Karaoke Forums

Is there any new song production that is legal for commercial use?

And if so, who?

Well for sure karaoke.net They supply Party Tyme & acquired the Pocket Songs library that they are rebranding Party Tyme. Completely legal for download and KJ use. They are still relatively new and are getting most of their back catalog licensed first, but are pushing a handful of new songs out as well with each update.

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

All of it is when the public performance fee is paid.

None of it is when the public performance fee is not paid.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

As far as new songs, i've been using the Mr. Entertainer disks top 100 Hits of 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015 & 2016. I use these tracks very frequently at my show. Cost is approx .35 cents per track. Lonman is correct in mentioning karake.net also for new tracks.

I was wondering where you KJ's have been getting new tunes that are 'legal' to use commercially!

Are the above answers not good enough? Do you feel they're NOT legal? If you feel they're not legal, why do you feel that way?

_________________
DJ Don

Which tunes do you believe to be "illegal" for use commercially?

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Well, take BuyKaraokeDownloads.com for example. The terms state: "You may not exploit any Digital Download for any commercial purposes...". So they're telling you right there that you can't make full use of and derive benefit from their downloads.

I wouldn't buy from buykaraokedownloads anyway. All they do is take instrumentals from other sites and put their own graphics up, plus sell defunt manus that have never given permission in the first place. They used to even sell Sound Choice tracks at one time.

Karaoke-Version, SBI, Karaoke.net I feel comfortable buying from and using. And like said - NOTHING is legal to play commercially IF the club are not paying their PRO fees.

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

That wording, just as the "home use only" wording is for their protection so that when BMI files suit for not paying the public performance fees you can't point a finger in their direction with "but they said I could".
You are in the public performance business; public performance licensing is the licensing you need to play whatever you want to play.

That said, I would never do business with Buykaraokedownloads; not for anything they post in their TOS, but because all indications show there is no way they paid any of their required licensing for the songs they sell.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Thank you all for your insight and information!

The PRO's issue is a big one in my opinion, as we all know most local bars/nightclubs won't or don't pay them until forced.

You can always go for the "pro"sub at karaokemedia.com 75usd/month 29000 tracks and they give you very nice software to use as a premium member.

Karafun is slightly higher in price @ $99/monthly for pro sub w/24000+ tracks.

If you still would like purchase/download option then karaoke.net is a very good choice for the professional.

Companies like karaoke-version.net do sell their tracks for personal use only but if you send them an email, they tell you as long as your country is ok with it then they give the ok. Either way it's all professional and all listed sites provide most of the "latest" tracks.

Cheers!

The second part is definitely true.

However, because karaoke tracks are audiovisual works, the fees paid to ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC (all of whom represent music publishers only) do not cover all of the public performance rights. "Sound recordings," by themselves, do not carry any public performance right under the Copyright Act. That means that you can publicly perform (play) sound recordings as much as you like without paying the recording artist. Audiovisual works (which include movies as well) do have a public performance right, so the producer of the audiovisual work can require you to obtain a license for that purpose.

I am not aware of any karaoke producer that has sought to enforce the public performance right in the U.S. to date. Of course, that could change.

This part is definitely partly true,
However, while you don't have to pay the recording artist of the sound recording, the owner of the copyright for the underlying composition still needs to get paid (either directly or through ASCAP, etc.).

Also, "Sound recordings," by themselves, actually do carry a public performance right under the Copyright Act.
§ 106 · Exclusive rights in copyrighted works.
(6) in the case of sound recordings, to perform the copyrighted work publicly by means of a digital audio transmission.

That means every time a Sound Choice track is played on radio or television, Stingray and the owner of the copyright for the underlying composition are both owed a share of the royalty.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

That is not accurate.

A "digital audio transmission" refers to internet-based transmissions (streaming), not to radio or TV.

However, when a sound recording that forms part of a Sound Choice track is played on TV (not radio, because that is an audio-only format), the copyright owner (be it Stingray or Phoenix) is entitled to a negotiated royalty based on synchronization, because the synchronization creates a derivative work.

The second part is definitely true.
However, "digital audio transmission" doesn't mean limited to internet.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF