Karaoke Forums

No one here will be surprised that I agree 100%. Between these current actions and as yet untested media shifting gray areas, I will remain Original Mfr. Disc based for the foreseeable future.

Unfortunately, the outcome of the EMI v. SC actions may well affect ALL of our abilities to procure new tracks regardless of media. All just a wait and see.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

Oh hell, Joe, if you're bringing THAT up, note the following:

SC ( or any other karaoke producer) cannot give permission to media shift the publishers' property, nor can they give permission for it's professional usage in a U.S. based show ( excluding the display of their -to my business- valueless logo, if some are to be believed).

That being said, one of SC's main selling points was that the GEMS were specifically made for ease of transfer to a PC. Not only that, but they are only available to professional Karaoke Hosts. Go figure how that works...

Either way, it is my opinion that any KJ who decides to use this set prior to the outcome of the suit is out of his/her business mind.

Something to think about: SUppose the outcome goes against SC and the GEMS have to go back. Now I have no idea how many Gem sets were produced and how many have been distributed, so I will make up a number:

Hypothesize that 70 sets ( I figure this to be a conservative estimate, considering all the hype originally posted about them). Now, I think the current pricing is somewhere around 3200- I know it's at least 3K, and I know that some folks paid more.

If those 70 sets have to come back, I would assume a refund would be in order. Heck, let's just round it of to 3k per set. That would end up being $210,000.oo

Do GEM users really believe that kind of money will be forthcoming from SC? I don't.

There may be many possible options for SC- but none of them will be of equal value for the KJs that use GEMS.

I'd wait.....

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

You can imply whatever you want in an agreement but it doesn't mean it will stand up if it is found to not be within the law. This firmly sits in that realm.

I also do not agree with Chris' view on this. IF SC is found to have essentially stolen the licensing for the GEM, they should be held accountable. And I do think it is within the same boundaries as KJ pirates. Stolen music is stolen music and the bottom line is, SC does not hold all the rights to the materials they re-created. Selling that material without the proper consent is the absolute same as selling a drive with pirated content.

BUT there is only one side of the story that's been told and I feel it's irresponsible to consider SC guilty until proven innocent. I do admit that their tactics in this seem shady at best BUT they are also dealing with US publishers who all but tie their hands. Why did they not simply move their operations to Europe? Why the Shell game?

My guess Mr.Boo was to save face. They did not want to give the impression that the pirates had run them out of the country. Maybe it would be more difficult for them to sue in the United States if they became a foreign corporation. No one will really know in hindsight that could be a very costly mistake.

When a criminal is caught, is convicted, and serves their time, they have paid their price. They deserve to be treated with a certain amount of respect for having served their time for the crime they have committed.

In reality there is a persistent stigma that follows them that is hard for them to shake and even harder for others to look past. I am just as guilty of that as any other person. But I still try to look past those past transgressions to give people a fair shake.

So....yes....those that Sound Choice has sued and settled with, have essentially paid the price and I am happy to compete with them on a somewhat level playing field.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

I am not really hold KJ's and Sound Choice (or any manufacturer) to different standards. KJ's are actually stealing the material and that is very easy to see and prove. But again, I don't think anyone has every proven that Sound Choice STOLE anything. and there is a big difference between taking exisiting works and recreating/repurposing them. That is why there is licensing and copyright laws in the first place.

Downloading something for free (stealing) is completely different than creating a derivative work (which should be licensed) at significant cost for the purpose of resale.

Both result in a lack of compensation to a source rights holder, but one is outright theft while the other is not asking for permission. Yes, there is some semantic wordplay here, but I not doing so to evade or to insist I am right. I believe the courts see it the same way.

ie; If I download a movie, music, karaoke with out paying for it - I have stolen it. If I get a band together, create a cover version of a song and sync some lyrics to it, I created that but did so without permission. I didn't steal anything.

Even BruceFan4Life should be able to agree with that aspect.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

So Chris, if I right-click your logo, save it and replace my name with yours, what is that? Would you be happy with me? Is that stealing?

That would actually be trademark infringment. Please note the TM on my logo.

Whether Sound Choice gets proper licensing or not, I am pretty sure they have always stated on their discs or packaging that they are not original artist renditions.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

OK, see your point on the logo. Do you think EMI would take the time and spend the money if they didn't think they had a case?

To see a NC company up and move their operations to Australia suddenly release a brand new product and rush to sell it before a deadline of the law changing is just odd to me. Guess we'll see how it turns out.

Do you think Sound Choice would take the time and spend the money (against KJ's) if they didn't think they had a case?

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Uhhh, Yes. It's still debatable how much time they actually take and how much they actually spend. Seriously, comparing the cut and paste SC complaints to the EMI complaint is a horrible comparison.

You are correct. But however cut and paste the Sound Choice suits are, they are doing them at scale and in many different districts with subtle but non-trivial differences.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

SC would certainly do so. The plan that they came up with is by no means original. IP trolls have been doing it forever. The intent is to squeeze "settlements" out of the uneducated through legal intimidation. Whether there is an actual strength to the case is really not that important- as shown in court.


EMI is not initiating mass suits against a bunch of folks hoping to get money from some through "settlements". They are specifically targeting SC ( after winnowing out the other 2) with several complaints. I don't think they are trying for a settlement either, because such a settlement would have to be of a worthwhile value, and I don't think they believe SC has the resources- I know that I don't believe they do, which is why I don't see full refunds coming to GEM users in the event of a loss by SC.

Keep in mind that I have not opined on SC's guilt or innocence.

I would consider the following:

Thinking that "right" always wins in court is naive- it's usually the best presentation that does it.

EMI has more juice in the music industry than SC.

This juice is based on many winning precedents in court- including some previously against SC.

EMI has infinitely more resources than SC. They can afford the very best and most experienced litigators.

SC has displayed serious managerial problems, and these could bleed into the handling of the case.

I've seen nothing in SC's court presentations that could be described as...um...formidable. In fact, they seem to have a knack for alienating some judges. EMI has shown that THEY can be formidable..

In short, SC is seriously outgunned. Sure, David has slain Goliath more than once, but it's a rare occurrence.

All I can say is that- right or wrong- SC has an exceedingly steep hill to climb.

So why aren't I jumping up and down for joy, considering my feelings toward SC's actions?

Because if SC screws this case up, they will be dragging the rest of us at least part way down with them- not that they could care less.

Best case scenario would still include a major reduction of sources for new music, higher costs, possible lower quality due to lack of competition, possible added business fees and licensing, etc. That's the BEST case scenario.

Worst case? A complete restructuring of the karaoke industry, and OUR benefit wouldn't be the priority- that's assuming that the industry would be allowed to remain viable at all.

Do I thank SC for all of these problems? UBETCHA! They pounded their chests, thumped the ground, and stamped their feet for money- for nothing more than a picture that they added to track. All that noisemaking awakened the publishers who said " Wait a minute! All that noise for money over a PICTURE???!!! It's OUR product that is of value to the karaoke industry! WE want more control and money!"

And you know something? They are right. Before, they didn't much care about this tiny piece of the music industry. However, thanks to a bad economy and SOUND CHOICE making them more aware of us as a new income stream through their noisemaking over nothing, they are now involved. Also, I give equal thanks to all those folks who volunteered to be assistant SC mouthpieces and help their noisemaking and publicizing.

Ron White was right.

If I sound angry- rare for me- I am. In my opinion, win or lose, SC's parasitical connection to our industry is damaging all of us- and some KJs have actually helped them.

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

" Disc based and loving it..."

"EMI is not initiating mass suits against a bunch of folks hoping to get money from some through "settlements"."

Actually the labels did it through RIAA.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

You know you live in an upside down world when a record company, one of the sleaziest industries ever known, is being cheered as a torch-bearer of all that is right & just.

You guys are always saying that SC created it's own problems by not evolving with the times and then stooping to desperate measures to save their skin.
Hello left hand. Meet right hand.

@Bazza: I the late 80's Liberty Bank came to my town and opened a bank very close to my home. It was in a perfect location to fill my needs and it had great access. On the first day the bank opened it's doors I walked in to open an account to find I am the first customer to be served. Like you, I was fiercely loyal to my unique status, an important bragging point in my book. They all knew my name every time I came into the bank ...... it was great! I was constantly plugging them when banking matters came up in conversation.

Then the housing boom hit and Liberty became a little too liberal with their money and ended up closing up my favorite bank location. They survived but I no longer bank with them.

So you went with Bernie Madoff instead? That would be the correct end of the analogy.

Mine ended way better than that, but yours may not.

Bazza Chris is always asking me how I can I defend thieves and pirates. If SC should prove to be guilty of the charges leveled at them by EMI, wouldn't that mean you guys are defending a thieve and pirate?

Thanks for the concern, but I'll be just fine. Unlike you, I wont be losing my house or retirement funds.



I don't recall defending anyone in this thread.

I was pointing out that EMI is not the white knight you think they are. They make Kurt Slep look like Nelson Mandela.