Invited in to help fight piracy!

"in my case" it will be neither and it's a moot point. You are free to surrender your rights to them with "your paperwork" all you like, I'm not buying it.

IN my opinion, their "contract" is also a sham. It does nothing for the KJ, it isn't "protection" no matter what your attorney says.

 

Chip,
All I know is that I'm being treated with respect. I'm now a part of the solution, not a part of the problem. Where do you stand?

 

On my own two feet. I don't need a crutch or a "big brother" to lean on.

 

That paperwork is protection, and the way it's written a law suit against you from Sound Choice outside those conditions for something like " Public Performance " is an instant countersuit on our part. Actually, ya know the paperwork specify's that they authorize you for public performance also , so that clears that concern up right there. That is the official documentation and it cannot be edited ( no fine print that states these terms are subject to change without notice ). That is the permanent agreement i have with Sound Choice.

 

I may not be Chip but I wanna add my two cents here.

Did we not all treat you with respect? How did talking with Kurt make you part of the solution? You could have done this on your own. Being part of the solution doesn't require working for anyone other than yourself.

How were you part of the problem before talking to Kurt? How are any of us a part of the problem? I love Karaoke, I report Hard Drive Sellers when I see them, I and other speak on a forum, offering ideas and opinions.

The PROBLEM is that our ideas, ideals and opinions don't follow a widely accepted platform. So we are shunned for being ANTI SC which at least for me was never my intent, or a few others intent. I personally hate being called that. I prefer FREE THINKER.

And since it was another group that put me in the one I am so labeled with now...who really is PART OF THE PROBLEM?

 

If you are doing something to fight piracy despite disagreeing with SC tactics then you are definitely not part of the problem but part of the solution and I applaud you for that.

 

Well then that confirms that the denial of public performance on the discs you own is enforceable too right? Yep....

There is a big difference between "use the mark" (as in trademark) and "public performance." If this was only an "publisher's issue" with discs, why was it included in the Gem agreement? It shouldn't have been since by it's nature in the U.K., it pretty much sidesteps any restrictions by publishers.

 

You see Lone, what you are dealing with is fear. Fear is not rational, though fear will attempt to justify itself over and over again.

Fear will refute evidence that would dispel fear, because fear would cease to exist if it accepted reality. The big scary monsters aren't real. "Oh yes they are because I'm afraid."

I've seen the argument that SC is free to sue you whenever they want. I've seen the argument that SC can audit you whenever they want. I've seen the argument that SC will, with the utmost certainty, sue you if you run a computer based show. I've seen the argument that using SC product will result in your clients being sued. It all became crystal clear with the post that said something to the effect of: I'm pissed because I can't use the discs I paid for because I'm afraid... the only thing that sustains these arguments under analysis is FEAR. This fear has even driven some to predict that another big scary monster is gonna come and sue everybody with the help of a company that does not produce karaoke tracks.

I believe that EDUCATING the public and thereby our clients about the issues we are facing as an industry and what the reality of the situation is when it comes to the legality or legitimacy of karaoke entertainment in the U.S.

Education has a direct effect on fear. It banishes fear and irrationality with the blunt force of knowledge.

The public performance clause in the License Agreement refers specifically to the rights granted with regard to SC's trademarks. In the section just above that it states clearly that there are rights still held by third parties that SC does not have the authority to grant.

It seems to me, that this (legal & enforceable contract) would quell any fear of being prosecuted by SC. My attorney confirmed that if I execute my obligations under this contract that I have nothing to fear.

I believe that part of this fear stems from the concept of a presumption of innocence. That concept applies to criminal prosecution. In civil litigation, there is no presumption of innocence as it applies to a dispute. In a dispute, there is no prosecutor. There is a complaint and a response. For example, if I engage in a dispute over property lines, I could take my neighbor to civil court and make him prove that his fence is not on my property. In effect, he would have to prove his innocence or move his fence. If his response proves my complaint to be unsustainable by the facts, then the respondent may initiate a counter-suit or dispute of his own to recover damages. This is where fear ceases to sustain itself once again and where you'll see fear thrashing and sputtering and lashing out as it tries to maintain its grip on the minds of the affected. It is so very hard to remain afraid when someone turns on the light.

FDR said "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself." I believe that to be the case only I would add that disinformation propagated by those who are afraid is but one of the cutting edges of fear that is the most dangerous.

 

Sandman...sometimes the Bogeyman is real. Ask any legitimate and wrongly sued entity that's had to spend thousands of dollars to defend themselves against bogus allegations. Oh Rumbolt.....

 

If bogus allegations are in fact proven, then you have grounds on which to counter-sue and recover damages. Julie, it works BOTH ways.

I would point out that NONE of the SC suits have gone to trial because if their allegations are proved to be untrue, they drop the suit. There are several alternatives to allowing SC direct access to your private property. I could suggest a court-appointed inspector that would be a neutral third party to do the audit. I could suggest video presentation of your cd+g/original media collection to be introduced as evidence that you do, in fact own the original media. I'm not an attorney by any stretch of the imagination, but I can tell you that by using knowledge and confidence, I can eliminate doubt and worry from my strategy.

That is how the system "works".

Julie... the Bogeyman doesn't exist. That is your fear, trying to make it real.

 

Not if the venue client joins SC's Safe Harbor program which costs them nothing. They really just have to confirm to SC that any KJ they hire has legit SC product to avoid any litigation.

 

:winkpill:I'm aware that the argument doesn't hold up.:rolleyespill:

 

I definitely wasn't sitting on my butt doing nothing. I reported hard drive sellers, I reported pirates, but did I ever get any proof? My information verified with proof might have gotten some results. The manufacturers cannot be everywhere. This meeting on the 15th, which you are all invited to, is going to be a forum where those of us who really want the industry cleaned up and can make the meeting will discuss what can be done. I've heard that those of you who can't make the meeting may be able to join by skype or possibly conference call. We are looking for solutions, not for finger pointing about past issues.

 

FEAR= FALSE EVIDENCE APPEARING REAL


education eradicates FEAR by turning the light on it:biggrinpill:

 

A cockroach will always run when the lights are turned on!

 

This is precisely why I have no interest in pulling down my underwear for SC. You have proven that there is a reason to be afraid, because if you speak up and disagree with SC's tactics and are afraid of wrongly getting caught up in a lawsuit that you and your club may have to pay huge sums of money to defend, people like you will insinuate that if you are to show any evidence, whatever evidence you actually show would be false anyway.

How generous of you.

 

And boogymen evaporate into the shadows they really are:smilepill:

 

you reported pirates, hard drive sellers, and in a previous statement said you even sent pics of the SC logo on screen, is that not enough? there are hired and compensated investigators who can take what you give and get the proof. you are reporting a crime to the authorities, and from there THEY follow up. doing ANYTHING is doing SOMETHING to better the situation and with or without the proof, you have opened a door and there is no minimum requirement for helping, don't sell short your contribution.

 

My own answer to this is twofold:

Principle- an invasion of privacy by someone with no authority to do so other than because they feel like it, with no real benefit for the KJ, to who this can happen again and again- no legally binding document states otherwise.

Business. My time is worth something. Why shouldn't SC offer the KJ their standard rate for the time involved ( both in prep and the audit). Why doesn't this seem fair?

Why does ANYONE think a VENDOR deserves freebies?

Again, I believe that if each audited KJ were to be compensated (as they should be), SC would be much more careful about those they send letters to. They might even truly investigate beforehand, because they wouldn't want to pay out funds for an audit of a KJ from whom they couldn't get a settlement ( and those funds back). Give me a down side to this method...

1) If SC actually investigates, they will get their money back from the guilty, and this will cost them nothing in the long run

2) The harrassment and inconvenience for the legit KJs would end, again, because SC would actually investigate PRIOR to sending letters.

3) Whether right or wrong, many KJs would cut back on the the bad word of mouth because of the compensation, and SC might yet save what's left of a customer base if they ever get back into the karaoke music production business.

 

Danny, that's a post that absolutely no one could debate. Thank you.