Karaoke Forums

The difference is that ripping creates copy that is permanently stored and used without putting the original disc in the machine. If you are PLAYING the disc, you have to have the disc.

OK, but just to be clear, where does it say on the CD I bought that I needed permission from SC to this? Correct me if or where I'm wrong, but where did I impact your trade dress when doing this It's a perfect "Copy Paste" from the original CD that is now been played via a HD as opposed to it's original media, the CD!! So you really think you'll have a case with this??? Keep in mind, I bought the CD in the first place, it didn't get in my HD illegally... I only decided it was time to switch to the newest technology without impacting the original content of the product And on top of it, I'm promoting your logo for FREE at least twice every time a song is been played, you should be proud of me

On the front of the CD. "Unauthorized duplication, public performance, or broadcast is a violation of applicable laws."



If you choose to do this without permission, and you are identified and investigated, you may be sued. If you are sued, then you will be offered the opportunity to demonstrate that you have one-to-one correspondence and get the permission needed. Or you can get the permission first and not have to worry about being sued.

Wow...you're just offering opportunities left and right...

_________________
Birdofsong

There is no "may be sued" or even "If you are sued." You should present factual information like it is a fact: "You WILL be sued" and "WHEN you are sued." (unless you'd like to prove that you haven't in the past and what the circumstances are .... which you won't)

Permission First = $150.00 and sign a binding agreement.
Permission Last = $500.00 and sign a binding agreement.

You really do have a bad habit of leaving out the "small, but costly and binding parts" of your answers.

True, but it also says This Material Is Protected By Federal Copyright Laws so I'm assuming SC IS the federal Copyright Law, right? and about the public performance, I'm also assuming your client is planning on suing every KJ's that are using their disk in public?

Question; when SC bought the rights (when they did...) to produced those tracks, was it for HOME use only?

When I bought the CD, it was wrapped and I was under the impression that it was legal to use in public mainly because it had no visual warning

So if I get this right, you're client is OK with the fact that KJ's uses their product for public performance even though there is a clear warning on the CD???

So, who needs a FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAW when you have the Sound Choice Law

1) You have yet to post the factors and formula that are used to determine the monetary value of any damages even once. Your statement is false.

2) After decades of experience in the business of Karaoke Hosting I find this statement false as well. It is the way in which the product is produced that draws or repels a singer, not the picture/logo preceding the track.

3) HUH? Are you now saying that SC's lawsuits are not based on TRADEMARK Infringement? All about the duplication of the TRADEMARK, remember? It may be a good idea to go back and read your own suits.

If the suits were based on the unauthorized duplication of the tracks themselves, would that not be COPYRIGHT Infringement, something - to my knowledge- for which SC does not sue?

If the suits were about stolen music, one could come up with a formula based on factors such as the cost of each stolen track multiplied by the amount of tracks stolen, the amount of shows proven run with said tracks, and the income that the KJ may have gained from those shows. One could do this because the stolen tracks represent income lost to SC.

HOWEVER, the suits are not about stolen music, but merely the display of certain artwork/logos preceding the display of the actual tool in use by the KJ- the track itself. Keep in mind that in many instances, that logo was added to the track by the karaoke producer without permission from the publisher, and shouldn't have been there in the first place.

This creates a completely different scenario than stolen music. There is no loss of income to SC.


After several requests on other threads, and several pages on a thread dedicated specifically to one question, you have not supplied any factors or formula to determine a monetary value for SC's Trademark Infringement suits.

I believe that I have received my answer. I believe- given the lack of any alternative information given by you- that there is no way to prove monetary damages involved in media shifting a logo without SC's permission.

Thank you for your time.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I especially like the BROADCAST part. If you put the cd in your player in the car and drive down the street with the volume cranked up you could be accused of broadcasting. What license covers that? Then again if you singing along with it you could get accused of public performance. I seem to remember that in Japan some cars had mikes and a PA in them that allowed you to sing while you drove although I never saw one.

_________________
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

Several people who are anti-SC methodology have actually HELPED Jim Harrington distract from the question at hand ( an old but useful debating technique) as asked in the OP. If we could stick to the subject of the OP, and not stray from it, some sort of direct reply to the question may be more possible. Can you help a brother out? Thanks.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Every disc I bought from SC has that no duplication warning on both the cases and the discs. What were your discs wrapped in when you bought them - butcher paper? Mine were all shrink wrapped so the warnings were still plain to see in the lower left corner on the back of the jewel case.
How many people bought their discs going in with the mentaility that they were buying them to copy them to computer (or copies at all). Before computer technology allowed it, we just bought discs to play from them. I don't remember buying my discs thinking in the back of my mind - as soon as I can play these from my computer, i'm doing so.

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

I guess I need a new prescription because it does say it on the back left corner

Lon, when I bought all these music CD's, I didn't think I would be importing them in my computer one day, so when I did, it didn't seem to create a problem has long as I had the original to prove the 1:1 ratio...

So coming back to that public warning, did you ever asked SC's permission to use the disk in public I guess not, and it never really created a problem, right?

OK,.......so did anyone actually READ the OP? Would anyone like to add any thoughts or information regarding the OP?

Jim Harrington, or anyone else? Anyone?

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I believe Jim already replied to your post

OK, to get back on track... I must say that the logo is not THE big deal but the quality of the track, and of course, that is one thing SC has done right in general. Now, I can play the same identical track with Karaoke Channel and people will still be very happy and I'm not even displaying the SC logo

Where I have a problem, is when a KJ says, I don't need a SC track because of the suing issues, therefore I will eliminate their tracks from my library and will find another good track. In most case, the KJ thinks it's better but it's not always better but often worst

I can tell you upfront, if I wish to sing "I Guess That's Why They Call It The Blues" from EJ and it is not the SC version, I'm not singing!! In fact the same applies to many other songs from that artist.

A KJ should be able to offer the best karaoke version and in my opinion, it can't be done without a single SC track in the catalog, to me it's an amateur KJ that simply doesn't respect it's customers. Now, don't get me wrong, I still don't fully support SC's initiative of suing it's own customer base... But you can't call yourself a pro KJ if you can't offer what's best out there, it is not up to the KJ to decide but the customers You want to make me sing EJ on a Sunfly backing, fine, you'll see me for the last time...

I just checked the back of one of my Sound Choice jewel cases and it says: "USE OF THESE PRE-RECORDED MATERIAL CONTAINED HEREIN IN ANY MANNER FOR THE REPRODUCTION OF RECORDINGS FOR SALE, RENTAL OR DISTIBUTION WITHOUT THE PRIOR WRITTEN CONSENT OF THE COPYRIGHT OWNER OF THE RIGHTS THEREIN IS A VIOLATION OF THE U.S. COPYRIGHT LAW AND IS STRICLY PROHIBITED.

NOW I CAN SEE HOW THIS WARNING WOULD BE ABLE TO STOP SOMEONE FROM SELLING PRE-LOADED HARD DRIVES WITH SOUND CHOICE MATERIAL ON THEM OR AT LEAST MAKE THEM OPEN TO BEING SUED BY SOUND CHOICE FOR SELLING THOSE HARD DRIVES.

HOWEVER, I don't see anything in that warning saying anything about copying these same songs to a computer strictly for ease of use of the tracks on the disc. A KJ is not selling or renting or ditributing the songs when he puts them on his laptop.

It seems that Sound Choice was aware that the tracks could be copied or there would be no need for this warning, yet they make no mention of a KJ not being able to copy them to their own computer. For years Sound Choice was fine with the 1:1 ratio. Now after years of people running shows from their computers; Sound Choice starts filing law suits against anyone using a computer and for some odd reason, these law suits never make it into a court room.

It seems to me that Sound Choice knows that they would lose big time if these cases ever got in front of a judge and that is why they never seem to get there.

Once again. THERE IS NOTHING ON MY DISC OR JEWEL CASE THAT SAYS THAT I CAN'T TRANSFER MY DISC TO MY COMPUTER. THE WARNING BASICALLY SAYS THAT YOU CAN'T MAKE COPIES TO CD-R DISCS AND SELL THEM, RENT THEM OR DISTRIBUTE THEM. NOT ONE WORD ABOUT MEDIA SHIFTING THEM FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL USE.

And I agree with you, they don't have a case but you still need to defend yourself and that cost $

Bruce, importing into a hard drive is still a copy

THE WARNING SAYS YOU CAN'T MAKE COPIES TO SELL, RENT OR DISTRIBUTE. IT SAYS NOTHING ABOUT MAKING COPIES FOR YOUR OWN PERSONAL USE.

Well, on mine it says; UNAUTHORIZED DUPLICATION but that's on the CD, there's no such mention on the Jewel case

I disagree.


You should seriously try the DK version - it has no melody flute and is spot on. Try All Hits for "Harmony" too and Sunfly for "Can You Feel The Love Tonight." You'll be pleasantly surprised.... but it's all subjective isn't it? To each his own.



Do you go out to a karaoke club to enjoy the evening with your friends or "to perform?" Because I disagree wholeheartedly with your statement above. I don't use SC - and haven't for a couple years now - because of their "initiative of suing it's own customer base" AND especially the KJ's venues.

You're welcome to make you own judgments on what is/isn't a "pro KJ" all you like, but I can tell you that last night, we had a line out the door waiting for others to leave because of overcapacity... without a single Sound Choice track in sight.

There are other brands of songs and that singers have no problem using and a "pro KJ" can still make it happen without any single brand of disc. Karaoke isn't about the brand of song or even the number of songs -- it's about the atmosphere created by the KJ.

Chip, I've tried or listened to every single Elton John backing out there and so far, only two brands are to my standard overall, it's SC & Zoom.

I agree with you tho, it is subjective... I know you & I are big fans of EJ, so I just posted one on SS for you, it's the SC version sorry man, there's no better version of this particular track

http://karaokescene.com/ss/song.php?id=91996

And I'm happy to see you are successful without the two letter brand, but I wouldn't be able to sing EJ in your club

OK I just looked at a dozen jewel cases and here's exactly what it says on each of them:

"Warning: Use of this pre-recorded material contained herein in any manner for the reproduction of recordings for sale, rental, or distribution without prior written consent of the copyright owner of the rights therein is a violation of the U.S. copyright law and is strictly prohibited, Unauthorized public performance, rental or broadcast transmission in part or in whole is strictly prohibited. All rights reserved"

No where do I see that you can't copy the disc and use it as long as you are not selling, renting or distributing it.

On the corresponding disc it says:

"Warning: This material is protected by Federal Copyright Laws. Unauthorized duplication, public performance or broadcast is a violation of applicable laws. These are professional re-creations and not renditions by the original artist."

So if copying you discs is a violation of FEDERAL COPYRIGHT LAWS, then why aren't the Feds going after KJ's for ripping to HD's? And just what are the applicable laws? Has anyone seen them? I don't mean speculation, I mean the actual LAW!

I have found a couple of articles which in my opinion are speculation but then again I not sure.

http://www.complexip.com/trademark-and- ... oke-discs/

On the above one I see where a popular figure from this board has posted.

http://www.ehow.com/list_6662697_copyri ... aoke_.html
On this one I see where SC got smacked by the 9th court of appeals.

http://ipjustice.org/karaokefairuse.shtml
And on this one I see where it says Karaoke falls under the fair use act.

So what is really true?, and no I don't just take JH's writings as fact either as I still don't see any court ruling where it says you can't shift!

_________________
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