Chartbuster Offering Music On SD Cards?!?!

[Guest]

As many times as my pinkie hits it
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

if they throw the responsibility on us, ok. the big problem the manus are using for the suits is trademark.....the graphics portion. laws already allow for media transfer from disk to pc for commercial use, and that is all ASCAP, BMI & Harry Fox are really concerned about as long as the venue pays licensing. we have their "blessing" of sorts, the manus want us to ask them for their blessing to transfer the graphics to pc for commercial use, and since no real laws concering them exist, technically i guess it can be their call.
i by no means agree with the heavy handed tactics, nor do i appreciate being called a theif and accused as a downloading pirate without any proof that i do NOT own all my discs. now......

can you imagine using these SD cards? carry my entire library with me in a case the size of an external hard drive. now THAT would be very cool to me.

 

[Guest]

can you imagine using these SD cards? carry my entire library with me in a case the size of an external hard drive. now THAT would be very cool to me.

From a marketing perspective what does it matter? Once you've been spotted using a PC you're an instant pariah and fodder for a law suit.

The products are now sick - who wants to be infected?

 

[c. staley]

From a marketing perspective what does it matter? Once you've been spotted using a PC you're an instant pariah and fodder for a law suit.

The products are now sick - who wants to be infected?

Exactly.

Purchase Chartbusters SD card songs and get sued by Sound Choice... great idea.

 

[DannyGKaraoke]

You wouldn't get sued by Sound Choice, Chip, since it is not a Sound Choice product. You could get sued by Chartbuster though.
That siad I would be afraid of misplacing the SD cards since they are so small.

 

[c. staley]

You wouldn't get sued by Sound Choice, Chip, since it is not a Sound Choice product. You could get sued by Chartbuster though.
That said I would be afraid of misplacing the SD cards since they are so small.

If you use a computer and an SC logo appears on the screen, you will get sued. I'll bet that even if you use discs for SC and a computer for all the rest, you'll still get sued by SC.

Whether it's SC or CB, sued is still sued isn't it?

Do you really need to put yourself in that position?

 

[KJSandman]

If you use a computer and an SC logo appears on the screen, you will get sued. I'll bet that even if you use discs for SC and a computer for all the rest, you'll still get sued by SC.

No, Chip.

If you use a computer and an SC or CB or PHM or ZM or SF logo appears you had better have purchased the original product and be capable of substantiating that purchase and your possession of said product.

If you use a computer and one of those logos appears you may be contacted by a manufacturer who wishes to determine if you have stolen their product and/or displayed their trademark without permission. You will not be sued if you can demonstrate that you have not committed thievery or a copyright violation.

I do not feel threatened by this action. I certainly am not giving up any of my rights when I respond to any inquiry. In fact, I am actively and rationally assessing the situation when I determine that because I have not committed the acts in question it certainly is less trouble to present evidence to that fact than it would be to force these companies to pursue the answer they seek in court.

As to which companies may take action that leads to someone being sued, any and all companies have the right to take action. They also have and have exercised the right to determine what criteria determines their course of action. Hence the 1:1 concept. The SD card is a different form of delivery, but it still is product with the licensing, rights and limitations.

I'm interested in the new format. The discs that I posted photos of on another thread weigh almost 150 lbs in their cases but about 4.5oz on my hard drive. The SD cards would be a lot easier to store, but the question about transfer of files to a working hard disk while archiving the original media is still there.

I am reasonably certain that I will not be sued by SC as I have a licensed and fully paid for GEM series. That means I have a covenant in place that SC will not take action against me for transferring my files to a hard drive as long as I maintain the 1:1 ratio. I am also a member of their Safe Harbor program as I own several hundred of their various series of CD+Gs and I found it prudent to contact them before they contacted me. I believe that is cooperation as opposed to submission. I believe that at some point professionalism must enter into the equation. I know that CB is aware of me because when I purchased their Essential 450 Vol. 10 CD+Gs, they had to produce a copy for me as it was back-ordered. I also saw Norbert Stovall had become a fan of the FaceBook page for my shows. My last order from PHM/Stellar was for 3 months of updates in mp3+g format on disc. I have a history with that company of having purchased 200+ discs from them going back to the mid 90's. To my knowledge, these manufacturers have not made it to Colorado yet, but I'll welcome them with open disc cases when they do.

NO, Chip, your statement is patently untrue. I am proof of that.

 

[c. staley]

No, Chip.

If you use a computer and an SC or CB or PHM or ZM or SF logo appears you had better have purchased the original product and be capable of substantiating that purchase and your possession of said product.

If you use a computer and one of those logos appears you may be contacted by a manufacturer who wishes to determine if you have stolen their product and/or displayed their trademark without permission. You will not be sued if you can demonstrate that you have not committed thievery or a copyright violation.

How ridiculous! You're saying that by simply using the product makes you suspect to have stolen it - period.

I do not feel threatened by this action. I certainly am not giving up any of my rights when I respond to any inquiry. In fact, I am actively and rationally assessing the situation when I determine that because I have not committed the acts in question it certainly is less trouble to present evidence to that fact than it would be to force these companies to pursue the answer they seek in court.

You certainly are giving up your rights, you are either unwilling to admit it or just don't realize it. You shouldn't have to "present evidence" that you have not committed any acts - it's up to them to prove you have. Would you feel any different if the child protective services came to you and demanded that you prove you are NOT a pedophile when their only "evidence" is that they've seen you playing with children at a park? Whether the action is criminal or not, it's the same premise: prove you're innocent because we don't have to prove you're guilty.

As to which companies may take action that leads to someone being sued, any and all companies have the right to take action. They also have and have exercised the right to determine what criteria determines their course of action. Hence the 1:1 concept. The SD card is a different form of delivery, but it still is product with the licensing, rights and limitations.

I'm interested in the new format. The discs that I posted photos of on another thread weigh almost 150 lbs in their cases but about 4.5oz on my hard drive. The SD cards would be a lot easier to store, but the question about transfer of files to a working hard disk while archiving the original media is still there.

Sure they have the right "take action" however, they don't have the right to conduct a fishing expedition - something the courts really do not smile upon.

I am reasonably certain that I will not be sued by SC as I have a licensed and fully paid for GEM series. That means I have a covenant in place that SC will not take action against me for transferring my files to a hard drive as long as I maintain the 1:1 ratio. I am also a member of their Safe Harbor program as I own several hundred of their various series of CD+Gs and I found it prudent to contact them before they contacted me. I believe that is cooperation as opposed to submission. I believe that at some point professionalism must enter into the equation. I know that CB is aware of me because when I purchased their Essential 450 Vol. 10 CD+Gs, they had to produce a copy for me as it was back-ordered. I also saw Norbert Stovall had become a fan of the FaceBook page for my shows. My last order from PHM/Stellar was for 3 months of updates in mp3+g format on disc. I have a history with that company of having purchased 200+ discs from them going back to the mid 90's. To my knowledge, these manufacturers have not made it to Colorado yet, but I'll welcome them with open disc cases when they do.

NO, Chip, your statement is patently untrue. I am proof of that.

So you have agreed to provide a vendor - Sound Choice - with your business accounting records whenever they want? That IS SUBMISSION since your business accounting records really have nothing to do with their rental product. Whether you are a good or bad businessman, can make money or not has nothing to do with their product so you've been snookered on that one for sure.

You have agreed to allow this private company -who is a vendor- whom you pay a (now) reoccurring fee to "inspect" your library whenever they want? That IS SUBMISSION. (and of the worst kind I might add)

You can attempt to justify your submission to all of their terms with no reciprocity on their behalf for the rest of your rental term if you like, it won't change the tar pit that you've voluntarily crawled into. But be prepared to do it all again for any vendor that requests.

By your own words, when it comes to being sued, even after signing all these agreements, paying a monthly rental and submitting to an audit, and giving up your accounting records, you are only "reasonably certain" you won't be sued.

I am positively certain I won't be. There is a HUGE difference.

You are welcome to hand them your rights along with your wallet. This is a free country and if marrying Sound Choice feels good to you, then by all means, go for it.

 

[KJSandman]

Without all the hyperbole...

Even if I conceded the submission of my rights as you have suggested, what have I actually accomplished? I've shielded my business and it's clients. This is a very specific scope of effectiveness. I've discussed this contract with my attorney and both parties have specific requirements with regard to its execution. There is no "any time they want" clause. I believe you may be aware that an competent attorney will represent your interests with regard to inquiries or audits. I am willing to cooperate. I also, always have the option of returning the product to them, thereby nullifying the agreement. This isn't the case for the CD+G product that I had purchased prior to obtaining the GEM series. I joined the Safe Harbor program as well because I believe that honestly and openly disclosing this information cannot harm me or my business.

You insist that Sound Choice will sue me. Why? Do you have direct knowledge pertaining to anyone who has a covenant in place with this company that has had action taken against them?

I am attempting, at the risk of more scorn and derision, to proffer the concept of professionalism, cooperation and possibly, coming up with a standard to determine what exactly it means to be a pro in this business. I've mentioned it before; there are industries where standards and regulation are the norm. There has to be some middle ground that benefits everyone involved.

You said: "How ridiculous! You're saying that by simply using the product makes you suspect to have stolen it - period."

I said "If you use a computer...". I concede the fact that unauthorized duplication of and subsequent use of this media constitutes a violation under current statutes.

I did not say "simply using the product makes you suspect to having stolen it".

I'm trying to be reasonable here. I am saying that using a computer to display karaoke in a commercial setting does in fact open you up to scrutiny. I've considered that fact as I've gained experience and built my business. I've also considered that cooperating with these manufacturers now may very well put me in an advantageous position in the future.

 

[Guest]

Without all the hyperbole...

Even if I conceded the submission of my rights as you have suggested, what have I actually accomplished? I've shielded my business and it's clients. This is a very specific scope of effectiveness. I've discussed this contract with my attorney and both parties have specific requirements with regard to its execution. There is no "any time they want" clause. I believe you may be aware that an competent attorney will represent your interests with regard to inquiries or audits. I am willing to cooperate. I also, always have the option of returning the product to them, thereby nullifying the agreement. This isn't the case for the CD+G product that I had purchased prior to obtaining the GEM series. I joined the Safe Harbor program as well because I believe that honestly and openly disclosing this information cannot harm me or my business.

You insist that Sound Choice will sue me. Why? Do you have direct knowledge pertaining to anyone who has a covenant in place with this company that has had action taken against them?

I am attempting, at the risk of more scorn and derision, to proffer the concept of professionalism, cooperation and possibly, coming up with a standard to determine what exactly it means to be a pro in this business. I've mentioned it before; there are industries where standards and regulation are the norm. There has to be some middle ground that benefits everyone involved.

You said: "How ridiculous! You're saying that by simply using the product makes you suspect to have stolen it - period."

I said "If you use a computer...". I concede the fact that unauthorized duplication of and subsequent use of this media constitutes a violation under current statutes.

I did not say "simply using the product makes you suspect to having stolen it".

I'm trying to be reasonable here. I am saying that using a computer to display karaoke in a commercial setting does in fact open you up to scrutiny. I've considered that fact as I've gained experience and built my business. I've also considered that cooperating with these manufacturers now may very well put me in an advantageous position in the future.

Very well said!:biggrinpill:

 

[Guest]

I did not say "simply using the product makes you suspect to having stolen it".

I am saying that using a computer to display karaoke in a commercial setting does in fact open you up to scrutiny.

What's the difference? Seriously, you are talking out of both sides of your mouth.

This is not the IRS - it's just a karaoke label, just a simple music product. We can move on without any need to involve ourselves in their problems. Unfortnately, they insist on inserting their issues into our face - pardon me while I head butt them.

 

[c. staley]

Even if I conceded the submission of my rights as you have suggested, what have I actually accomplished? I've shielded my business and it's clients.

You've not shielded your clients from anything. With either the Gem agreement or safeharbor you are still open to legal action.

This is a very specific scope of effectiveness. I've discussed this contract with my attorney and both parties have specific requirements with regard to its execution. There is no "any time they want" clause. I believe you may be aware that an competent attorney will represent your interests with regard to inquiries or audits. I am willing to cooperate. I also, always have the option of returning the product to them, thereby nullifying the agreement. This isn't the case for the CD+G product that I had purchased prior to obtaining the GEM series. I joined the Safe Harbor program as well because I believe that honestly and openly disclosing this information cannot harm me or my business.

So, you are willing to send this vendor money and with regard to "inquiries and audits" you will need "a competent attorney to represent your interests?"

You insist that Sound Choice will sue me. Why? Do you have direct knowledge pertaining to anyone who has a covenant in place with this company that has had action taken against them?

I'm not insisting anything. However you can't claim that even with your current agreements in place, they can't sue you... because they can.

 

[KJSandman]

No, I'm not.

Pro... comprehend the entire message...

Using the computer is already a violation, prior to any act of theft or infringement.

The thing is, I see their problem as my problem with regard to this industry. I don't agree with everything they've said or done. I still don't see their actions at a threat to legitimate operators. I'm not involved with their problems, I'm involved in cooperating with the intent of finding a solution.

What is your motivation?

 

[Diafel]

Using the computer is already a violation, prior to any act of theft or infringement.

Actually, the jury is out on that one, and will be for some time to come.
It's only a "perceived" violation. Until a court rules specifically and definitely on it, it will continue to be an OPINION only!

 

[KJSandman]

Alright, I see your point

In what way are we supposed to incorporate our perceptions into the practicality of running this business. If there are no specifics, doesn't it make sense to consider the situation as it stands and avoid the obvious pitfalls while trying to detect the less obvious ones?

Dealing with this perceived violation by pro-actively communicating with those concerned seems reasonable to me.

 

[Guest]

No, I'm not.

Pro... comprehend the entire message...

Using the computer is already a violation, prior to any act of theft or infringement.

You're wrong, there is already sufficient precedent affirming your right to shift the format to a computer.

The issue dividing people on this forum is not piracy - it's control.

If format shifting was still in doubt this would all be a slam dunk, we'd all be paying SC and neither "trademark" or "audits" would be part of the discusion.

 

[Guest]

Actually, the jury is out on that one, and will be for some time to come.
It's only a "perceived" violation. Until a court rules specifically and definitely on it, it will continue to be an OPINION only!

Actually the Jury isn't out on it, the law is very clear on the subject of use of trademarks and there are already cases that have been decided in the trademark holders favor on the subject (many of them).

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

Actually the Jury isn't out on it, the law is very clear on the subject of use of trademarks and there are already cases that have been decided in the trademark holders favor on the subject (many of them).

a link would definitely help sort this out. where is that law?

 

[Diafel]

Alright, I see your point

In what way are we supposed to incorporate our perceptions into the practicality of running this business. If there are no specifics, doesn't it make sense to consider the situation as it stands and avoid the obvious pitfalls while trying to detect the less obvious ones?

Dealing with this perceived violation by pro-actively communicating with those concerned seems reasonable to me.

How I deal with it is I choose to drop the manufacturer's discs who are most likely to try and come after me for that perceived violation. I don't have many to begin with, so it's not a real loss to me.
I would rather do that than go through the alternative hassle. I'm quite sure my venue owners would lose their minds in the unlikely situation I was handed a letter or a lawsuit and would not bother to wait and hear an explanation. I prefer to keep the roof over my head and the food on my table. It's not just all about the manufacturers' survival. There is me to think about, too. And since no one else is thinking of me, I guess I'm the one that has to do it.

 

[Diafel]

Actually the Jury isn't out on it, the law is very clear on the subject of use of trademarks and there are already cases that have been decided in the trademark holders favor on the subject (many of them).

Whatever you say, Thunder. :rolleyespill: