|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
Bazza
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:50 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 8:00 am Posts: 3312 Images: 0 Been Liked: 610 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: someone said there are, possibly, 30,000 active KJs out there That number seems very high. There aren't hundreds of KJ's in every town. Who knows though. It's all speculation.
|
|
Top |
|
|
hiteck
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 1:52 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 10:39 am Posts: 884 Location: Tx Been Liked: 17 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: 240 certified KJs, and someone said there are, possibly, 30,000 active KJs out there where does that come out to 30%?? That isn't even 1%. That isn't even 1/10 of 1%. I'm pretty sure Harrington/SC referenced 30% as a goal not a current standing. And if they can get 30% of the KJ's that's a huge improvement in income (+300%) over the 10% that are supposedly legit.
_________________ 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.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:00 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
hiteck wrote: I'd think if SC's tactics, rules, policies, etc... were a little more accommodating to those who aren't pirates you'd have a lot closer to a 100% of the 10% that aren't pirates. Then you'd be almost a third of the way to your 30% goal.
Our tactics, rules, and policies are already highly accommodating to those who aren't pirates. There is a very vocal minority of people who don't like those tactics, rules, and policies. Besides, 30% isn't a goal. It's just an illustration to show Bobby that our approach improves our position.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:12 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
I think they should abandon all the audit nonsense, and lawsuits, and change routes. Think of it. If they could come up with a way to insure that all future purchases were tamper proof, and tracked, without only being offered to certified hosts, kind of like CB was trying to do, they could just start over. take the past as a loss. Done. The technology wasn't available yet to stop piracy. Now there IS technology that can prevent it. Use that technology, create new music and move forward. Make it available to everyone at comparable prices and SC would be back to solvency and doing WELL in no time. As long as they continue on the same course they are on now, they will continue to alienate much of what could be their customer base. What they seem to refuse to understand is that MANY people do not want to be watched by big brother, as we all have enough of that in our lives with our government. That is up to SC, though. Do they want a handful of customers or many, many customers??
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:26 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: hiteck wrote: I'd think if SC's tactics, rules, policies, etc... were a little more accommodating to those who aren't pirates you'd have a lot closer to a 100% of the 10% that aren't pirates. Then you'd be almost a third of the way to your 30% goal.
Our tactics, rules, and policies are already highly accommodating to those who aren't pirates. There is a very vocal minority of people who don't like those tactics, rules, and policies. Besides, 30% isn't a goal. It's just an illustration to show Bobby that our approach improves our position. See, all you are interested in is improving YOUR position. Self interest. You aren't interested in fixing the industry, only your bottom line, which could be done in a more innovative way that suing everyone. For some reason, some here, seem to think it would be a lovely idea to just allow SC certified hosts to work, and all others be excluded. That isn't fair business practice. Many of the other mfrs don't seem to share you enthusiasm in suing people and certifying hosts. So if the day came that only SC certified hosts could work, that would give SC an unfair advantage in the marketplace. How many hosts, besides a bunch here, do you think would pay to get certified with ALL the mfrs? That would kill just about every NEW host before they even got started, unless they started off with a fortune to spend.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
hiteck
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:36 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Jun 06, 2010 10:39 am Posts: 884 Location: Tx Been Liked: 17 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: hiteck wrote: I'd think if SC's tactics, rules, policies, etc... were a little more accommodating to those who aren't pirates you'd have a lot closer to a 100% of the 10% that aren't pirates. Then you'd be almost a third of the way to your 30% goal.
Our tactics, rules, and policies are already highly accommodating to those who aren't pirates. There is a very vocal minority of people who don't like those tactics, rules, and policies. Besides, 30% isn't a goal. It's just an illustration to show Bobby that our approach improves our position. I realize the 30% wasn't a hard goal but the idea of an improvement over what's been happening in the past. Better is better, I get it! Couldn't the 1:1 very vocal minority of people that don't like those tactics be an asset to SC if there was some compromise? Not all uncertified KJ's are bad people or pirates or pro-piracy. At times it seems that SC considers KJ's as certified or pirates and that's just not fair. If you and SC could realize that, that is how many of that very vocal minority feel then you might realize why they feel the way they do. It's very difficult to trust someone that doesn't trust you based on the actions of others.
_________________ 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.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 2:45 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
hiteck wrote: HarringtonLaw wrote: hiteck wrote: very vocal minority I don't know about us being a minority. Maybe on the boards, but I think in real life SC and others would find that we would be the MAJORITY. Otherwise there would be thousands of KJs flocking to get certified, not just the few hundred that have.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 3:04 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: 240 certified KJs, and someone said there are, possibly, 30,000 active KJs out there where does that come out to 30%?? That isn't even 1%. That isn't even 1/10 of 1%. If that is what has come from 3 years of action, that isn't really worth the effort, IMHO, but to each his own. Believe it or not there are still kj's that don't know anything about the suits at all. I just talked with 1 a couple days ago from a little ocean side town that was in for a couple nights. But he did seem interested in certifying his SC library (apparantly has over 800 SC cdg's) after we talked about piracy and the possible lawsuits against the kj's/bars, so I gave him the info on how to do so.
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 3:06 pm |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Bazza wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: someone said there are, possibly, 30,000 active KJs out there That number seems very high. There aren't hundreds of KJ's in every town. Who knows though. It's all speculation. Sure seems like it here. Karaoke on almost every corner!
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 3:13 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
Lonman wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: With @ 240 KJ's listed on the SC certified KJ page how close are you to your 30%? 240 certified KJs, and someone said there are, possibly, 30,000 active KJs out there where does that come out to 30%?? That isn't even 1%. That isn't even 1/10 of 1%. If that is what has come from 3 years of action, that isn't really worth the effort, IMHO, but to each his own. Believe it or not there are still kj's that don't know anything about the suits at all. I just talked with 1 a couple days ago from a little ocean side town that was in for a couple nights. But he did seem interested in certifying his SC library (apparantly has over 800 SC cdg's) after we talked about piracy and the possible lawsuits against the kj's/bars, so I gave him the info on how to do so.[/quote] I could see justifying the cost if you had 800 discs, but not if you only have a few.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 9:06 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: I think they should abandon all the audit nonsense, and lawsuits, and change routes. Think of it. If they could come up with a way to insure that all future purchases were tamper proof, and tracked, without only being offered to certified hosts, kind of like CB was trying to do, they could just start over. take the past as a loss. Done. The technology wasn't available yet to stop piracy. Now there IS technology that can prevent it. Use that technology, create new music and move forward. Make it available to everyone at comparable prices and SC would be back to solvency and doing WELL in no time. As long as they continue on the same course they are on now, they will continue to alienate much of what could be their customer base. What they seem to refuse to understand is that MANY people do not want to be watched by big brother, as we all have enough of that in our lives with our government. That is up to SC, though. Do they want a handful of customers or many, many customers?? You should take a look at the bigger picture before you entertain dreams of Soundchoice giving up the lawsuit business. The lawsuit business is proving to be very profitable. Consider the figures the court reported from the CAVS suit against Soundchoice for trade libel and unfair competition. http://docs.justia.com/cases/federal/di ... 1326874990From page 6: Quote: “recently filed a lawsuit in this District. See Slep-Tone Entm’t Corp. v. Backstage Bar & Grill, No. CV 11-08305 (C.D. Cal. filed Oct. 6, 2011). The lawsuit names approximately 70 California defendants and has so far resulted in more than $180,000 in settlement payments from these defendants.” This document was filed on January 17, 2012. By the 18th a total of 16 defendants were dismissed from the lawsuit. At least four of those were venues. And one of them was a disc based KJ who was sued in error. That leaves 15 entities that paid a total of $180,000.00 or an average of $12,000.00 each. There are still 55 defendants from that suit yet to settle. So, by dropping a few thousand in expenses on a single group-suit they walk away with $180,000 in less than three months and still have potential to milk it for an even greater amount in addition to that. Multiply that by each city or each district the lawsuit express rolls into and you are talking about some serious money. Do you really think they could make that kind of money that fast and that easily by putting out karaoke music and having to compete with other manufacturers at the same time? Why bother? They are currently operating in a field without competition where the low hanging fruit is ripe for the picking. At this point in time it would be a poor business decision and a waste of valuable sue-them-while-you-still-can time to try to re-enter the karaoke production business. HarringtonLaw wrote: When a different business model is likely to result in better results than the current one, SC will change it. If I had a cash-cow that produced like that I would probably milk her dry too.
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 10:20 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
Yeah, I guess you are right. No wonder they want to sue everyone they can get their greedy little hands on. And they wonder why people do not want to use their product. Amazing.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
karaokegod73
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:17 pm |
|
|
Senior Poster |
|
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:53 pm Posts: 187 Been Liked: 5 times
|
I think without the suits there would just be a continued downward spiral. If you're putting money into karaoke then obviously you want to make money...so why would you want people buying hard drives for a few hundred dollars with 100,000 songs taking shows that you could have gotten? These people would not be going into business at all if it wasn't so cheap.
That being said, I do have some issues with SC terms. Not the audit fee, but other parts of the agreement which invade privacy and show a continued distrust of everyone, even those who have shown they have not pirated/stolen karaoke music.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:34 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
karaokegod73 wrote: I think without the suits there would just be a continued downward spiral. If you're putting money into karaoke then obviously you want to make money...so why would you want people buying hard drives for a few hundred dollars with 100,000 songs taking shows that you could have gotten? These people would not be going into business at all if it wasn't so cheap.
That being said, I do have some issues with SC terms. Not the audit fee, but other parts of the agreement which invade privacy and show a continued distrust of everyone, even those who have shown they have not pirated/stolen karaoke music. They aren't going after the hard drive sellers, though. They are just going after every KJ they can. Maybe if they would go after the hard drive sellers they could make a bigger dent in the fight against PIRACY, instead of fighting shifters.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
karaokegod73
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:45 pm |
|
|
Senior Poster |
|
Joined: Sat Nov 15, 2008 8:53 pm Posts: 187 Been Liked: 5 times
|
Trademark suit would make most sense then, since these are the ones counterfeiting their marks the most.
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 11:47 pm |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
karaokegod73 wrote: Trademark suit would make most sense then, since these are the ones counterfeiting their marks the most. Shifters are not counterfeiting marks. They are only copying their discs. There is a big difference between them and hard drive sellers and all out track thieves.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Paradigm Karaoke
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:09 am |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 12, 2010 6:24 pm Posts: 5107 Location: Phoenix Az Been Liked: 1279 times
|
karaokegod73 wrote: I think without the suits there would just be a continued downward spiral. If you're putting money into karaoke then obviously you want to make money...so why would you want people buying hard drives for a few hundred dollars with 100,000 songs taking shows that you could have gotten? These people would not be going into business at all if it wasn't so cheap.
i agree, however the law suits are doing nothing to stem that tide. the settlements include GEM sets for the money paid. more than you and i could lease them for, but still less than what we have paid for our music. i am also not sure how they got all that information being everything is sealed.
_________________ Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:34 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: Yeah, I guess you are right. No wonder they want to sue everyone they can get their greedy little hands on. And they wonder why people do not want to use their product. Amazing. They are suing from those that stole from them in the first place
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Lonman
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:36 am |
|
Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm Posts: 22978 Songs: 35 Images: 3 Location: Tacoma, WA Been Liked: 2126 times
|
Smoothedge69 wrote: They aren't going after the hard drive sellers, though. BS! That is their primary concern! Which is why they are not pressing further on those that actually have discs!
_________________ LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
|
|
Top |
|
|
Smoothedge69
|
Posted: Wed May 09, 2012 12:40 am |
|
Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am Posts: 3885 Images: 0 Been Liked: 397 times
|
Lonman wrote: Smoothedge69 wrote: Yeah, I guess you are right. No wonder they want to sue everyone they can get their greedy little hands on. And they wonder why people do not want to use their product. Amazing. They are suing from those that stole from them in the first place Open your eyes, Bro. They name almost anyone they see displaying a Sound Choice mark, without question.
_________________ I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 115 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
|
|