Karaoke Forums

I have already explained the change of circumstances, which makes your misleading and selective quotations more of a personal attack than an argument.

If a non-certified host refuses to answer those questions, and he makes SC tracks available from other than original discs, he can expect the venue to fire him.

Thank you, Mr. Harrington. I hope to make that the next project after taxes.

Thank you- the rest from JH then seems to be less than accurate.

Also, I have asked time and time again- with ZERO response- about pricing.

1) I am an ODB host- which, btw, SC knows for a fact.

I own 38 SC discs ( Mostly Star and Power Pick series). What would be the fee charged to audit me?)

Also, what is the cutoff point for lowest volume audit fees? 50 discs? 75? In other words, what would the cutoff be in regard to raising the fee above what I am charged?

I believe this would be the SIXTH TIME that I asked this question.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

"Oh, by the way, good news for all Sound Choice supporters, after my depositions in Vegas and trips there over the past two weeks, we reached settlements with several defendants and those that are venues will be requiring certified hosts. So, anyone wanting to work in Vegas should contact us, because right now, there aren’t enough legit hosts in Vegas that I am aware of and I think I can help place hosts in about 8 gigs immediately. And after trial on the remaining defendant(s) there might be more openings."

i assume the requirement will be removed so Cue and Joe can apply if they so desired.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

a OBD host does not need certification as long as they are playing FROM disc. READ the Safe Harbor Venue info.

Given the number of computer-based hosts versus the number of ODB hosts, I think a little imprecision on Kurt's part can be forgiven. As I have said repeatedly, SC does not have any agreements with venues to require certified hosts. We do have agreements with venues that effectively require them to hire legit (with respect to SC materials) hosts, which include ODB hosts and hosts who do not use SC materials.

Because leopard lizard called and the person who answered the phone gave incorrect information?



And you've been told to call SC if you are serious about applying for certification.



Based on what? The fact that you believe Kurt Slep walked into one of your shows one night? Sorry, didn't happen.



And you've been told that there are no hard and fast rules. The rate is negotiable for low-volume operators, but it depends on the circumstances--and not just the number of discs.

You've already made it clear that you're not interested in certification, so the only point of this exercise is to attack SC (or me), which is fine, but let's call it what it is, and not a serious inquiry.

Oh, just send cueball a sticker that says he's certified and add his name to the list. Do you need a stamp?

Joe, please don't take every little thing as being a diabolical plot, at least not on my behalf. For all I know, when I last called, nothing was in place yet. Following on other forums, I knew they were working on something but having technical difficulties. I was later told the employees hadn't been brought up to date yet. So it was more a matter of nothing having been made official yet and not a lie. I was just trying to back that it hasn't been straightforward up to now.

Not being on the list is not going to lose me work unless SC comes to our area. No one in the area is aware of the list at the moment. It was something I wanted to do for myself and be covered just in case they did come to the area. We signed up for Safe Harbor early on so if a venue did get contacted, there would be an avenue in place to keep the venue safe.

Also, there has been a lot of pressure from other hosts for me to computerize and at one point I agreed to ask for the papers to start that. So there could even be confusion on their part as to what I wanted to do. But for the moment I can't afford to go in that direction so if there is a disc program then I will be looking further into that.

I must be missing your explanation of the change in circumstances.
It seems to me the circumstances are exactly as they were when this was discussed a year ago. My quotes were selective (that's how quotes work) but not misleading. I posted a link to the thread from which they came so anyone could verify the truth.

If there is anything misleading it is either your posts in that thread or your posts in this one.
You made promises that you are not keeping. Period.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I do not think it is unreasonable to assume that SC was working on a method for disk users, announced it, and the plan did not pan out. The fault I see in that is SC maybe should have kept the idea to themselves until they could reasonably assume the plan would work. But with all the push here and probably on other forums, they felt it necessary to make an announcement. They have plenty that people can hold their feet to the fire over, but I'm having a hard time with this one.

I do think it would be a good idea for them to adjust their wording to include disc users for those that put any stock at all in their policies, but it would not matter to me in the least since I do not.

James,

Would it be safe to say that the gist of Kurt's comment is that the "settled" defendants are required to abide by SC's "Safe Harbor" guidelines if SC karaoke content is played in their venues? ie: Verification of legitimacy whether disc based or media-shifted?

_________________
-- Mark

I am not going to comment on any particular settlement. I will comment generally.

When we enter into a settlement agreement, it is safe to presume that the settlement agreement requires legal operation going forward. That's true of all defendants. There are various ways for that to be enforced. Safe Harbor is one of them for venues. It's also possible to have an arrangement that looks somewhat like Safe Harbor, but isn't Safe Harbor. But the point is that venues don't want to be sued again, so we set up a way for them to operate without having to worry about being sued, yet that ensures that they aren't doing something that we would sue them over.

No venue is ever required to hire a certified KJ. Venues are generally required to hire either (a) a certified KJ, (b) an ODB operator, or (c) a host who does not make SC tracks available. Any of those three are acceptable, but really what is acceptable/not acceptable is defined by what they can't do...which is to hire a host who uses SC materials in a media-shifted format without SC's permission.

Thanks for clearing that up James.

That scenario seems pretty simple to me, and a proper way for former venue defendants to agree in their settlements and to insure themselves to NOT getting sued again by SC.

Thanks again for a great answer.

_________________
-- Mark

1) WHY NOT? It's been YEARS now, and still no plan, no guidelines? Why shouldn't I ask for a public answer, so all would have the information?

This is an exemple of the lack of follow-through that pushed SC out of production, made the KIAA a phantom, and caused all the problems with APS.


2) The exercise was not an attack, but rather to provide a hypothetical situation using myself as the example, and get a price breakdown that should have been decided on a LONG time ago, with the guidelines part of the business plan. Why the need for secret negotiations?

As for Leopard Lizard receiving wrong information: She called Sound Choice. Where else was she supposed to go?!? If the SC employees number as you say they do, there is absolutely no reason or excuse for dispensing incorrect information. Therefore there IS a conflict.
Who is she supposed to believe?

Which is true?

Did the the person to which she spoke have the authority to answer her question, or is calling a waste of time?

Should all inquiries be specifically directed to you, and you alone?

This is why I ask the questions here, where the answers will be posted publicly- if I get them.

This is not an "attack" of any sort. These are questions that need to be addressed for the benefit of those KJs that wish to do business with SC. Answering them in a precise and clear manner would be beneficial to SC and those that deal with them, not me.

Give "helpful" a chance... You'd be amazed at the results!

As for whether or not Kurt showed up at one of my shows: Since I never stated that here on the forum or to you in a PM, one would have to ask oneself why that came to your mind.....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

NOW, if SC were to say it that simply instead of Kurt saying , then you wouldn't be hearing all these arguements from people like me (ODB KJ). Do you see anything within that statement that specifically mentions ODB KJs??? As I stated before, the fact that Kurt first states the term CERTIFIED HOSTS, negates the next line about LEGIT HOSTS. The word CERTIFIED has already been planted in their heads, and thus, the term LEGIT is associated with the term CERTIFIED.

I'm with Cue on this. Kurt was very specific.

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

Isn't that the real question the going forward part James? The only manu who is currently asking whether an operation is legal is SC. The main reason for the legal process is to recover lost money for SC, right? While it is true venues don't want to be sued again, no one knows if you got paid a significant amount from the previous suits, since the details are withheld. Currently there are only a little over 400 certified hosts, it would be impossible for SC to supply all venues with certified hosts, that is hosts certified with SC product. It would be possible to supply non certified hosts as is currently happening minus the SC product, and still have no fear of a suit from you or Kurt. Now you can see why hosts and venues consider your product toxic and refuse to carry it any longer. The more successful you are with these shakedown suits, the more inclined people in the industry will be to drop SC completely. You cannot run a viable company selling to only a few hundred select, certified hosts or venues. The simple fee to shift minus the audit is still the go to move if you want to make some money and get everyone signed up. If that happened then there would be a lot less interest in the issue of piracy, and maybe hosts could get back to their jobs. Of course that means you would have to find a new client, have a legal day.

There is a plan. It's a $150 base rate, plus additional for certifying multiple or very large systems (that depends on several factors, including the time involved, the number of systems certified, etc.).

If you want a departure from that, SC will consider it, but it's on a negotiated basis. Factors would include the size of the system (based on the number of discs), the location of the audit, the availability of a remote audit, the financial condition of the operator, the availability of an auditor, the need for additional certified operators in an area, what the operator is willing to pay, and so forth. I can't give you a precise formula because it is multi-factorial.

Do you get angry at a car dealer for not telling you in advance how he will decide whether to take your offered price or not?



You lost your status as an honest broker of information, whatever it might have been, when you posted this:



You cannot hold that view and expect me to cooperate with you for any reason. Because of what you posted, I am forced to regard the questions you ask as the prelude to a future attack and to regard the statements you make as intended to harm my client.



I have no idea when she called or whom she talked to. Judging from the response that was given, it seems that the person who answered her call was confused about what she was asking. Virtually everyone who asks for certification is not a disc-based host.



As I said before, I am sorry that she got incorrect information. I have tried to provide the correct information. I'm not sure what more I can do at this point.



I have no idea. She got incorrect information, regardless of the authority to answer it.



Not at all.



See above. I have given answers in a precise and clear manner.



I don't have time to go through hundreds of your posts to find the specific reference. You have stated it on here, and you allude to it constantly.

I was going to abstain from further participation on this one as my request to Joe to quit quoting my posts to further his own agenda was not respected.

But guess I will say that I am happy with Mr. Harrington's response on here and the fact that he has given me a second avenue for communication should I have trouble in the future. I hope to be able to take advantage of it after taxes and if I have trouble I will know how to resolve it.