What's new

Fighting Back

I think there will be a long term benefit to Mp3+G discs. Even if you were forced to directly play the songs from the discs, eventually I believe there will be a liscense you can buy to transfer the files to hard drive. The CPDJA has been fighting to get one for some time now, and altho I can't afford to be a proper member right now, I continue to help them in any way I can.

Does anyone know the story behind how Canada got digital liscensing for music? Basically, a DJ got sued, fought and won. I don't see why the same thing can't happen for karaoke.

Think of all the time I'm going to save myself when I already have my files in mp3+G format and don't have to spend the time ripping them.

Oh and let's not forget the most obvious benefit, at least to someone who's just starting out or hasn't been doing this for a long time.

up to 7200 songs with NO FREAKIN' REPEATS!! ;)

-James
 
Bazza said:
Any hints as to the prices?

Here is what Kurt said in an earlier post on this thread:

"For someone who wants to BUY our products first, the entire 7200 song MP3+G set will be about $4850! And we'll be giving discounts to KIAA and ADJA members that will probably cover a year's membership on larger purchases."
 
DJ Dr. Drax said:
If SC decided to sell the Mp3+G in a download delivery no issues.
.

Sorry to pop back in, but a lack of knowledge of the karaoke business ( no knock- you're a DJ after all ) and the "+G" part of the situation is showing.:

There are no downloaded karaoke tracks legal for use by a U.S. based karaoke host, because no such combination license ( including the SYNC for lyrics swipes- not used by DJs, of course) EXISTS in the U.S. The so called "legal" downloads are actually only legal for overseas hosts to use, because licensing requirements are different there.

This not even argued by anyone anymore. Dr. Drax, if you wish to disagree and call me more names or remark on my ignorance, please be aware that you will be doing the same to Mr. Kurt Slep, CEO of Sound Choice, who backs me up on this point.
 
JoeChartreuse said:
Sorry to pop back in, but a lack of knowledge of the karaoke business ( no knock- you're a DJ after all ) and the "+G" part of the situation is showing.:

There are no downloaded karaoke tracks legal for use by a U.S. based karaoke host, because no such combination license ( including the SYNC for lyrics swipes- not used by DJs, of course) EXISTS in the U.S. The so called "legal" downloads are actually only legal for overseas hosts to use, because licensing requirements are different there.

This not even argued by anyone anymore. Dr. Drax, if you wish to disagree and call me more names or remark on my ignorance, please be aware that you will be doing the same to Mr. Kurt Slep, CEO of Sound Choice, who backs me up on this point.

Actually, again, you misunderstood, and Drax really wasn't 100% clear. If SC obtains permission to distribute in a digital format online, then they can do so. It's NOT illegal - the labels who own the music have simply refused to allow that sort of distribution SO FAR. The same thing happened with iTunes in the beginning. The agreements REQUIRED DRM. eMusic's catalog was indie artists... but the big labels are now embracing non-DRM distribution. Sony's back catalog, Columbia Jazz, and Concord Jazz are now on eMusic. iTunes is now non-DRM.

It will be embraced - IN TIME. SC is persuing licensing to deliver using other means (MP3+CDG on disc) and hopefully, as a digital download.



As for the overseas thing... They can sell it overseas, you can buy it overseas, and use it here - within the confines of import regulations and the laws here.

In other words, if you buy Terrence Trent D'Arby's 'Best of' CD from Japan which comes as a two disc set (which was released in the US as a single disc) to get a track on the second disc - it's no more illegal than obtaining tracks purchased overseas. The legalities of licensing overseas vary. That's how Zoom was able to release an Eagle's disc and SC chose not to (overseas). They 'could' have done exactly what Zoom did, but they also knew if they did it would tarnish their dealing with Warner in the future - so they didn't. While they couldn't sell it direct in the states - nothing is to stop you from buying from a brick and mortar in the UK and having it sent to the US. Or buying it from an importer in the US.


The whole point comes down the manufacturer obtaining the proper licensing for the country of origin.
 
A lot of people, not the least of whom is Kurt Slep of Sound Choice, have drawn conclusions as to what is legal and what is not. I've taken on SC in their lawsuit against me to defend my position which is simply this: Loading my CDGs onto a harddrive and playing them from that harddrive is fair use as defined by US statute and case law. It is not in any way trademark infringement, unfair competition, or otherwise illegal. For commercial karaoke purposes, no court has ever made a decision on this issue. It's my position that this IS FAIR USE. And while I am not a lawyer, the person who wrote those article is, and they specialize in intellectual property.
http://www.imaginelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1196173.html
Oh yeah... and they agree with me.

-- Dan Dan
 
azdandan said:
A lot of people, not the least of whom is Kurt Slep of Sound Choice, have drawn conclusions as to what is legal and what is not. I've taken on SC in their lawsuit against me to defend my position which is simply this: Loading my CDGs onto a harddrive and playing them from that harddrive is fair use as defined by US statute and case law. It is not in any way trademark infringement, unfair competition, or otherwise illegal. For commercial karaoke purposes, no court has ever made a decision on this issue. It's my position that this IS FAIR USE. And while I am not a lawyer, the person who wrote those article is, and they specialize in intellectual property.
http://www.imaginelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1196173.html
Oh yeah... and they agree with me.

-- Dan Dan

Actually, it's not for commercial purposes. The Rio Decision, USV Title 17 and every other decision handed down from the Supreme Court says it's NOT. A 1:1 copy where the discs aren't being used doesn't have any real damages though. They're wanting to verify the 1:1 ratio if you're on a hard drive system, and if you don't have a disc for a track then you're not legal. Seems simple enough for me.

There is a HUGE difference between being 'legal' and not being able to show damages.

I'm eagerly awaiting the outcome of your court case because that is the ONLY way that it will be defined definitively. Well, once it goes to the supreme court it will...


And as for the article to which you linked: I've read it many years ago. And until an actual decision is handed down, it's speculation, just like what everyone else is doing.
 
I am still trying to find where fair use allows for comercial use so far I haven't found that anywhere in the Copyright laws! I wish one of those who keep seeing it would copy and paste it for me!
 
Thunder said:
I am still trying to find where fair use allows for comercial use so far I haven't found that anywhere in the Copyright laws! I wish one of those who keep seeing it would copy and paste it for me!

With that in mind Thunder, aren't we all breaking the law to some degree?
 
truthteller said:
With that in mind Thunder, aren't we all breaking the law to some degree?

NO not everyone!

Some of us are!

And your point!:sqlaugh:
 
azdandan said:
A lot of people, not the least of whom is Kurt Slep of Sound Choice, have drawn conclusions as to what is legal and what is not. I've taken on SC in their lawsuit against me to defend my position which is simply this: Loading my CDGs onto a harddrive and playing them from that harddrive is fair use as defined by US statute and case law. It is not in any way trademark infringement, unfair competition, or otherwise illegal. For commercial karaoke purposes, no court has ever made a decision on this issue. It's my position that this IS FAIR USE. And while I am not a lawyer, the person who wrote those article is, and they specialize in intellectual property.
http://www.imaginelaw.com/lawyer-attorney-1196173.html
Oh yeah... and they agree with me.

-- Dan Dan

Hey Dan,

I don't know if you've been to my website, but I would very much like to do a profile on your case, and provide our readers with updates. Feel free to PM me with additional information as it becomes available.
 
Dan:

Is the lawsuit against you for using a computer or for using music (or the trademark for that music) that they are accusing you of not paying for? If it is the latter, how does your case become a test case for computer use? Are you saying that because using a computer shouldn't be a crime, they never had a right to question your library? Not sure how you are making one thing out of another.
 
Thunder said:
I am still trying to find where fair use allows for comercial use so far I haven't found that anywhere in the Copyright laws! I wish one of those who keep seeing it would copy and paste it for me!

According to the article that was posted, fair use DOESN"T cover commercial use. What they are saying is that there are OTHER factors that outweight a commercial use.

However, until it goes to your supreme court, it is just one lawyer's opinion. I don't think it will ever get that far tho, it just doesn't seem like something that would draw enough attention.

Too bad, I would love fair use to cover copying a cdg.
 
"Fair use" only covers PERSONAL use. It absolutely does not cover any commercial use. And if DanDan thinks his use of karaoke tracks is not Commercial use, he has a long long fight to try to win that argument. The article from Imaginlaw that he likes to quote CLEARLY states that "fair use" is not an allowed argument when the use is commercial. And that is because that is correct.

DANDAN is not being sued for transferring the songs that he did own prior to our investigation from CDG to his hard drive. We are not suing ANYONE for format shift transfers if they owned original Sound Choice CDGs for each and every song on their hard drive prior to our investigation. DanDan is being sued for songs that he did not own on CDG prior to our investigation and filing. By his own admission on his posts, he has since purchased thousands more songs AFTER our investigation and filing. Sorry, that's TOO LATE. Sort of like slowing down after you've been caught on radar by the cops.

Kurt Slep
CEO, Sound Choice
 
Kurt,

I have been arguing the fair use clause for years now and certain people will always be able to read something into it that is not, was not, and never will be in it!
 
Thunder said:
I am still trying to find where fair use allows for comercial use so far I haven't found that anywhere in the Copyright laws! I wish one of those who keep seeing it would copy and paste it for me!

That's the whole point - it doesn't.

Here's United States Code Title 17 for copyright.
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/

Here's part of chapter 1 that deals with Fair Use:
§ 107. Limitations on exclusive rights: Fair use
How Current is This? Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include—
(1) the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
(2) the nature of the copyrighted work;
(3) the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
(4) the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.
The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.


If you do a google search on the Rio Decision, BetaMax Decision, and every other Fair Use decision before the supreme court - they tend to give PERSONAL use lots of lee-way with regards to Fair Use. However, I've yet to see where they allow commercial Fair Use because it would be a pandora's box.

Space shifting on a 1:1 basis might show a lack of damages, but it's STILL aginst the law.
 
ED,

Preaching to the choir here!:sqwink:

I know what the Copyright laws state I have read them reread them and then read them again! I just want someone who SEEs the comercial use in the fair use clause to show it to me!:sqlaugh:
 
Thunder said:
ED,

Preaching to the choir here!:sqwink:

I know what the Copyright laws state I have read them reread them and then read them again! I just want someone who SEEs the comercial use in the fair use clause to show it to me!:sqlaugh:

Can't see what's not there.... :sqwink:
 
MusicMeister said:
Actually, again, you misunderstood, and Drax really wasn't 100% clear. If SC obtains permission to distribute in a digital format online, then they can do so. It's NOT illegal - the labels who own the music have simply refused to allow that sort of distribution SO FAR.

No, again, YOU misunderstand. Distribution of karaoke MP3 tracks would only be legal from and overseas site- It's not licenced here, because=to repeat- no such combination license exists in the U.S. Also, MP3 downloads being used by U.S. based karaoke hosts in the running run their shows are not legal here. Such use is NOT licensed in the U.S., and such downloads are not licensed, though if used only in the home I'm sure no one would care.

As Dr. Drax:
"If SC decided to sell the Mp3+G in a download delivery no issues.". Clear enough, and as stated above, false. So you know, this is WHY Kurt is discussing MP3 DISCS.
 
You still failed to get it...

The licensing just hasn't been set up in the past. It's a licensing agreement that Sound Choice would have to arrange with the copyright owners directly. Basically, it's a modification of their current licensing allowing for a different distribution format. It's not 'illegal' - it's just never been set up before. It's the same sync license they have now - only with a modification to the distribution format to insure they don't upset the people who are licensing their intellectual property with SC.


As for the stuff from outside the US.... Assuming it was legally licensed in the country of origin, then you wouldn't fall under copyright/licensing requirements here specifically - it's actually the importation laws you would have an issue with. And depending on the track and it's availability in the US you 'might' be violating import laws... but that's a whole different conversation.

Almost forgot, the terms of us on most online sites prohibit commercial use... but that's not a copyright issue - it's a civil tort dealing with terms of use.
 
geez...

Sound Choice said:
"Fair use" only covers PERSONAL use. It absolutely does not cover any commercial use. And if DanDan thinks his use of karaoke tracks is not Commercial use, he has a long long fight to try to win that argument. The article from Imaginlaw that he likes to quote CLEARLY states that "fair use" is not an allowed argument when the use is commercial. And that is because that is correct.

If you actually read the full article, it CLEARLY states how fair use could and has been allowed by federal judges in a commercial setting.

Sound Choice said:
DANDAN is not being sued for transferring the songs that he did own prior to our investigation from CDG to his hard drive. We are not suing ANYONE for format shift transfers if they owned original Sound Choice CDGs for each and every song on their hard drive prior to our investigation. DanDan is being sued for songs that he did not own on CDG prior to our investigation and filing. By his own admission on his posts, he has since purchased thousands more songs AFTER our investigation and filing. Sorry, that's TOO LATE. Sort of like slowing down after you've been caught on radar by the cops.

Kurt Slep
CEO, Sound Choice

Perhaps you should confer with Mr. Harrington, as you're quite clearly suing me for trademark infringement and unfair competition arising under §§ 32 & 43 of the Trademark Act of 1946, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1114 & 1125. Perhaps you should take some time and learn what that means. Interestingly it has very little to do with fair use or copyright.

I'm awfully curious what admissions on what posts you're referring to. By all means, please post links. And for that matter, what songs you think I played Sound Choice tracks for at my show that I did not own an original disc for and when? Answer me here; it'll save you attorney's fees for my discovery requests.

Yes, I have purchased thousands of songs since your so-called investigation. And those songs I did not have prior to your investigation, on my hard-drive or elsewhere. I've done this to grow my library as I always have when it's affordable. Karaoke Now, a local retailer here, recently had nearly every Sound Choice PowerPicks CDG available for $5.99. Prior to that, and at the time of your so-called investigation, I had mostly Supercore, Pop Hits Monthly, Pop Hits Today, DKKaraoke, Pioneer, JVC, Madacy, Priddis, The Singing Machine, Karaoke Kurrents, Ameri-Sing, House Party Karoke, American Idol, NorthStar, All Hits, Sweet Georgia Brown, NuTech, Music Maestro, All Star Karaoke, Superstar Karaoke, Pocket Songs and Karaoke Bay. The karaoke version of each song I use is clearly listed in my karaoke books. The same books that had my phone number and e-mail address that you never bothered to use prior to filing suit against me as "John Doe No. 1" without even knowing or asking my name. It's the biggest joke in the AZ karaoke community, as I'm well known and not hard to find. Why did it take five months for you to serve me? Seriously, how do you define "Investigate"?

Karaoke Now has also had many discs from other less litigious manufacturers for $1 and $1.99. At those prices, who wouldn't buy thousands of songs? I also bought out three complete karaoke libraries as the deals presented themselves, also resulting in the acquisition of thousands of songs.

Your lackeys have not "caught me on radar", and y'all are a far cry from "the cops".:sqlaugh:
There is no law that mandates I must stop building my library or enjoying my hobby because someone has filed a frivolous lawsuit against me.
 
Back
Top