here Mr. Harrington in response to c. staley is the definition of "thread hijacking", which I believe are against forum rules.

And the ATT continues his ill-informed rants.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Well I would certainly accuse Timberlea of both a "one-sentence-drive-by-insult" (which I believe is called "trolling") and thread hijack....

However, I haven't hijacked anything. The thread is about Joe's letter from Harrington, my post is directly relevant to both Joe's request and ultimately Harrington's actions. You might accuse Harrington for "deflection" by attempting to (once again) to change the focal point off of the letter and onto me or anything else but you certainly cannot accuse me of hijacking the subject.

Once again, here is the original offer as posted:

-------------------------------------------------------------
HarringtonLaw wrote:
When a host is original disc-based, there is no need for an audit. In fact, there is nothing to audit; ergo, no charge for an audit. If you are 100% original disc-based, email me your business name and mailing address, and I will arrange for a letter to be sent to you on SC letterhead or my firm's letterhead--your choice--explaining that a host who uses original Sound Choice-branded discs only is considered by us to be a fully compliant, legal operator, and should be treated exactly the same as a Sound Choice Certified KJ. You can share that with any venue you like, make copies of it, etc., as long as the wording is not changed. No charge.
---------------------------------------------------------------


1) Please point out where there is ANY mention of any particular person or group that should treat the host the same as an SC certified host. I see none. That means this treatment- as stated- should extend to SC.

That means that I should me listed on the site with no further contitions per your offer. Actually, I don't understand the problem. If SC doesn't mind suing now and dropping later, why the reverse? List the disc based KJ, and if an error is found, drop later...

2) Please point out anything in the posted offer that requires additional steps. I see none.


OK. As it stands, the offer cannot or will not be honored. On the other hand, I do have a POSITIVE suggestion- at least as far as the letter:

While this letter will never be taken for any sort of "certification", it could be tweaked - very slightly- into something that may be of SOME use to a disc-based host.

Right now it is written in negatives. If it were written in a positive manner, it could be of some use. For instance:

Change "We have not verified whether this is accurate" (untrue in my case -Quote from HL "Joe is the prototype for our ideal operator: someone who uses original discs and has paid for his music", but whatever...) to something like " If this is so, then the Karaoke Host is operating within the parameters of the policies of Sound Choice" or some such.

The difference? The first lends at least some possibility that the host is FOS- a negative statement. The second simply states the policy, and leaves it to the venue to check with the host- a POSITIVE statement. There are other "tweaks" that could be made.

What I would STILL like to see is a general informational letter that could be sent to disc based Karaoke Hosts - properly worded- that could then be shown to a venue to let them know that they are safe from SC's current action through the use of a disc based host. A general letter of this sort wouldn't require any "certification" because it would only be useful to a truly disc based host. No one else would show it.

BTW- just curious here: The letter describes the KJ as he/she/it. My own past dating experiences aside , I'm wondering if SC has stumbled onto a third sex, or a species of karaoke host that reproduces through fission or grafting? Not important, just kind of struck me as strange...

I would like to add something here for both "sides" ( even though we're ALL anti-track thief).

On one hand, no one said that HL had to post that offer, and I think it was a mistake to do so without having the ability to follow it up as it was stated.

On the other hand, in no way am I trying to rip Jim Harrington personally here. I don't like the letter I received- as you may have noticed. However, I would also add that HL spent some solid time and energy here in communication with me on several occasions. I would also point out that his posts to me have been civil at all times.

Unfortunately, if HL wishes to remain employed by SC, he has to work within their constraints. I wouldn't do it, but then again, that is not how I feed my family.

I'm glad he's on the forum, and is willing to post what he can. Yup, we definitely have opposing viewpoints, but that's how knowledge and answers are gained- by viewing all sides of a problem.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Copied from Joe:


I would like to add something here for both "sides" ( even though we're ALL anti-track thief).

On one hand, no one said that HL had to post that offer, and I think it was a mistake to do so without having the ability to follow it up as it was stated.

On the other hand, in no way am I trying to rip Jim Harrington personally here. I don't like the letter I received- as you may have noticed. However, I would also add that HL spent some solid time and energy here in communication with me on several occasions. I would also point out that his posts to me have been civil at all times.

Unfortunately, if HL wishes to remain employed by SC, he has to work within their constraints. I wouldn't do it, but then again, that is not how I feed my family.

I'm glad he's on the forum, and is willing to post what he can. Yup, we definitely have opposing viewpoints, but that's how knowledge and answers are gained- by viewing all sides of a problem.

Clicking the "LIKE" Button for Joe...nice post

How hard do you suppose they laughed when they drafted that part? They probably ran all around the office showing it to everyone so they could all have a good laugh too.
I'm still laughing now.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

When I first read I thought "What?"....had to re-read it again and got a good little chuckle out it!

Bazza: As previously stated, I was actually trying to do some fence mending, and possibly help tone down the b**ch slapping here on the forum. I WANTED to eat a bit of crow. The offer seemed to be an easy way to do it. Unfortunately, I ( meaning that it's MY FAULT) did not take time to digest the wording, which left a bit of wiggle room.


Quoting Jim:


1) I gave him exactly what we offered. If he wanted something different, he had an opportunity to say to me, "Hey, this isn't going to work for me, can we do something different?"

2) Instead, he decided to use it as an opportunity to criticize us

1) Jim, you did indeed send a letter, but because ( again, MY fault) I didn't let the way you worded it sink in, the inadequate letter that was sent still fits the bill. It's useless, but it does fit your words- though not the spirit- as stated- no argument.

2) As stated at the very beginning, both here on the forum and in private communications with you, that was never my intent. I stated that I would take you up on your offer, and report the results here on the forum.. That's what I promised to do, do I did it. I don't work "behind the scenes".

Had I received a letter that - even if not a certification- that may have been of some possible use to ANY disc based host, I would have posted that as well, and thanked you for making an effort on our behalf.

That didn't happen.

If you ( SC ) would like to correct the situation as I have shown in my post above, I would still be happy to chew the bird and offer my thanks. I don't really even care anything about the site listing, I simply believe a helpful and educational letter is not too much to ask from a company demanding so much.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Cue, I don't see this as calling me out. If you recall, I never disagreed with you, but was only HOPING for the best.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

There are the transgendered, male to female, female to male. Ask Donald Trump about it.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Canada/2012 ... 46666.html

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

Joe:

We use "he/she/it" in documents to reflect that there are hosts that are corporations or other juridical entities that don't have a sex.

For example, when I refer to SC in a legal document, and I need a personal pronoun for the company, I use "it," not "he" or "she."

As for the other items, when I have a moment to examine your suggestion in greater detail, I will give it due consideration. Maybe we can make the changes you requested. I may simply recommend that you follow the new certification process for ODB hosts so that you can be a certified host, since it should not take more than a half-hour of your time to complete, given the extent of your SC holdings.

I do appreciate that we're able to be civil even though we disagree.

1) In this case, I will not do anything more for purposes of "certification". I fullfilled the requirements as stated, and SC knows that my show is based on original manufacturers' discs.

However:

2) To clarify/simplify an earlier post: It is my belief that HL actually intended to honor the offer as stated, both in word AND in spirit, but it was given the kibosh by Kurt- probably because it was me- ( and maybe with the help of some othersiders that I spoke to). I think HL made the the offer in good faith, but jumped the gun, having no approval from Kurt. I guess it was because SC had absolutely nothing to lose ( and some goodwill to gain). However, knowing Kurt, it just didn't matter.

This is what I meant by "working within the constraints" of SC. Of course, he can't admit that here, because it would not be in the best interests of his client- who left him holding th bag.

This is a SOUND CHOICE PROBLEM- and Jim shouldn't take the heat for it- except for jumping the gun. I would add that although I'm sure it's Kurt that wouldn't let the letter show that I have been verified as an original disc using host, I would have a point where I would not allow an employer to force me to print a falsehood. MY letter should have been a verification, but it wasn't- again, probably because it was me. You know what? Considering my stance, I guess that's the way it has to be.

Let's see what happens in regard to a new, generalized letter for disc based hosts.... I hope to see one soon, but now know better than to hold my breath....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

That's your choice.



As I have indicated previously, and as has been demonstrated to you, the letter program for ODB hosts has been in place for a long time.

And, to the contrary, because it was you asking as a known quantity, Kurt agreed to the letter for you, but he wanted a program with more proof of ownership of original discs for others who are not so well known. Thus cometh the new system.

EDIT: I inadvertently moved a portion of Joe's text out of the quote box, so that it looked like it was mine. Sorry for any confusion.

After reading all this Joe I'm glad you didn't have to eat Crow

_________________
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