Karaoke Forums

Honestly, if I come to you and demand that you pay me protection money or else? That is more like the MOB than someone who is just out to slow down the rampant piracy in the Karaoke industry. Or to protect one's intellectual property.

Some has been said about Tortious Interference, filing suits without evidence required by law prior to said suits being filed ect.

Can someone please enlighten us as to the merit or this as it pertains to defending against such suits, when you have plenty of original disks but still are sued? I mean in the realm of counter suit. There may be someone out there who has a valid argument that this could help, in that case it may curb the ongoing traveling band of suits SC is spreading around the country, without gaining required proof prior to filing said suits.

No Cheerleaders please, this is for the benefit of wrongfully sued individuals only, not for Pirates trying to get out of trouble!

Interesting first post..

Did you read the rules?

And by the way. the mob has been in music for fifty plus years.. Not news..

I have not read "the" rules, that's why I am asking, what rules do you refer to? I am curious and I read something in another site that speculated this. I am more curious as to Tortious Interference and how it can be used in defense. Whether the MOB has been in music or not isn't reason to let it go on. Whether you have substantial proof to validate a civil case means a lot.

I would like to see an estimate of how much to public has had to pay for the mass lawsuits SC has filed that have failed to produce a verdict. Using the legal system to provoke an out of court settlement as a business plan is called what? Trolling? I am only curious. Is that correct?

Still double-checking rumor of RICO charges added to one of the suits against SC.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

I think it would be hilarious if Kurt Slep went down on a RICO charge. After claiming to be squeaky clean, and acting all holier than thou, then he ends up doing a bid for 30 years on a RICO case. !!!!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

I don't think it is wise to speculate on an unconfirmed story, without link information to back it up. At least on this forum. I wish that confirmation of this RICO story could be established I will keep looking for supporting evidence of the allegations also.

Now you SC haters are really going around the bend. SC is suing people in open Federal Courts and because of this, at least one of you are trying to insinuate RICO charges. How desperate YOU must be. Shameful for just writing such a rumour.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

I said it was unconfirmed story tim. Is repeating unconfirmed stories any worse than filing a suit a against a host and actually hurting his or her business, when you haven't the evidence to backup the suit? It would seem that a double standard is applied when stories are repeated by the manus, simply because they are looked upon as some sort unimpeachable source and if they say it's so it must be true. I think the same standard should be applied to all stories, and they should be taken with a grain of salt.
Until they can be confirmed.

I, for one, hope it is confirmed, true, and goes all the way to conviction.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

Why not just ask Robert and Chip about this Joe to get your confirmation?

And while you are at it, please ask them for documentation.

http://soundchoicelasvegaslawsuit.com/w ... mment-5280

"Both Robert and Chip are the ONLY folks that present DOCUMENTATION of their statements, while the opposed are pretty much air, and absolutely no documentation."

---JoeChartreuse

http://soundchoicelasvegaslawsuit.com/w ... mment-5326

_________________
-- Mark

Wouldn't it be easier to get Jim Harrington on here, since he was the lead attorney on the case according to Chip who had to excuse himself. Jim should know which case RICO was allegedly invoked and which he was forced to step down from. It would not destroy his client lawyer relationship to let hosts know where the public court records are and can be accessed. If the charges were made it should be a matter of public record, shouldn't it Insane?

*sigh*

Do you recall the old saying that "anyone can sue anyone for anything"?

There is a civil action available under the federal RICO act. The result of such an action, if successful, is money damages or an injunction. No one goes to jail on a civil RICO offense.

I can confirm to you that CAVS USA added a RICO claim to its lawsuit, along with a raft of other claims, back in January. There's no mystery here. The amended complaint is a public record. Those claims are every bit as baseless as the original claims were, if not more, and they were added when it became clear to CAVS and its attorneys that their original lawsuit wasn't going to succeed.



Sorry to disappoint you, Bobby. I do find it interesting that you want him to go to jail for 30 years for the "crime" of protecting his business's intellectual property in a way you deem distasteful. Seems to me that says more about you than it does about him.

I'm not disappointed in the least. I would just find it hilarious for him to go down on a RICO charge. It would give me a good laugh is all. It's not just the way he is protecting his product that I find offensive, though. It is also the way he is trying to get producers and publishers involved, so EVERYONE can get sued, even those who don't use his product. THAT is what I find MOST offensive. It seems that if it were up to Sleppy, EVERY computerized KJ would get sued for something.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

So those that don't use SC product should be able to steal other manus without consequence? Not following here. That is what they are trying to get the publishers involved for so they can nail the theives of other manus product - the way I understand it anyway, which should be done IMO.

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

No, that is NOT what should be done. It's a license to just sue everyone who has shifted their discs, it's a license to sue everyone who buys downloads, and so on. I don't know about you, but I don't want to spend my time, OR my money proving that I am compliant to the 1:1 ratio over and over again, as each entity tries to weed out the pirates. There are countless publishers out there. Imagine having to go through one audit after another. FUDGE THAT!!!!

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

It's only got to this point BECAUSE of all the rampant piracy. You cannot tell who is and isn't legit these days. You used to be able to look at a book and see a few thousand songs and probably a safe bet that they are legit. Then go to a show that has 5" thick binders with 12-15 versions of every song - pretty good bet they were a pirate. Now many kj's don't even use books, so you cannot tell that way. Kj says just tell me what you want to sing and i'll have it - pretty good bet piracy.
Again what needs to happen is 1 organization to pay and audit the entire library on an annual basis - i'm all for that as long as the cost is reasonable. It would definitely keep the hobbyists and lowballers out of the game.

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

I put out three books, but I tell my people if you don't see your song in there, let me know and I will have it by your next turn. I'm not stealing it, I am purchasing it from Tricerasoft or All Star.

As for annual audits, I say HELL NO. I don't want to be bothered with that. As I have said before, I have never gotten audited by the IRS, I sure as Hell am NOT going to accept an audit from a karaoke vendor or some karaoke organization, ESPECIALLY if I have to pay for it. Say what you will. I won't change my mind on it. I am doing what I am supposed to be doing and I do not have to prove myself to anyone.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

I don't say change your mind. But that is what i'd like to see, and those don't comply either be fined or get out! That would open the playing field up quite a bit for those that treat this as a business.
But there is no need to worry, it'll never happen unfortunately.

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

You don't have to believe in audits to treat Karaoke as a business.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

I understand one may consider it semantics, but ultimately if they have any goal in that type of approach, and it doesn't directly or indirectly involve increasing their own profitability, then their motives are out of line, from a business standpoint, which is not to say that any attempt of this nature would be ethical. But if there is any detail about all this that might be perceived as exceptional in all this is that the product these companies put out is all but exclusively derived from the creativity of others' intellectual property (which could potentially bring up the argument as to whether or not these recreations should be also considered intellectual property)...