What's new

Clarification- For Whom The Post Tolls....

JoeChartreuse

Chief Talker
PF Member
Messages
2,490
Reaction score
0
Points
402
Location
Bergen County, NJ
I have come to understand that many seem to think that a lot of my posts were directed where they were not, and some have begun mixing my posts up with others. I have been getting PMs and e-mails that indicate this, so:


Sound Choice: Yes, I have some issues with them, but not so many as some keep claiming..

I have ethical issues with what I see as harrassing innocent people, tarnishing their names and careers, and settlements through intimidation- plus the side effect of venue karaoke paraonoia caused by them.

For purposes of this thread only, I will call this my opinion to avoid more debate, derailing, and misunderstanding, ok?

That's basically it for SC. Anything you see me post on the above is definitely aimed at SC, will continue to be as long as they continue in the same way.


At this time I have no issues with CB or any other karaoke company, as they haven't done what SC has- YET.


The Licensing Issues: These posts are not directed at the mfrs., but to KJs!

I simply don't care if the mfrs. are licensed or not, simply because most other companies never were, and they aren't any worse. I'm mfr. disc based, and in my case the problem is their responsibility, not mine.

I HAVE posted on it however, but I wasn't aiming at the mfrs. IF SC wants to try and collect licensing fees, let 'em try. My posts- directed at KJs- are simply to let them know that since SC has no U.S. licensing, paying them licensing fees would be ridiculous from a business standpoint. Informational for KJs only.

However, if you want a compliment for SC- Kurt is the ONLY one honest enough to publicly post that he has no U.S. licensing.


In regard to my posted questions regarding CB's licensing:

At that time, three things happened at once. I heard rumors ( and so far still are ) of Publisher/Owners jumping into the fray, CB posted that all of their tracks were U.S. licensed, and then I saw the permanent injunction against at leat 180+ of their songs. If the P/Os were getting involved, then licensing DOES become important.

I almost HAD to post questions, so I did. However, it was a polite exchange from both sides, and even CB knew my reason for asking was for knowledge to benefit KJs. Unfortunately, they remain silent in regard to those questions.

In other words, my questions to CB were in hopes of getting info to be directed toward kjs.

None of MY licensing questions were attempted knocks on ANY manufacturer.


Look, any manufacturer of any product is going to push said product, and tell you it's the best- or will if they want to stay in business. One does not depend on them for neccesary information about their product, including legality. Just common sense.



As far as altering product making it your own:

Just information that I believe every KJ should have in their business arsenal. Again, nothing to do with the manufacturers.

I have no agenda. I am a disc based Luddite, and happy. While I advise against changing to digital for all of those gazillion reasons (including many business related) that I have previously given, the fact is, I not only don't care how you base your show, but hope you are happy and stay that way- better for me!

So, to many who accuse me of "manufacturer bashing", I say that isn't always true, and I have been equally busy debating the business with other KJs, and those posts were for them.

Do not ask for whom the post tolls- 'cause sometimes it tolls for thee....

I can only hope that clarifies, at least a little bit. :rolleyespill::winkpill:
 
I don't think it is necessary for you (or anyone) to apologize for other people's need to read between your lines.
 
I don't see an apology in Joe's post.

Read between the lines much?

I can't do that with your post, because there is only one line.

The first word of the thread's topic: "Clarification" pretty much makes your comment irrelevant.
 
...and Joe's perceptions are his and his alone. He doesn't know everything he thinks he does about the SC investigations etc. He screams they are ruining ppls lives but ALSO thinks SC et al are justified in theie "pursuit" They just can't be right because they aren't doing it the way he SAYS he would. ad naus.

He definitely projects as if he is in bed with dogs ( pirates). He will cry over and over he is "on their side" ( the mfr) but, but, but.

I and others have tried to enlighten him To the fact that if you lie with dogs... but what he absolutely can not seem to comprehend is you can't be on both sides.

Watch his reply to my post. He will make all the sense in the world ( to himself) then go right back into "they are wrong but they are justified in doing it"

This is not an attack (but I realize it could be percieved as such) it is my observation of his entire history on this topic.

No wonder there are misconceptions ( sigh)
 
Mantis1 said:
...and Joe's perceptions are his and his alone. He doesn't know everything he thinks he does about the SC investigations etc. He screams they are ruining ppls lives but ALSO thinks SC et al are justified in theie "pursuit" They just can't be right because they aren't doing it the way he SAYS he would. ad naus.

He definitely projects as if he is in bed with dogs ( pirates). He will cry over and over he is "on their side" ( the mfr) but, but, but.

I and others have tried to enlighten him To the fact that if you lie with dogs... but what he absolutely can not seem to comprehend is you can't be on both sides.

Watch his reply to my post. He will make all the sense in the world ( to himself) then go right back into "they are wrong but they are justified in doing it"

This is not an attack (but I realize it could be percieved as such) it is my observation of his entire history on this topic.

No wonder there are misconceptions ( sigh)

Okay, so which of you then should we recognize as the authority on what Joe thinks?
 
Proformance said:
I don't think it is necessary for you (or anyone) to apologize for other people's need to read between your lines.

I don't think it is necessary to post a massive explanation of ones previous posts when none was requested. :laughpill:
 
Actually, my OP was just what it was supposed to be- a clarification. Not an apology for anything misunderstood by others. No one requested it, but I felt like posting it.

I expected maybe a few "I get it"s and some "You're full of it"s as well. Of course I see the "You're full of it" - Thank you, Mantis :winkpill:- and hope to see a few " I get it"s soon...

However, it's the best I can do either way, and what is, is.
 
I don't see anything untoward in anything you've posted, although I'm still waiting on that alleged list of 180 songs so I can respond to it.

I for one appreciate and honor Joe's style and grace in handling what are sometimes hot-button issues.
 
Chartbusterette said:
I don't see anything untoward in anything you've posted, although I'm still waiting on that alleged list of 180 songs so I can respond to it.

Look in your OWN filing cabinet... you see a list of ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY SIX songs... on a document labeled "EXHIBIT A" and "Permanent Injunction and Dismissal, Middle Dist. Tn. Case No. 3-06-468"

(in order to keep things fair, a copy of this document is available to all non-cheerleader members of the forum. I would expect CB to provide their own copy to their cheerleaders so that the two can be compared.... we wouldn't want to be accused of not producing the correct document.)
 
Chartbusterette said:
I don't see anything untoward in anything you've posted, although I'm still waiting on that alleged list of 180 songs so I can respond to it.

I for one appreciate and honor Joe's style and grace in handling what are sometimes hot-button issues.

Once again, I thank you for your kind words. However, I would like to add that I DID request an e-mail address that you would reply to, and I did post the 9 tracks on the list that I own several times. Not pushing that issue on this thread though. Just dealing with the OP.

Either way, I figure an "I got it" from you is worth a lot. Thanks again.
 
JoeChartreuse said:
and hope to see a few " I get it"s soon...

You won't see the "I got it" light bulb going on from me as I always did get it, right from the beginning, so obviously the bulb has been burning continuously.
So I guess this is the next best thing.
 
Diafel said:
You won't see the "I got it" light bulb going on from me as I always did get it, right from the beginning, so obviously the bulb has been burning continuously.
So I guess this is the next best thing.

Actually, it IS the best thing, though the other is pretty darn good too. Thanks!
 
Back
Top