|
View unanswered posts | View active topics
Author |
Message |
kjathena
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:31 pm |
|
|
Super Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:51 pm Posts: 1636 Been Liked: 73 times
|
Rickgood, Does it really matter if anyone is suing now for using downloads? Think about it was anybody suing for using "HD's" 5 years ago ? The whole idea is to prevent any problems. Ignoring the rules just invites problems That is why I keep telling everyone to educate themselves and be willing to pay for the choices they make. If you choose to disregard the rules you loose the right to complain later I wonder how many people wish they had educated themselves about the dangers of media-shifting before to cost them thousands of dollars or threat of a lawsuit. I know I wish I had. Personally it is no skin off my nose if someone decides to assume the risk...I just want everybody to have proper information to make the decision.
_________________ "Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain." Unknown "if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters." Lee McGuffey
Last edited by kjathena on Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
|
Top |
|
|
chrisavis
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:44 pm |
|
Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2011 12:38 pm Posts: 6086 Images: 1 Location: Redmond, WA Been Liked: 1665 times
|
kjathena wrote: Chris, If you are going to be in the karaoke business it is better to make informed decisions than to be in the dark I have learned to research and question everything...then of course I did have the benefit of a number of hours getting educated on licencing by Norbert when we went to NC for audits and that talk did pique my curiosities. Athena - I respect your thoughts on this, and if you want to know this stuff, by all means, know it. But I have been singing karaoke for 20+ years and know KJ's that have been hosting since the cassette tape days. With the exception of the occasional BMI/ASCAP issue (which the bars, not the KJ's should be handling), none of those KJ's concerns themselves with this stuff and they have been just fine for a quarter century now. In fact, I think the obsessive amount of time many of the folks spend on these forums trying to prove they know more about copyrights, trademark, and import laws is pretty ridiculous. The forums are clogged up with a bunch of mis-information from people that aren't qualified to represent the information appropriately. More harm than good seems to come from it, not to mention the animosity between people that gets generated. It is just plain silly. -Chris
_________________ -Chris
|
|
Top |
|
|
kjathena
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 9:50 pm |
|
|
Super Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:51 pm Posts: 1636 Been Liked: 73 times
|
Chris, I respect your right to not care. I spend my time attempting to get people to educate themselves as I know how it feels to be blindsided by an issue out of the blue. As the saying goes however you can lead a horse to water but you cant make him drink
_________________ "Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain." Unknown "if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters." Lee McGuffey
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Sat Sep 15, 2012 11:38 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
Dearest Harringtonthena,
The post quotes are getting too long to keep up with, so I’ll do my best to briefly summarize my thoughts on this matter rather than a point-by-point rebuttal.
I understand these matters are enormously complicated, but they don’t become simpler by injecting added complications. So, to simplify things for the layperson such as myself who’s substandard intellect couldn’t begin to grasp such weighty issues, I propose a simple question:
Is it possible for the imported downloads we've been buying to be just as legal as those imported custom discs we've been buying?
Keep in mind that you have essentially accused Sunfly as well as every other UK manufacturer and their distributors of engaging in illegal activity either directly or as accomplices. That’s not a very cool thing to do to when you are in the process of trying to build working relationships with them.
Once you have told the truth about how it is possible, perhaps you’d like to expand on exactly why that is definitely not the case for the downloads sold to us by Sunfly, SBI, Zoom, Tricerasoft, etc… and how they are routinely violating their license agreements.
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
kjathena
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:19 am |
|
|
Super Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:51 pm Posts: 1636 Been Liked: 73 times
|
Chipling12357,
I suggest you re-read HarringtonLaws two post on the last page. They answer your "Is it possible for the imported downloads we've been buying to be just as legal as those imported custom discs we've been buying?" question and expand upon the details very well.
Why would you think that any UK downloads are exempt from the rules listed by the Licensing agency PRS ?
You may not like the facts but that does not make then any less solid. Good try at deflection however.
ATHENA
_________________ "Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain." Unknown "if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters." Lee McGuffey
|
|
Top |
|
|
Cueball
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 4:47 am |
|
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2001 6:55 pm Posts: 4433 Location: New York City Been Liked: 757 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: However, the mere fact that MCPS policy prohibits distribution to the United States is irrelevant if the physical disc is sold in the UK and imported into the US by the purchaser. Under those circumstances, US law would apply to the importation, because there is a physical thing that is being imported. Under the provision you cited, a single disc imported by the purchaser for private use is not subject to the importation provision of the Copyright Act. The key is "private use." That term is generally defined to exclude commercial use...but if it is imported for private use, then converted to commercial use, and--and this is key--the only context in which the disc is used commercially is in a show in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue, then all is very probably legal, or at least difficult for any rights holder to maintain an action for. 1. Does this mean that any custom CDG that I order and have shipped to me in the US from SBI, Karaoke-Version, Tricerasoft, Zoom, Sunfly, etc... is legal for professional use in the US (based on it being in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue? 2. If yes, then barring the Trademark Infringement twist on things in recent years her in the US, is there any other particular stipulation/s in the Law that would disallow a KJ to then convert that physical custom CDG into an MP3+G format to download to his/her hard drive and now use those tracks on a professional level in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue? BTW.. LMFAO at the reference to CHIPLING12357 and HARRINGTONTHENA.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 7:42 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
cueball wrote: 1. Does this mean that any custom CDG that I order and have shipped to me in the US from SBI, Karaoke-Version, Tricerasoft, Zoom, Sunfly, etc... is legal for professional use in the US (based on it being in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue?
Not necessarily. The underlying assumptions are (1) that the CD+G disc is actually licensed for the country of origin and (2) legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is valid. Note: This is not a comment about any specific manufacturer's practices. cueball wrote: 2. If yes, then barring the Trademark Infringement twist on things in recent years her in the US, is there any other particular stipulation/s in the Law that would disallow a KJ to then convert that physical custom CDG into an MP3+G format to download to his/her hard drive and now use those tracks on a professional level in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue? Well, according to the letter of the Copyright Act, the conversion from CD+G to MP3+G requires the making of a copy, and the right to make copies is an exclusive right of the rights holder (usually the music publisher). But from a copyright perspective, that might be a fair use (barring, of course, the trademark issues that may arise). That's Sony v. Universal City Studios (the Betamax case), although that case referred to time-shifting rather than format-shifting. It's a gray area, as I believe we've discussed many times. cueball wrote: BTW.. LMFAO at the reference to CHIPLING12357 and HARRINGTONTHENA.
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 8:20 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Not necessarily. The underlying assumptions are (1) that the CD+G disc is actually licensed for the country of origin and (2) legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is valid. Note: This is not a comment about any specific manufacturer's practices. "Underlying assumptions" are only that; assumptions on your part. And of course you wouldn't want to include any "specific" manufacturer's practices.... you'd rather avoid that hot potato... HarringtonLaw wrote: cueball wrote: 2. If yes, then barring the Trademark Infringement twist on things in recent years her in the US, is there any other particular stipulation/s in the Law that would disallow a KJ to then convert that physical custom CDG into an MP3+G format to download to his/her hard drive and now use those tracks on a professional level in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue? Well, according to the letter of the Copyright Act, the conversion from CD+G to MP3+G requires the making of a copy, and the right to make copies is an exclusive right of the rights holder (usually the music publisher). But from a copyright perspective, that might be a fair use (barring, of course, the trademark issues that may arise). That's Sony v. Universal City Studios (the Betamax case), although that case referred to time-shifting rather than format-shifting. It's a gray area, as I believe we've discussed many times. Typical. Cueball talks about "trademark" and Harrington answers with copyright. Why am I not surprised?
|
|
Top |
|
|
MtnKaraoke
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:21 am |
|
Joined: Thu Aug 05, 2010 1:40 pm Posts: 1052 Images: 1 Been Liked: 204 times
|
c. staley wrote: ... "Underlying assumptions" are only that; assumptions on your part. And of course you wouldn't want to include any "specific" manufacturer's practices.... you'd rather avoid that hot potato... pOt, MeEt KeTtLe
_________________ Never the same show twice!
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:30 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
c. staley wrote: HarringtonLaw wrote: Not necessarily. The underlying assumptions are (1) that the CD+G disc is actually licensed for the country of origin and (2) legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is valid. Note: This is not a comment about any specific manufacturer's practices. "Underlying assumptions" are only that; assumptions on your part. And of course you wouldn't want to include any "specific" manufacturer's practices.... you'd rather avoid that hot potato... I think that if you look carefully and honestly at what cueball and I posted, you'll realize that your "criticism" doesn't make any sense. He asked if, based on my explanation of the importation law, any custom CDG bought from those manufacturers is legal for professional use, and I gave him the assumptions that underlay my analysis--which aren't "guesses," just conditions that must be satisfied for the conclusion to be true. That is why I am not commenting on any particular manufacturer's practices...I don't know whether or not those manus have satisfied the underlying conditions. It's not a "hot potato," just not something I'm in a position to know. c. staley wrote: HarringtonLaw wrote: cueball wrote: 2. If yes, then barring the Trademark Infringement twist on things in recent years her in the US, is there any other particular stipulation/s in the Law that would disallow a KJ to then convert that physical custom CDG into an MP3+G format to download to his/her hard drive and now use those tracks on a professional level in a PRO-licensed (ASCAP/BMI/etc.) venue? Well, according to the letter of the Copyright Act, the conversion from CD+G to MP3+G requires the making of a copy, and the right to make copies is an exclusive right of the rights holder (usually the music publisher). But from a copyright perspective, that might be a fair use (barring, of course, the trademark issues that may arise). That's Sony v. Universal City Studios (the Betamax case), although that case referred to time-shifting rather than format-shifting. It's a gray area, as I believe we've discussed many times. Typical. Cueball talks about "trademark" and Harrington answers with copyright. Why am I not surprised? Cueball asked (to paraphrase), other than trademark, is there anything else that might make that conduct illegal? So yes, cueball talked about trademark, only in the context of excluding it. My answer about copyright is--I believe--what cueball was looking for. So, was there any purpose to your post other than to attempt--in vain--to ridicule me? Because if there was, I'm not seeing it.
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 10:52 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Not necessarily. The underlying assumptions are (1) that the CD+G disc is actually licensed for the country of origin and (2) legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is valid. Note: This is not a comment about any specific manufacturer's practices. Let's analyze this logic of your at little more closely: #1. Purchase a "custom cdg" from Australia ("the country of origin") of any track for which licensing in the U.S.A. has been either revoked, expired or flat-out never granted. (Alanis, Eagles, Eddie Money and others, etc..) #2. Your logic above states that " legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is VALID" There is no legal license for some of the many songs that are sold, shipped from Australia to the U.S. even now. i.e. your client's trademark attached to their product -- sold from Australia -- are NOT licensed for any use here in the U.S. It's another "sidestep" that your client engages in so often and your attempt at validating it falls short of the mark. Nice try.
|
|
Top |
|
|
JimHarrington
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:04 am |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am Posts: 3011 Been Liked: 1003 times
|
c. staley wrote: Let's analyze this logic of your at little more closely:
#1. Purchase a "custom cdg" from Australia ("the country of origin") of any track for which licensing in the U.S.A. has been either revoked, expired or flat-out never granted. (Alanis, Eagles, Eddie Money and others, etc..)
Why does the U.S. licensing status of any track have anything to do with a CD that is made in Australia and licensed for distribution in Australia? c. staley wrote: #2. Your logic above states that "legal title to the disc passes to you in a country for which the original license is VALID"
If legal title to the disc passes to the purchaser in Australia, then, so far so good. c. staley wrote: There is no legal license for some of the many songs that are sold, shipped from Australia to the U.S. even now. i.e. your client's trademark attached to their product -- sold from Australia -- are NOT licensed for any use here in the U.S.
Again, as earthling has pointed out, the U.S. licensing is irrelevant as long as (a) the disc is licensed in Australia (which it is), (b) the disc is acquired by the purchaser in Australia (which it is), (c) the disc is imported by or for the purchaser into the US (which it is), (d) the intended use of the disc is "private use" at the time of importation (which it is), and (e) there is no more than one copy of each work being imported (which it is). The trademark being attached has nothing to do with it. The trademark is attached under a license that is valid under Australian law. c. staley wrote: It's another "sidestep" that your client engages in so often and your attempt at validating it falls short of the mark.
Beyond licensing the use of the trademarks, providing the master tracks (legally under Australian law), and imposing some quality controls over the product, my client has absolutely nothing to do with the sale of custom discs made in Australia. Clark Music makes those discs, and if Americans choose to arrange for the purchase and importation of them into the US, based on § 602, that is entirely beyond our control.
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:38 am |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
My question is a deflection? Actually I was seeking clarification. Re-read is your answer? That’s a deflection. Well, you have both commented since my question, yet neither of you have addressed it with a direct answer. Is it possible the answer is too simple? The answer is YES it is possible for the imported downloads we've been buying to be just as legal as those imported custom discs we've been buying. How? Simply by following the law. The law states that -- Importation into the United States, without the authority of the owner of copyright under this title, of copies or phonorecords of a work that have been acquired outside the United States is an infringement. So it can be done with the authority of the copyright holder. It is necessary to obtain authority of the owner of copyright to sync the lyrics, why is it so hard to believe that the authority to sell a few copies to United States customers isn’t negotiated at the same time? Perhaps you should re-read HarringtonLaw’s posts. His answer to this was to deflect the issue back to CDGs and give a lesson on how to get CDGs into this country against the wishes of the music publishers. HarringtonLaw wrote: You haven't cited a US law that allows MP3+G downloads without the permission of the music publisher. I know. I don’t think that way. I sited the law. It outlines how it should not be done. HarringtonLaw wrote: If you are referring to § 109, you have skipped over five important words: "lawfully made under this title"
I certainly did not. My entire point is that it can be lawfully made. You don’t get it because your preferred method seems to be the skipping over of five important words: “the authority of the owner” HarringtonLaw wrote: This is an enormously complicated area of the law--one that is difficult enough for attorneys specializing in this area to navigate Especially if they are trying to navigate around it.
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:47 am |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Again, as earthling has pointed out, the U.S. licensing is irrelevant Actually, I pointed out that the licensing of other countries is irrelevant (when US laws are obeyed). However, the point you are making with the misinterpretation is valid.
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
kjathena
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 11:53 am |
|
|
Super Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:51 pm Posts: 1636 Been Liked: 73 times
|
earthling12357,
The answer to your question is contained in the following paragraph from Harringtonlaw.
"UK-licensed downloads are licensed under the LOML+ ("Limited Online Music License Plus") licensing regime. That license, by its express terms (simply go to prsformusic.com and search for that license) expressly prohibits distribution to the United States and Canada. UK-licensed physical media for karaoke are licensed under the KAR license, which also expressly prohibits distribution to the United States."
there is no permission from the rights holders for the United States as a matter of fact it is expressly excluded from LOML+ licenses
It explains the difference between the two types of licensing offered by PRS. Your premise is flawed...read the two licenses yourself and you MAY start to understand.
Again as the old saying goes "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make them drink"
_________________ "Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain." Unknown "if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters." Lee McGuffey
|
|
Top |
|
|
earthling12357
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:16 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Jan 08, 2011 11:21 pm Posts: 1609 Location: Earth Been Liked: 307 times
|
Your MCPS and LOML are irrelevant if they negotiate an agreement directly with the copyright owners. I have never once suggested that UK licensing is valid for exportation to the US. It is not the only option.
"No man is so foolish but he may sometimes give another good counsel, and no man so wise that he may not easily err if he takes no other counsel than his own. He that is taught only by himself has a fool for a master." Hunter S. Thompson
_________________ KNOW THYSELF
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:22 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: Beyond licensing the use of the trademarks, providing the master tracks (legally under Australian law), and imposing some quality controls over the product, my client has absolutely nothing to do with the sale of custom discs made in Australia. Clark Music makes those discs, and if Americans choose to arrange for the purchase and importation of them into the US, based on § 602, that is entirely beyond our control. Is Clark music selling SC's product or is Clark music selling "Clark music's licensed product made from SC components?"
|
|
Top |
|
|
Cueball
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 12:49 pm |
|
Joined: Sat Oct 20, 2001 6:55 pm Posts: 4433 Location: New York City Been Liked: 757 times
|
HarringtonLaw wrote: ... Cueball asked (to paraphrase), other than trademark, is there anything else that might make that conduct illegal? So yes, cueball talked about trademark, only in the context of excluding it. My answer about copyright is--I believe--what cueball was looking for. Correct.
|
|
Top |
|
|
kjathena
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 1:08 pm |
|
|
Super Plus Poster |
|
Joined: Tue Jun 15, 2010 3:51 pm Posts: 1636 Been Liked: 73 times
|
Earthling12357,
"I have made the claim that legally purchased downloads are legal in the United States," a quote from your own post.
BIG IF....why don't we all do some research and see IF any of the UK companies have negotiated separate licensing to allow for karaoke downloads in the USA ?(since they are expressly excluded from the LOML+ licensing). Pick whatever number of more or less current songs that you feel are Representative of a fair market share and start the research and emails. It doesn't really take that long to find out "who" owns the rights for recent tracks.....it can however take some time to get a response on emails. (this I know from experience).
Who knows? We may find that there have been some agreements......I am open minded enough to consider the possibility. Are you open minded enough to research and find out you may be wrong ?
You may wish to start with the info on the email trail you posted earlier in the thread....or maybe your friend Chip and give you a starting point for finding email addresses of publishers?
I am going to start with 9 songs(released by American artists) that have the rights owned by 3 major(U.S) publishers....as I have email address for those....will try and find karaoke tracks offered by a cross selection of UK manufactures as well.
Maybe someone can ask the question directly of the manufactures themselves ? I think there are a number of people on these forums that have a relationship with one or two UK companies.
Lets get proof one way or the other and put this issue to bed......if it requires "the sleeping dragon " to be awaken again SO BE IT !!! let's cut the BS'ers off at the knees.
Let's see how many are willing to do the research ?
_________________ "Integrity is choosing your thoughts, words and actions based on your principles and values rather than for your personal gain." Unknown "if a man has integrity, nothing else matters, If a man has no integrity, nothing else matters." Lee McGuffey
|
|
Top |
|
|
c. staley
|
Posted: Sun Sep 16, 2012 5:34 pm |
|
|
Extreme Poster |
|
Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am Posts: 4839 Location: In your head rent-free Been Liked: 582 times
|
kjathena's ghostwriter wrote: You may wish to start with the info on the email trail you posted earlier in the thread....or maybe your friend Chip and give you a starting point for finding email addresses of publishers? If you don't know where to find info for publishers, you're obviously not really "researching" anything. Nice try.... (strike twelve) It's not rocket science.... (well, for you it might be..)
|
|
Top |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 152 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
|
|