The Karaoke SoftShop
Top Rated Karaoke Software

Has SC Finally Gone The Way of CB?

Discuss any legal issues pertaining to karaoke.
User avatar
wiseguy
Site Admin
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: WV

Post by wiseguy » Sat Feb 21, 2015 4:16 pm

That's what I was talking about... the "fine print". But you're right. You should consult an attorney before signing any agreement. Only a fool would sign away their rights to seek future legal remedies.



The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Sat Feb 21, 2015 6:19 pm

8) You'd be surprised how many fools sign away their rights. Take the situation where EMI can also sue the GEM license holders if they choose to do so, along with SC the license grantor. The hosts that have licensed GEM also signed the no sue clause I'm sure. If they end up getting sued they will not be able to take SC to court for their loses. :nonod: :nonod: :nonod:

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Sun Feb 22, 2015 10:30 am

8) This link explains what happens during and audit and by the host involved eventually decided not to sign the audit agreement. It would seem any time you sign an agreement with SC there is a clause not to sue them at some future date. This forever keeps you from taking them to court yourself. Something the GEM host that got licensed ought consider if EMI decides to sue them as well as SC.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0e-1R6Cwdk

Well I tried to get this link working, funny it worked on the Karaoke Scene but not here I wonder if SC got to the host who put it up? If you want to see the video check out Karaoke Scene Forum, in Piracy section under "Interesting video on the Sound Choice audit etc." For as long as it is still there.

Another way to watch the video is to go to youtube and look under "Legal issues you should consider before your Sound Choice audit". The video is about 7minutes and 15 seconds long.

User avatar
wiseguy
Site Admin
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: WV

Post by wiseguy » Sun Feb 22, 2015 11:56 am

I was able to locate the video buy searching for the title. Funny that it is at the URL you posted but the link doesn't work. The URL I copied is https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I0e-1R6Cwdk which seems to work as a link.

That video was made back in 2012, but if the contract hasn't changed, only a fool would sign it.

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Sun Feb 22, 2015 12:19 pm

8) You're better with the computer than I am wiseguy thanks for getting the info on this forum. :D :D :D

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Mon Feb 23, 2015 10:32 am

8) I have been confused by hosts that tell me Kurt is still in charge as far as Phoenix is concerned.

Kurt's lawyer Jim Harrington recently revealed on K/S forum what happened with the establishment of the new PhoenixLLC.

"That being said, Slep-Tone did sell substantially all of its assets for fair value;it was a real sale at arms length to PEP. As the name indicates there are others (besides Kurt) involved in this new venture, and they were uninterested in being invested in a company that has as-yet unresolved litigation, regardless of the likelihood of success in that litigation".

So Kurt did sell all of his assets, and the new partners aren't interested in the old SC unresolved suits. This is sort of confusing since the legal process and the licensing of the GEM product along of course with the Trademark are essentially all that is left of SC. It might be that legally this is a way to sell off assets of SC to this LLC. before the EMI suit is finished and SC is forced to pay up. Much in the same way CB dodged paying CAVS by having the company foreclosed upon.

In some vague way Kurt is still involved since he is listed on the papers as a manger/ organizer of the new LLC. It would seem strange that the new investors would set up an LLC, to carry on basically the legal process started by SC, since they are not interested in any old litigation started by SC. :? :? :?

P.S. Jim further stated:

"In addition to the new programs and new production, we are working presently on some other activities that will broaden PEP well beyond what Slep-Tone was doing, and it made business, legal, and financial sense to create a new vehicle through which to conduct those activities as well."

Is this an admission by SC that they so damaged their name and Trademark that they had to form the LLC. , in order to provide new products? I still think we aren't too far away from seeing the old SC company flounder under the weight of pending legal actions against it.
If EMI wins their case watch SC either go into bankruptcy or foreclosure. If so much of SC is in the hands of others, what good does it do to continue a dialogue with Kurt, since now he is only a minor player?

User avatar
wiseguy
Site Admin
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: WV

Post by wiseguy » Mon Feb 23, 2015 12:35 pm

I kind of feel sorry for those KJs who depend on SC music for a large part of their library. They're stuck between either worrying about being sued or signing a contract that says that if they get screwed over they cannot sue. There is no more stability to the "look the other way" HELP system. Best case scenario is that SC just goes the way of all the others and nobody hears from them again.

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Tue Feb 24, 2015 9:34 am

8) It's not only that they depend on SC, but also because they licensed the GEM series some hosts could be sued along with SC by EMI, and other publishers. The SC agreements do not protect the hosts from being sued by anybody but SC. If you sign an agreement with SC you are prevented from suing them if you have to pay EMI. That means you are on the hook for licensing their product pretty neat. Only a lawyer could come up with this situation, protecting his client and leaving everyone else holding the bag.

If SC does go into foreclosure or bankruptcy we will hear from them again. Just like CB went into foreclosure and emerged as DTE/WWDE, and Priacy RecovveryLLC. The game never ends unless you just drop the SC label. Fortunately most of the brands just went the way of the buffalo, and fell into the free ware zone.
:roll: :roll: :roll:

User avatar
wiseguy
Site Admin
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: WV

Post by wiseguy » Wed Feb 25, 2015 1:46 pm

It's probably a stretch to think that EMI would go after monetary damages from the KJs who purchased the GEM series. They may however be able to make the songs illegal to use professionally, and without the option to sue SC for damages, the KJs would be left with a wasted investment.

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Thu Feb 26, 2015 8:19 am

8) I don't know if it is such as stretch when there is talk qf a possible recall of all GEM's licensed as part of a deal to settle the EMI suit. Jim Harrington has said the chance of such a recall would be as likely as getting hit by a bus. People do get hit by buses though. I would wonder what would happen to a host that refused to turn in his GEM licensed material. If it was not returned then I would imagine EMI would sue them for the continued commercial use of the material. This GEM set represents in some cases as much as a $5,000.00 investment by some hosts and it would just go down the crapper.

I think the possibility of such a recall is greater than Jim or Kurt really want to admit. They have felt enough pressure to announce a reimbursement formula on K/S forum. This new program is being offered by Phoenix, see they are already using the new company name. Under this new program any hosts that licensed GEM after February 25, 2015 will get reimbursed. I guess if you licensed your GEM on February 24th you are out of luck.

This seems highly unfair to all of the early bird licensees like Danny 2006 he was the first, wasn't he? It is par for the course for this company, however. to screw all their long term customers, in order to obtain new customers with new money. They really have now shame. :mrgreen: :mrgreen: :mrgreen:

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Thu Feb 26, 2015 12:04 pm

8) It has just come to my attention that the new Phoenix LLC. lacks a distribution agreement to use the content of the GEM series, from the owners of the SC library Stingray. SC's old distribution agreement expired in December of 2014. So my question is if there is no distribution agreement on using the content of GEM from Stingray, besides the Trademark, what are you really leasing from Phoenix?

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Thu Feb 26, 2015 8:19 pm

8) I saw an update from SC's lawyer Jim Harrington. It seems to be a joint agreement between MCPS and Stingray with SC as far as the distribution rights of the GEM product. The product was made in England and managed to use a loop hole in the copyright laws in order to have GEM produced. This was back in 2010, since then the loop hole was closed. When the current stockpile of GEM product is exhausted their will be no more. Phoenix is hoping to produce new products so they say, the same old line SC has been using for years. Without new product the only business Phoenix will be in once the GEM supply is gone, will be protecting the SC Trademark, using the legal process to encourage hosts to become licensed, and maybe certification through the audit system. The only problem with this is for 200.00 dollars a month you are only licensing basically the SC Trademark Logo. The underlying content is not covered and Stingray and the publishers can still sue you. You are only buying a promise that SC will not come after you? I wonder just how good their promises are. :roll: :roll: :roll:

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Mon Mar 02, 2015 6:22 am

8) The disclosures just keep coming. It would seem that SC's lawyer Jim Harrington is one of the partners in the new PhoenixLLC. I thought only a fool represented themselves. I guess this is one way to keep the legal fees down. I just wonder if Jim can keep his objectivity since he is his own client now? :redface: :redface: :redface:

User avatar
wiseguy
Site Admin
Posts: 1819
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 5:05 pm
Location: WV

Post by wiseguy » Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:15 pm

Maybe the suing over creating business is more profitable than we think.

The Lone Ranger
Posts: 615
Joined: Mon Jun 17, 2013 9:19 am
Location: CALIFORNIA

Post by The Lone Ranger » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:15 pm

8) It would seem to be the new business model. Though this is a different slant than what I was taught when I took business classes in college, many moons ago. It would seem that we have returned to the days of the robber barons and gilded cage area of the 1890's and early 1900's. That is the way J.P. Morgan got control of the electric business, he threatened to sue Westinghouse knowing they could not afford to have a lengthy legal battle. By doing so he made Westinghouse sign over patents for AC and other inventions that had been signed over by Tesla, their chief inventor. :roll: :roll: :roll:

Post Reply