Karaoke Forums

It seems Mr Ranger is upset with my use of the word "real".

Let me re-phrase:

PC - A "real computer" that is full featured.
Rangers Magic Box - A "real computer" that is crippled so it can't do anything else but play Karaoke files from a hard disc.

There. I fixed it.

Thanks for making that "real" plain Bazza.

This illustrates the danger of trying to apply situation-specfic answers to other contexts.

As to KC, it's a breach of contract issue. The terms of use prevent commercial use, so violating the terms of use is a breach of contract and could be an infringement because the license is rendered void.

I don't know enough about others' policies to speak to them.

James, but isn't it the same breach when someone plays a SC disc when it plainly says on the label that it isn't allowed?

I am sure you can see how and why this is totally confusing on several fronts. I'm not picking and I'm not trying to nail it down. I really don't think that is possible... I just want to make the point of how confusing it is. Follow THIS part of the label but don't worry about THAT part.

Then that contract should be renegotiated. Karaoke Channel SHOULD be allowed to sell their product for commercial use. If this is something that Kurt worked out, so he could force KJs to buy HIS product, while leaving KC in the lurch to only work with home users, he is even MORE of a slime than I originally thought.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

There are two different statements at issue.

1) Unauthorized public performance is a violation of applicable laws.
2) Commercial use is prohibited.

The first one is simply a statement of fact designed to put you on notice that further permissions are needed if you want to pay the disc in public. The second is a concrete prohibition of commercial use.

You might want to dial back the Kurt-directed anger a bit.

The contract in question is between KC and the purchaser. If the purchaser uses the tracks commercially, the purchaser has violated his contract with KC.

KC is completely uninterested in the commercial market, by the way.

Obviously there is something between KC and SC. They direct KJs to SC's website. I don't believe that they are uninterested in commercial sales. i believe that they were FORCED into that position, because there is a FORTUNE to be made if they were to sell for commercial use. Simply put, if what you say is true, they are fools!!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

KC is one of Stingray Digital's business lines. The "something" between KC and SC is that they both use the same source material.



Karaoke is only a small part of Stingray's business. As I understand it, they are focused much more heavily on licensing their music for TV, radio, and films. They have made the determination that selling into the commercial market is not worth the trouble required.



You have absolutely no evidence that they were "FORCED" into anything. I'm not sure how they could have been forced into anything at all; they always had the option not to do the deal. They got what they wanted out of it. But I can't make you believe or not believe something.

You are sadly mistaken if you think the commercial KJ market is big enough to constitute a "FORTUNE" to Stingray. They're a private company, so it's hard to put a number to the size of Stingray as a whole, but it would not surprise me to learn they were a $500 million company.

All I know is that I REALLY wish either your client, or these guys would get with the program and start offering single song downloads for commercial use. If SC ever DOES start producing again, they are not only going to be WAY behind the other brands as far as content, they are going to be buried by the other brands for NOT offering downloads. Little by little that is the way the trend is going. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

It would be nice if there weren't any Kurt-directed anger in the industry. Of course Jim you feel such anger is misdirected and should be focused on others and not SC. Actually some in and now out of the industry don't feel that way. They think that maybe SC could have better thought out and executed this legal process. That maybe they should have not relied on agencies like APS, that maybe they should have kept a tighter reign on their employees. That maybe Kurt should have set down with not only other manus like at the summit but maybe some of the people who actually work in the industry hosting. Not just a handful of certified supporters but everyone. It is very hard to be liked by an industry which you have labeled 95% illegal. That is like the Republicans wondering why they can't get more of the Latino vote, when they don't support a path to citizenship. I guess that's unfair since you do offer a relatively cheap way to become legal licensing the GEM series. That doesn't change the fact you have to deal with people you feel mostly are dishonest.

Hmmm that sounds like someone might be working on a law suit against Smooth for something he said or might say

_________________
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

Not at all. For something he said to be actionable, it would have to be damaging to SC. He's trying to be hurtful, but "damage" would require something he's not shown himself to be able to produce.

OK it just sounded that way.

_________________
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

I don't even know if it could be labeled hurtful Jim, since that would require others on this forum to lend weight to his opinions. Just like they remind me my opinions are just that with no substance to back them up.