That's when you delete all your Sound Choice songs and keep going..DanG2006 wrote:The big thing is that the judge said that he had not gotten permission to media shift the product over to hard drive and so is ordered not to do so until he gets written permission to do so. To do that he has to go through the audit.
Media shifting w/o permission a violation of manu's rights
Chartbuster too? Because they require the same permission to shift to hard drive in a 1:1 ratio as SC and they are also suing KJ's and venues for trademark infringement. THe difference is that they aren't settling the way SC is. THeir settlement puts the KJ out of business. I'm glad I did what I did so that I could use the best tracks made for karaoke over the rest of the crap that is out there.Bigdog wrote:That's when you delete all your Sound Choice songs and keep going..DanG2006 wrote:The big thing is that the judge said that he had not gotten permission to media shift the product over to hard drive and so is ordered not to do so until he gets written permission to do so. To do that he has to go through the audit.
Has anyone ever seen or know of...a law or any place that is written that you can not do a format shift?
Is it just them saying you need permission to do it? Based on what premise? What makes it illegal? Just because they say so? How am I using something I didn't pay for? How am I using them illegally? I bought them. I own them.
If I do my show from a hard drive and own the discs I use, what is the problem.
I didn't steal anything. My hard drive is my 1-1 back up to protect my investment. Which I just happen to be using to do a show. At the same time protecting my investment.
I say if they can not produce in writing an actual law or statute that says what I am doing is illegal, just them saying so doesn't cut it.
I can say all kinds of things are illegal...doesn't make it so. I thought all this 1-1 stuff was hashed out in court years ago. I thought the court said it was legal. So how do they decide to over ride the court.
Trademark infringement..
Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attaching to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees (provided that such authorization was within the scope of the license). Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers. An owner of a trademark may commence legal proceedings against a party which infringes its registration.
By using their music I am not claiming to be Sound Choice. I am not saying I am the creator of the music. When their logo appears on the screen everyone there can plainly see that the music is a Sound Choice song. It doesn't say a Bigdog song. I am not telling everyone I created it. I am not pretending to be Sound Choice. There is no deception.
I say it is not a Trademark Infringement. They would have to prove I somehow am insinuating I am Sound Choice. That I created the music. I am not in anyway shape or form trying to steal their music or use their logo illegally. I am not Sound Choice. I am not connected to Sound Choice or pretending to be. I don't see a case here for that.
That would only apply if the name of my company was Sound Choice Karaoke...and I used a logo exactly like or very similar to the one they use. And I was trying to imply I was the creator/owner of the music. Or I was selling their music and pretending I was Them.
How can they stop you from using other music they don't own? I would just do oldies shows without their music.
From all the indicators I am seeing at my shows...less and less new music is being sung. I am up to date as of February songs. The last year or so very few new songs ever get sung. Some/most of my new stuff never gets sung.
Is it just them saying you need permission to do it? Based on what premise? What makes it illegal? Just because they say so? How am I using something I didn't pay for? How am I using them illegally? I bought them. I own them.
If I do my show from a hard drive and own the discs I use, what is the problem.
I didn't steal anything. My hard drive is my 1-1 back up to protect my investment. Which I just happen to be using to do a show. At the same time protecting my investment.
I say if they can not produce in writing an actual law or statute that says what I am doing is illegal, just them saying so doesn't cut it.
I can say all kinds of things are illegal...doesn't make it so. I thought all this 1-1 stuff was hashed out in court years ago. I thought the court said it was legal. So how do they decide to over ride the court.
Trademark infringement..
Trademark infringement is a violation of the exclusive rights attaching to a trademark without the authorization of the trademark owner or any licensees (provided that such authorization was within the scope of the license). Infringement may occur when one party, the "infringer", uses a trademark which is identical or confusingly similar to a trademark owned by another party, in relation to products or services which are identical or similar to the products or services which the registration covers. An owner of a trademark may commence legal proceedings against a party which infringes its registration.
By using their music I am not claiming to be Sound Choice. I am not saying I am the creator of the music. When their logo appears on the screen everyone there can plainly see that the music is a Sound Choice song. It doesn't say a Bigdog song. I am not telling everyone I created it. I am not pretending to be Sound Choice. There is no deception.
I say it is not a Trademark Infringement. They would have to prove I somehow am insinuating I am Sound Choice. That I created the music. I am not in anyway shape or form trying to steal their music or use their logo illegally. I am not Sound Choice. I am not connected to Sound Choice or pretending to be. I don't see a case here for that.
That would only apply if the name of my company was Sound Choice Karaoke...and I used a logo exactly like or very similar to the one they use. And I was trying to imply I was the creator/owner of the music. Or I was selling their music and pretending I was Them.
How can they stop you from using other music they don't own? I would just do oldies shows without their music.
From all the indicators I am seeing at my shows...less and less new music is being sung. I am up to date as of February songs. The last year or so very few new songs ever get sung. Some/most of my new stuff never gets sung.
Bigdog, I also wondered how displaying the SC logo from a hard drive differed from displaying the logo from a CD. As I understand it this would not be trademark infringement as you interpret it or what is commonly perceived.
It appears that what SC is saying is that when you format shift without their permission you degrade the quality of their original product and display their trademark while performing the degraded format shifted tracks in public therefore impugning the quality of the SC brand.
As far as I know (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the SC audit does not include a quality test of your format shifted songs to assure that they meet SC quality standards. If this is the case it would appear that if you agree to an audit the quality issue is no longer an issue but rather just a legal ploy.
It appears that what SC is saying is that when you format shift without their permission you degrade the quality of their original product and display their trademark while performing the degraded format shifted tracks in public therefore impugning the quality of the SC brand.
As far as I know (someone correct me if I'm wrong) the SC audit does not include a quality test of your format shifted songs to assure that they meet SC quality standards. If this is the case it would appear that if you agree to an audit the quality issue is no longer an issue but rather just a legal ploy.
Does it matter when they get the music and the words wrong? 
Or when they shorten a 15 minute song down to 3 1/2 minutes?
Sound like BS to me....Where is the quality test and who would know?
If that is their argument....which sucks...Why aren't they concerned about the quality of the karaoke system they are being played on? 99% of those suck and make their music sound HORRIBLE at best...
Are they using the best quality discs money can buy when they sell them?? Or are they just good enough. Or are they "Chinese Bobs" wholesale discs...
From now on in my books I will have a quality disclaimer and make a public announcement before each show as to the quality of certain tracks...
That should just about cover it from a legal aspect..
Once again...I am not selling their tracks...just playing them....I am not claiming they are mine and how about the old..."It's good enough for karaoke" excuse..? Drunk people...don't care and 99% of the KJs don't care...
Their legal argument has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese..
Or when they shorten a 15 minute song down to 3 1/2 minutes?Sound like BS to me....Where is the quality test and who would know?
If that is their argument....which sucks...Why aren't they concerned about the quality of the karaoke system they are being played on? 99% of those suck and make their music sound HORRIBLE at best...
Are they using the best quality discs money can buy when they sell them?? Or are they just good enough. Or are they "Chinese Bobs" wholesale discs...
From now on in my books I will have a quality disclaimer and make a public announcement before each show as to the quality of certain tracks...
That should just about cover it from a legal aspect..
Once again...I am not selling their tracks...just playing them....I am not claiming they are mine and how about the old..."It's good enough for karaoke" excuse..? Drunk people...don't care and 99% of the KJs don't care...
Their legal argument has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese..
I guess when straws are all you have that is what you grasp at.Bigdog wrote:Does it matter when they get the music and the words wrong?
Sound like BS to me....Where is the quality test and who would know?
If that is their argument....which sucks...Why aren't they concerned about the quality of the karaoke system they are being played on? 99% of those suck and make their music sound HORRIBLE at best...
Are they using the best quality discs money can buy when they sell them?? Or are they just good enough. Or are they "Chinese Bobs" wholesale discs...
From now on in my books I will have a quality disclaimer and make a public announcement before each show as to the quality of certain tracks...
That should just about cover it from a legal aspect..
Once again...I am not selling their tracks...just playing them....I am not claiming they are mine and how about the old..."It's good enough for karaoke" excuse..? Drunk people...don't care and 99% of the KJs don't care...
Their legal argument has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese..
Going after KJs who are using pirated copies of their material is one thing that nobody can blame them for. This logo BS is being used to force legitimate KJs into agreeing to an audit and that just pisses me off.
OKay. You tell me a better way to tell the pirates from the legit hosts without the audit. There is none except sue everyone who has a computer being used for karaoke and then sort them out. The audits were created to allow them to sue just the legit KJ's. The KJ that was ordered in that order thumbed his nose at the audit when he was offered one for free. Why should SC after regular discovery be lenient on him? It answered the question of whether or not format shifting without permission was legal or not. Now both SC and CB, the two requiring audits for media shifted content will be using it as a weapon to get more KJ's to become legal. Again it comes down to ALL RIGHTS RESERVED and they reserved the right to format shift to getting written permission which means an audit to make sure the computer KJ isn't a pirate of their product.wiseguy wrote:I guess when straws are all you have that is what you grasp at.Bigdog wrote:Does it matter when they get the music and the words wrong?
Sound like BS to me....Where is the quality test and who would know?
If that is their argument....which sucks...Why aren't they concerned about the quality of the karaoke system they are being played on? 99% of those suck and make their music sound HORRIBLE at best...
Are they using the best quality discs money can buy when they sell them?? Or are they just good enough. Or are they "Chinese Bobs" wholesale discs...
From now on in my books I will have a quality disclaimer and make a public announcement before each show as to the quality of certain tracks...
That should just about cover it from a legal aspect..
Once again...I am not selling their tracks...just playing them....I am not claiming they are mine and how about the old..."It's good enough for karaoke" excuse..? Drunk people...don't care and 99% of the KJs don't care...
Their legal argument has more holes in it than Swiss Cheese..
Going after KJs who are using pirated copies of their material is one thing that nobody can blame them for. This logo BS is being used to force legitimate KJs into agreeing to an audit and that just pisses me off.
Its called investigation. Every law enforcement agency does it. They don't go out and arrest someone and then say "now prove your innocent". They do an investigation and gather enough evidence to build a case.OKay. You tell me a better way to tell the pirates from the legit hosts without the audit.
The only reason they got that decision was because of the logo issue. Could you imagine the implications if this kind of ruling was made on all recorded music? You would have every record label demanding an audit of your DJ music.It answered the question of whether or not format shifting without permission was legal or not.
What right do these companies have to put us out and cost us time and money because of their business losses. We legitimate KJs are the ones who supported their business in the first place by paying good money for their discs. Is this how we get rewarded for our patronage?
There are a lot of KJs who feel the way that Bigdog and I do. Every KJ that I have talked to in my area has said that they would sell their systems before they would submit to an audit. I got rid of my SC songs awhile ago and I'll dump Chartbuster too if necessary.
If a company like Lost Classics were to put out new..old music I'm interested. Much of the new music today sucks and doesn't get sung except for a few songs. And since Sound Choice feels inclined to make the X rated versions of todays music...I don't even buy them or include them in my books. I'm not wasting my money on Rap Crap.
People are still singing old song that are 20-30-40-50 years old. It's more singable and you can remember the songs.
I still say I am not using their music without permission if I own the discs...
They never bitched about a 1-1 copy on CD of a CD...So tell me exactly what is the difference between a back up disc or a back up file if they are 1-1...I would say they set a presedence when they allowed a 1-1 CD copy...without permission...We can find plenty of old internet postings from Sound Choice to make that case...
I would say they are screwed...I just need the right lawyer...
Show me where it says that I am required to keep rebuying permission to use their songs. On what legal ground? Especially after I already purchased the music once. The disc clearly says written permission...nothing about a fee...and a yearly fee...
I say if all KJs just stick together and boycott them...their attitude would change or their income would..I hate to say that...because they do put out a good product and seeing them or anyone else go under because of stupidity won't help us...
People are still singing old song that are 20-30-40-50 years old. It's more singable and you can remember the songs.
I still say I am not using their music without permission if I own the discs...
They never bitched about a 1-1 copy on CD of a CD...So tell me exactly what is the difference between a back up disc or a back up file if they are 1-1...I would say they set a presedence when they allowed a 1-1 CD copy...without permission...We can find plenty of old internet postings from Sound Choice to make that case...
I would say they are screwed...I just need the right lawyer...
Show me where it says that I am required to keep rebuying permission to use their songs. On what legal ground? Especially after I already purchased the music once. The disc clearly says written permission...nothing about a fee...and a yearly fee...
I say if all KJs just stick together and boycott them...their attitude would change or their income would..I hate to say that...because they do put out a good product and seeing them or anyone else go under because of stupidity won't help us...
But they do investigate. Unfortunately they can't just go up and say "Do you have every disc for that music?" when you know very well that even the pirate is gonna say "Yes I do. But they are at my office right now".
The pirate would make them in an instant and dissapear before they could be served.
Just the computer and absence of discs is enough based on the trademark law to be able to sue if the KJ isn't already on their list of certified KJ's.
The pirate would make them in an instant and dissapear before they could be served.
Just the computer and absence of discs is enough based on the trademark law to be able to sue if the KJ isn't already on their list of certified KJ's.
But they do investigate. Unfortunately they can't just go up and say "Do you have every disc for that music?" when you know very well that even the pirate is gonna say "Yes I do.
That's a tough break but it still doesn't give them the right to hassle innocent people. This would be like Wal-Mart threatening a suit against you unless you let them search your house for stolen merchandise because you are known to possess the kind of items that some people have shoplifted from them.
And therein lies the BS. What the trademark law is about is that when you format shift without their permission you degrade the quality of their original product and display their trademark while performing the degraded format shifted tracks in public therefore impugning the quality of the SC brand.Just the computer and absence of discs is enough based on the trademark law to be able to sue if the KJ isn't already on their list of certified KJ's.
BUT if you submit to an audit they will no longer care if you degrade their music while displaying their logo. That shows that they are using the trademark law as a legal ploy to force legitimate KJs into submitting to the audits. Dan, do you really see nothing wrong with this?
If it turns one pirate into a legal host or puts them out of business, I have zero problem because there isn't any other way to weed out the legal ones from the illegal. You come up with a way other than that and SC would love to hear it as long as it is usable.
The voluntary audit is the best way to avoid the lawsuits unless you want to cut their product out but it's not only SC but CB that is doing this. The difference between CB and SC is that SC's audit is a one time fee while CB's is a yearly one.
SC you only need to send pictures of your discs after the audit when you reach 2% additional discs.
The voluntary audit is the best way to avoid the lawsuits unless you want to cut their product out but it's not only SC but CB that is doing this. The difference between CB and SC is that SC's audit is a one time fee while CB's is a yearly one.
SC you only need to send pictures of your discs after the audit when you reach 2% additional discs.
Dan, the end does not always justify the means. I have just as much to gain by the pirates being put out of business as you or any other legitimate KJ does. But I simply cannot tolerate injustice.
A legitimate KJ should never have to prove that he is legitimate or else face a law suit. That reeks of guilty until proven innocent.
Its not my job to help SC prevent the pirating of their songs. I will not be used to do so against my will.
SC has already lost all my business and their logo will never again be displayed from my karaoke system. CB will be next to go if need be.
A legitimate KJ should never have to prove that he is legitimate or else face a law suit. That reeks of guilty until proven innocent.
Its not my job to help SC prevent the pirating of their songs. I will not be used to do so against my will.
SC has already lost all my business and their logo will never again be displayed from my karaoke system. CB will be next to go if need be.
