Karaoke Forums

Of course.


That's the whole point, which I think you may be missing. They were warned not that they should learn to prevent it, but that they would not be able to prevent it. I know the company you work for sold the snake oil of DRM too, but it had no shot of being effective and the industry was told that from the get-go by some very authoritative voices. Therefore, it had to be made easy and cost-effective for people to buy the content. And they needed to figure out new revenue models and streams.


Didn't I say that? What I said is that as members of the industry, they bear some tiny bit of responsibility.

And in almost every way, they made the same stupid mistakes the rest of the industry made even after being warned not to make them. They bought the idiotic copy protection they were told time and time again would not work. They tried to keep CD sales going by refusing to unbundle. They clung to the old model of distribution for a decade after they needed to embrace another.

Again, it would have been pretty much impossible for them to stem the tide on their own, but the entire industry could indeed have done something. There has been an adjustment even now, and some revenue is back. Advertising support, satellite radio, premiums, etc have made inroads. Think how much more developed that would be with another 15 years of work on it. Instead they stuck their heads in the sand and made threatening noises from the other end, which served them not at all.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Blaming the music industry for not doing enough to prevent piracy is like blaming women for being raped because they wore too provocative clothing.

I am afraid that you don't get it either. They were told that there was no chance they would be able to prevent copying. Now you can wish all you want when something is going to happen, and you can blame anyone you want. But when you try to fly in the face of facts, you have trouble.

So I am not blaming them for not doing enough to prevent piracy by stopping copying, because they can't prevent copying. I blame them for failing to come to grips with that fact. They needed to attack it in a different way, they were warned all along that what they were trying would not work, and they did it anyway. That's what I blame them for.

Try leaving your money in piles laying around for anyone to take. You can blame anyone you want when it is gone, and you may even catch a few thieves, but it is going to be gone nonetheless.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

I would agree that it may be impossible to put the genie back into the bottle as far as distribution methods as people have gotten used to downloading just the song they want on the fly. Custom packages or individual downloads are what fill the need of the current host.

But I don't blame the US industry entirely because the laws in this country haven't kept up and they have somewhat had their hands tied behind their backs while out of the country could operate with less constraints. Now the overseas loopholes are being closed but people won't want to go back to the old ways of buying their songs.

But anything SC did to combat copying was met with resistance so really what could they do? They haven't been able to negotiate reasonable digital licensing until now, evidently, so they had to watch out of the country sites take their market along with the impact piracy was having.

The problem is people feel entitled to steal. Not sure how that is SCs fault.

You couldn't come up with a more appropriate analogy than that..........Bad, Bad lawyer......

People think that it's ok to steal from Sound Choice because they feel that in order to buy the Sound Choice songs they wanted, they were forced to buy songs that they didn't want. Paybacks are a (@$%&#!), huh?

Even now, Sound Choice forces people to buy thousands of songs to get the ones that they actually want.

That was the media choice at the time. You had to buy a whole CDG/CD/Album. It wasn't just SC. That is just a bull escuse for stealing.

First, making unfounded malicicious accusations has nothing to do with other posts. Name them, or you should apologize publicly for your false descriptions (slander) of members here on the forum. If you CAN'T name them, we can assume that you lied. I'll make it easy for you- name ONE person on this forum that you believe your description fits- or will your "100% truthful" postings have to suffer...?

Second, please feel free to note allegations towards SC that have been PROVEN wrong- I look forward to it.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I've tried to reason that path all along. It wasn't just SC but ALL manus back when it all first started. I remember paying $150 for a laserdisc for 1 song I wanted, I don't feel dup'd because I wanted it, I CHOSE to buy that disc BECAUSE I wanted that song.

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

So let me get this straight James you are saying that SC has been financially raped by the pirates, and is suffering from battered manu syndrome? You use this excuse to turn around go after your attackers, even though some are innocent of the crime. I'm just glad this is done in a legal manner and you are not the rape victim running around with a gun, shooting at persons that might resemble your attackers. I think you need another analogy. Have a blessed day.

The other side of the puzzle is the wealth transfer that the industry imposed on the American people by paying off Congress to get the copyright extension passed. That is like a trillion dollar transfer to the industry, straight from the pockets of the citizens of the world. Or shall we say the citizens of America and Europe, since most other countries pay as much attention to copyright as karaoke pirates do.

So sanctimonious doesn't look good on the music and film industry. They live in a glass house with very thin windows.

But more importantly, the resources they spent on that would have been better spent getting their digital act together. They could have standardized licensing and built a clearinghouse so that resellers could figure out innovative ways to sell the product. In fact, they were warned they needed to do that, as well as figure out ways for people to sell packages of product. Instead they clung to the CD for a decade after it should have been superceded as the main industry unit of distribution.

_________________
[color=#ffff55]Mickey J.[/color]
Alas for those who never sing, but die with all their music in them.
-- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Sr.

Sound Choice doesn't want to do digital downloads because they have about 18,000 fluff tracks that no one would buy if they weren't included in their "packages".

"Al the other entertainment entities moved on and figured out other ways to distribute their material which would lessen piracy."

No all these studios (Paramount, Columbia, Disney, etc) and labels (Sony, EMI, etc) have a huge legal staff that all they do is go around and try to nail infringers, pirates, etc. They are not not doing nothing. Unfortunately the technology isn't there. Everytime a "lock" is put on, a few hours later a "key" is made. Unlike anything else, the internet/computers have made it easy to counterfeit goods. One person with the savvy and a computer can do it. At least with counterfeit physical goods, it take more than one person to produce and distribute them.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

The RIAA tried that route. They started off by suing little kids who were downloading music. They charged people $10,000 per song in their cases. They gave the ENTIRE music business a black eye because they were going after everyone instead of going after the major players. Record sales plummeted even further after that mess. Why do you think iTunes is so popular? People could buy single song downloads rather than liking one song but having to buy a whole disc. It has been said, piracy will never be gone. BUT it can be minimized using the right tools and the right policies.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Microsoft only implemented DRM at the behest of the movie and music industries. It was the only way to get their business. Microsoft told those industries it would not work as well.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

People think it's OK to steal from Sound Choice because they want the product and they don't want to spend the money for it.

Any other so-called motivation is a post-hoc rationalization.

Just tell your MASTER that it is time to get with the program and offer single song downloads. He would make MANY people very happy if he did that. Tell him to stop crying about expense and he will see rich rewards!! I am in FULL agreement with Bruce. It's time to stop making people pay for music they don't want or need.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

First of all, don't direct that at me. I wasn't the one who posted what you're complaining about. Given the anonymity of the forum, I have no way of knowing who is a pirate and who is merely advocating for the pirates' position. I'm not sure there is an important difference there, but again, it was not my statement.

Second, you specifically made the allegation that SC does not do pre-suit investigations. The statement is objectively false, but let's be charitable and confine it to actual proof. In a court case, we were required to provide investigative reports to the court. We did so. As a result of that, the court agreed that (a) we conduct pre-suit investigations, (b) that those investigations are adequate in the context of what we are alleging, and (c) that those investigations provide a sufficient factual basis for us to be able to state the claims for which we are seeking relief. That document has been provided to you.

Yet, recently, you brought it up again, accusing us of not undertaking investigations before suing.

Your initial allegation was a fabrication, and I call it that because you have zero factual basis for your conclusion.

Your repetition of that allegation, once it was shown to be false, is a lie. And given your position with respect to SC--your posts here fairly drip with vitriol for the brand--it's malicious on your part.

So I suggest that before you complain about "malicious, unproven accusations," you might want to consider your own history in that regard.

That is in your opinion. Just because YOU don't sing them, doesn't make them 'fluff'!

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

I'm not a KJ and since I wouldn't be singing them, they are nothing but fluff to me that I was coerced into buying in order to get the songs that I actually wanted.