Fighting Back

[Guest]

The problem with your responses, Thunder, is that you keep making up the scenarios, you keep making up the rules and YOU keep handing out the verdicts.




You, Thunder, assumed many things about that transaction. So let's simplify it and leave it that Bazza sold the discs and Hard Drive at his own garage sale!

The problem with your responses, Eric, is that you keep making up the scenarios, you keep making up the rules and YOU keep handing out the probabilities.

Eric, there is a difference between making up the rules and knowing what the rules are! I have sat through a federal civil trial, and I paid close attention, on top of that I have the transcripts so i can go back and refresh my memory any time I like! What "EXPERIENCE" are you basing your suposistions on? If you want I can send you the entire Federal Rules of the Court!


I am not assuming anything here but you are! You are assuming that if someone says "I sold everything" that the whole thing will end right there.
The problem is that any case like this is going to require evidence, if the Plaintiff can show evidence that you were using the files and you can't show any evidence that you owned them, you are a duck sitting on the water (an easy target)!

 

[Bazza]

Now you just got your neighbor subpoenaed to a federal court trial, is he going to lie for you?:sqbiggrin:

Who's lying? It was such a large crowd. He was probably indoors at the time. I ran the sale while he was at lunch. :sqwink:

 

[JoeChartreuse]

It's all moot horse-hooey. SC wiil never go to court.

If SC goes to court, and the KJ's lawyer isn't a complete feeb, SC loses due to so many unlicensed tracks with logos attached that they distributed, an is stuck with court fees.

If the KJ's lawyer hasn't got a single firing neuron, and the KJ loses, it's chapter 11, and SC is stuck with court fees for nothing.

SC gains absolutely nothing going to court, and stands to lose money, time, and credibility. They know that.

In other words, neither winning nor losing in court gains SC ANYTHING, and will cost them no matter what.

Much easier to, in my opinion, to intimidate for protection money, with the added benefit of getting rid of stock- kinda like a forced post Christmas sale- which is what they are doing.

Again- Court discussion is pretty much a waste of time.

 

[Guest]

It's all moot horse-hooey. SC wiil never go to court. That is horse hockey to you!:sqbiggrin:

If SC goes to court, and the KJ's lawyer isn't a complete feeb, SC loses due to so many unlicensed tracks with logos attached that they distributed, an is stuck with court fees. **** you are assuming again Joe!

If the KJ's lawyer hasn't got a single firing neuron, and the KJ loses, it's chapter 11, and SC is stuck with court fees for nothing. So if he files Chapter 11 who would his creditors be...... Sound Choice! everything he owns other than a single transportation mode (the cheapest one he owns) and his house (except everyone really needs to look at the new bankrupcty laws they are a **** now) would go to (drum roll please **************** SOUND CHOICE! and he would be out of luck for the next 7 years!

SC gains absolutely nothing going to court, and stands to lose money, time, and credibility. They know that. And the Pirate has what to gain by going to court?

In other words, neither winning nor losing in court gains SC ANYTHING, and will cost them no matter what. doesn't that all remain to be seen?

Much easier to, in my opinion, to intimidate for protection money, with the added benefit of getting rid of stock- kinda like a forced post Christmas sale- which is what they are doing. Ya just gotta love it when a good plan comes together!

Again- Court discussion is pretty much a waste of time.

You and I and I, Sound Choice and any of the pirates (that aren't complete idiots) they have filed against are probably in total agreement on this one!:sqbiggrin:

 

[JoeChartreuse]

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Originally Posted by JoeChartreuse


1) If SC goes to court, and the KJ's lawyer isn't a complete feeb, SC loses due to so many unlicensed tracks with logos attached that they distributed, an is stuck with court fees.
THUNDER:**** you are assuming again Joe!

2) If the KJ's lawyer hasn't got a single firing neuron, and the KJ loses, it's chapter 11, and SC is stuck with court fees for nothing.

THUNDERSo if he files Chapter 11 who would his creditors be...... Sound Choice! everything he owns other than a single transportation mode (the cheapest one he owns) and his house (except everyone really needs to look at the new bankrupcty laws they are a **** now) would go to (drum roll please **************** SOUND CHOICE! and he would be out of luck for the next 7 years!

3) SC gains absolutely nothing going to court, and stands to lose money, time, and credibility. They know that.

THUNDERAnd the Pirate has what to gain by going to court?

In other words, neither winning nor losing in court gains SC ANYTHING, and will cost them no matter what. doesn't that all remain to be seen?

Much easier to, in my opinion, to intimidate for protection money, with the added benefit of getting rid of stock- kinda like a forced post Christmas sale- which is what they are doing.

Again- Court discussion is pretty much a waste of time.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Steve,

As for # 1, I wasn't assuming, I merely said IF they lose

#2, Same thing, IF they win

#3, The pirate gains nothing by going to court, and loses nothing but a little time. Then it's back to work as normal.

SC may be listed as a creditor, but that means nothing- they still get zero. I too know bankruptcy law, unfortunately. a relative went through a one in 1998, and have also kept up with the changes.

If the KJ is an LLC or Corp, it's pretty much paperwork and 30 minutes in a room with a judge. Also, if incorporated, his PERSONAL credit may only be minimally affected. As for 7 years? A myth. He'll be offered credit cards in 6 months. His car or house? Depends on the state, but most will no longer take a primary residence if it isn't "extravagent", or the car if it is paid for, and of a standard non-luxury model. ( in other words as you said- the cheapest one he owns).


SC-if they win- ( which would mean the KJ's lawyer hasn't a clue) gets nothing out of it.

SC-if they lose- loses court costs, time, and any credibility they still have left. Not only that, but each loss weakens the case for the next go round, if cited by the next KJ's lawyer.

In short, the pirate neither gains nor loses, SC only loses.

 

[Guest]

Joe, even if the KJ is corp he still loses all his gear, although most are not corp status, most are running as sole props and subject to lose everything!

Under the new bankruptcy laws it is much harder to file than it ever was before. Court cost and fines are not covered under bankruptcy either! Even if the pirate should in some way possibly win he is going to have to have a lawyer and that cost is going to have to be paid upfront (lawyers that work in the federal court aren't stupid) If the KJ should go in pro se then he has lost before he ever finds the right court room! It is going to cost the pirate either way win or lose so no the pirate is still in a lose/lose situation he is going to have to pay to settle, pay to win or pay to lose!

Yes he will get credit offers immeadiately because everyone knows he can not file again for 7 years but for three years under the federal court rules if Sound Choice can show that he lied or misrepresented anything to the court, then it all starts up again right where it left off!

The Pirate can not win in any manner in this situation!

The only possiblity other than leaving the business is to settle and take the buy in option to be legal, with that Sound Choice is the clear winner!

 

[It's Karaoke]

Great input joe, and you're absolutly right. And another thing. Even if SC sits in the front row, with a spot light on them, smiling from ear to ear. They {SC} don't have a clue in at least 6 suits i've read, as to who they're even sueing for crying out loud...those "DBA"'s can be really slippery. Now they may think they know who they're sueing..wait till it gets to court. i can see it now. "Yur honor..i saw that man right there playing sound choice songs off a hard drive...wha'ya mean it's not yur rig it's a corporations, and yur not a part of it? Oh i see..yur just a slob sitting there pushin' buttyons and can't tell a hard drive from a 4 wheel drive..oh i see. well...well....then ummm who's Nasty Nell's Goodtime Karaoke if yur not?...ummm yur honor..yur honor?????

 

[Guest]

Great input joe, and you're absolutly right. And another thing. Even if SC sits in the front row, with a spot light on them, smiling from ear to ear. They {SC} don't have a clue in at least 6 suits i've read, as to who they're even sueing for crying out loud...those "DBA"'s can be really slippery. Now they may think they know who they're sueing..wait till it gets to court. i can see it now. "Yur honor..i saw that man right there playing sound choice songs off a hard drive...wha'ya mean it's not yur rig it's a corporations, and yur not a part of it? Oh i see..yur just a slob sitting there pushin' buttyons and can't tell a hard drive from a 4 wheel drive..oh i see. well...well....then ummm who's Nasty Nell's Goodtime Karaoke if yur not?...ummm yur honor..yur honor?????

I am sure you don't know, but Sound Choice can file a suit against "John Doe" or others TBN! Any of these suits can be amended at any time during the process right up until the actual trial date. So having a name incorrect or a person incorrectly identified doesn't even slow the process down but a day or so!

It would appear that you really don't have a clue!

And all that will be sorted out in depositions long before anyone ever sits in front of the judge, lying during a deposition (thinking you will spring a big suprise during the trial won't cut it) will simply leave you with a federal perjury charge.

There are three general federal perjury laws. One, 18 U.S.C. 1621, outlaws
presenting material false statements under oath in federal official proceedings. A
second, 18 U.S.C. 1623, bars presenting material false statements under oath before
or ancillary to federal court or grand jury proceedings. A third, 18 U.S.C. 1622
(subornation of perjury), prohibits inducing or procuring another to commit perjury
in violation of either Section 1621 or Section 1623.
In most cases, the courts abbreviate their description of the elements and state
that to prove perjury under Section 1623 the government must establish that the
defendant "(1) knowingly made a (2) false (3) material declaration (4) under oath (5)
in a proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States."
The courts generally favor the encapsulation from United States v. Dunnigan to
describe the elements of Section 1621: "A witness testifying under oath or
affirmation violates this section if she gives false testimony concerning a material
matter with the willful intent to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of
confusion, mistake, or faulty memory."
Section 1622 outlaws procuring or inducing another to commit perjury:
"Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury,
and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both",
18 U.S.C. 1622.
The false statement statute, 18 U.S.C. 1001, is closely akin to the perjury
statutes. It outlaws false statements in any matter within the jurisdiction of a federal
agency or department, a kind of perjury with oath prohibition.

 

[Wall Of Sound]

It would appear that you really don't have a clue!

I second that! :sqlaugh:

 

[ericlater]

.......all that will be sorted out in depositions long before anyone ever sits in front of the judge, lying during a deposition (thinking you will spring a big suprise during the trial won't cut it) will simply leave you with a federal perjury charge.

There are three general federal perjury laws. One, 18 U.S.C. 1621, outlaws
presenting material false statements under oath in federal official proceedings. A
second, 18 U.S.C. 1623, bars presenting material false statements under oath before
or ancillary to federal court or grand jury proceedings. A third, 18 U.S.C. 1622
(subornation of perjury), prohibits inducing or procuring another to commit perjury
in violation of either Section 1621 or Section 1623.
In most cases, the courts abbreviate their description of the elements and state
that to prove perjury under Section 1623 the government must establish that the
defendant "(1) knowingly made a (2) false (3) material declaration (4) under oath (5)
in a proceeding before or ancillary to any court or grand jury of the United States."
The courts generally favor the encapsulation from United States v. Dunnigan to
describe the elements of Section 1621: "A witness testifying under oath or
affirmation violates this section if she gives false testimony concerning a material
matter with the willful intent to provide false testimony, rather than as a result of
confusion, mistake, or faulty memory."
Section 1622 outlaws procuring or inducing another to commit perjury:
"Whoever procures another to commit any perjury is guilty of subornation of perjury,
and shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than five years, or both",
18 U.S.C. 1622.
The false statement statute, 18 U.S.C. 1001, is closely akin to the perjury
statutes. It outlaws false statements in any matter within the jurisdiction of a federal
agency or department, a kind of perjury with oath prohibition.

And what is your point? You go on and on and on and on. Who are you trying to impress? Anyone who watches TV knows what perjury is. Anyone who was a teenager or older at the time knows that President Clinton was found guilty of committing perjury, dis-barred and almost impeached.

You don't know the facts that any case will bring to the court, but you take a broad brush to everything and hang your hat on believing that SC is infallible and everyone that they have accused is guilty. HOGWASH TO YOU.

People are innocent until PROVEN GUILTY. AND THE INNOCENT HAVE ALSO BEEN PROVEN GUILTY AND PERJURERS HAVE WALKED AWAY SCOTT-FREE.

So, instead of focusing on and challenging the accused as to what their defense might be, leave that up to their (future) lawyers. And why don't you instead challenge SC to prove that they have the preponderance of evidence needed in order to obtain a verdict of guilty? SC is virtually the only one who knows what evidence exists to support their accusation. Why not focus your attention and efforts on making sure that they have covered all the necessary basis? Because if they haven't there is no case! And if there isn't much in the way of evidence, the defense will have very little pressure placed upon them.

And while taking that on, why not spend more time pressuring SC to actually take a case to court, which will never happen, rather than trying to convince us that this is a "cut and tried" matter with a foregone conclusion and that the accused should, therefore, "roll over and play dead" for SC/ for your/ for whomever? This is virgin territory and there is no way to predict anything. And you and NO ONE else is in a position to predict that questions regarding licensing won't be admissible and wouldn't carry weight with the court that might diminish SC's case! Maybe they will, maybe they won't. Maybe they won't even be raised by the defense. We JUST DON'T KNOW!

SO GIVE IT UP ALREADY.

BTW. In the discussion of bankruptcy, you assumed the corporation that provides the KJ with his work and wages, also owns the equipment. Maybe his wife owns the equipment, THE HOUSE AND THE CARS! Perhaps, the corporation provides nothing more than liability insurance policy, marketing programs and wages? Perhaps he rents the equipment from his wife? I know many people who are in business and who have protected their assets in similar ways.

But that's my point, you have an assumption for everything that fits your "mold" and to blazes with other possibilities or even the future facts, whatever they may turn out to be. And for some reason that I am unable to comprehend you post with two primary assumptions in mind:
1) accused = pirate
2) SC wins/defendant loses, no matter what!

NOW DOES ANYBODY GET THE OBVIOUS?
1) If SC had an iron-clad case why go through all of their gyrations before trial, particularly the audit? It's like the cops do when trying to finesse suspects: WE KNOW YOU ARE GUILTY SO WHY DON'T YOU CONFESS?
2) If they have the evidence, why perform an audit? Just tell the accused what the "goods" are that they have on them and offer them their non-"settlement"? The accused knows whether they are guilty or not.
3) Why would anyone who is an out and out pirate not take the settlement offer to pay $6500 unless they don't believe that the case will actually go to trial?
4) Would a lawyer knowing his client is pirate, advice him to refuse the SC offer considering both how nominal it is and, if nothing else, what his legal fees will amount to?

SO ONE QUESTION?
What would your advice be as a lawyer if your client had 1000 discs (WHAT HE CONSIDERS TO BE A COMLETE LIBRARY), with 2100 digial SC tracks, 100 of which couldn't be linked to anyone of those discs, and MOST OF WHICH ARE RARELY REQUESTED?

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Joe, even if the KJ is corp he still loses all his gear, although most are not corp status, most are running as sole props and subject to lose everything!

Under the new bankruptcy laws it is much harder to file than it ever was before. Court cost and fines are not covered under bankruptcy either! Even if the pirate should in some way possibly win he is going to have to have a lawyer and that cost is going to have to be paid upfront (lawyers that work in the federal court aren't stupid) If the KJ should go in pro se then he has lost before he ever finds the right court room! It is going to cost the pirate either way win or lose so no the pirate is still in a lose/lose situation he is going to have to pay to settle, pay to win or pay to lose!

Yes he will get credit offers immeadiately because everyone knows he can not file again for 7 years but for three years under the federal court rules if Sound Choice can show that he lied or misrepresented anything to the court, then it all starts up again right where it left off!

The Pirate can not win in any manner in this situation!

The only possiblity other than leaving the business is to settle and take the buy in option to be legal, with that Sound Choice is the clear winner!

First, there are variations in bankruptcy law from state to state. If you say that it's gotten a lot more difficult in your area, I know that I can take your word for it, but it's not the same everywhere, especially here in NJ.

Here, if your assets - excluding your primary residence and standard car- are below a certain point, you still pretty much file some papers and lose nothing, This means the gear and a means to make a living stay intact. After our last posts I checked with a friend ( a DJ, not a Karaoke Host) who just finished up with it. He was able to keep his gear ( though he sold it because- as seen- he was unable to make a living with it.)

Also, your post makes the assumption that most are not corp or LLC status. Remember, I don't care about real pirates or what happens to them- only the innocent KJ getting hassled. Around here, most of the legits are LLC or a type of corporation.
Nevertheless, the DJ I spoke of was a sole proprietor, and still lost nothing.

Steve, you and I can go around this circle forever, with neither convincing the other. The fact is- and as Eric pointed out- no one will KNOW until a case actually goes to court, and I just don't believe it will ever happen. SC can make money intimidating KJ who don't know better into paying protection money, and they won't ( OK, 'cause I like ya- probably won't) in court. Howsabout we wait and see if they ever go to court. You tell me: How long do we wait? I know you have mentioned how long you believe it takes to get a case into court ( and no, I don't disagree with you here- the system's a mess and backlogged) should we wait a year? Two? Five? A real pirate can make a lot of unreported income in that time.

Whatever your beliefs regarding a court outcome, what SC is doing is not a deterrent to REAL pirates, anymore than gun laws are to REAL crooks. The only thing SC does with these tactics is cause problems for LEGIT KJs.- and this has always been my main and original issue. The fact that they have nothing to do with fighting piracy doesn't bother me- the DAMAGE they do to the legits does.

The complete lack of any investigation does. The pulling names off of the net or out of a hat with no valid reason does. The diminishing of SC's credibility does. The complete lack of ethics nauseates me, and to see these people held up as something good- such as pirate fighters- which they are not- is not only stunningly ridiculous, it's truly a sad commentary...

 

[Guest]

First, there are variations in bankruptcy law from state to state. If you say that it's gotten a lot more difficult in your area, I know that I can take your word for it, but it's not the same everywhere, especially here in NJ. Joe Banckrupcy laws are all federal, they have nothing to do with the state!

Here, if your assets - excluding your primary residence and standard car- are below a certain point, you still pretty much file some papers and lose nothing, This means the gear and a means to make a living stay intact. After our last posts I checked with a friend ( a DJ, not a Karaoke Host) who just finished up with it. He was able to keep his gear ( though he sold it because- as seen- he was unable to make a living with it.) Again we are not talking about banckrupcy by choice here, the pirate in the in the example used by Eric would file banckrupcy after he is found to be in violation of trademark infringement against Sound Choice, I believe if you read a little on the subject that seizure of the equipment used is part of the relief requested! So yes more than likely he would lose his equipment!

Also, your post makes the assumption that most are not corp or LLC status. Remember, I don't care about real pirates or what happens to them- only the innocent KJ getting hassled. Around here, most of the legits are LLC or a type of corporation. And being legit they don't have anything to worry about to begin with!
Nevertheless, the DJ I spoke of was a sole proprietor, and still lost nothing. Again he didn't declare bankrupcy because of a lawsuit being decided against him!

Steve, you and I can go around this circle forever, with neither convincing the other. The fact is- and as Eric pointed out- no one will KNOW until a case actually goes to court, (I believe I have been saying this all along until recently Eric has maintained that every pirate will beat SC in court) and I just don't believe it will ever happen. SC can make money intimidating KJ who don't know better into paying protection money, and they won't ( OK, 'cause I like ya- probably won't) in court. Howsabout we wait and see if they ever go to court. You tell me: How long do we wait? I know you have mentioned how long you believe it takes to get a case into court ( and no, I don't disagree with you here- the system's a mess and backlogged) should we wait a year? Two? Five? A real pirate can make a lot of unreported income in that time. I agree that the pirates could do that but it also opens more of them up to the suits being filed and if it is one that has already been filled against the case simply gets stronger in Sound Choices favor! But what I have seen here locally with just the small amount of pirates working this area is that with just one having been filed agaisnt they have disappeared, granted they may have moved to another area or just stopped doing shows for the time being but I rather doubt that mayself.

Whatever your beliefs regarding a court outcome, what SC is doing is not a deterrent to REAL pirates, anymore than gun laws are to REAL crooks. The only thing SC does with these tactics is cause problems for LEGIT KJs.- and this has always been my main and original issue. The fact that they have nothing to do with fighting piracy doesn't bother me- the DAMAGE they do to the legits does. Here again I disagree with you, I haven't seen any indication that it has hurt any legit KJs, what I have seen is an increased traffic at my showes and an increase in the number of venues calling trying to get me to bring my show to them.

The complete lack of any investigation does. The pulling names off of the net or out of a hat with no valid reason does. The diminishing of SC's credibility does. The complete lack of ethics nauseates me, and to see these people held up as something good- such as pirate fighters- which they are not- is not only stunningly ridiculous, it's truly a sad commentary...
OK I am going to ask you, what kind of investigation should Sound Choice conduct before filing?

Joe, I am not trying to convince you of anything i am just putting forward well thought out arguements that are contrary to your own position (debate)!

I know Eric is getting frustrated with me because I am not agreeing with him (and the fact that my arguements are soundly based) I am just debating the points made here. I can just as easily argue the other side but like the rest of the arguements put forward by those against the lawsuits they just wouldn't hold up!

 

[JoeChartreuse]

1) Joe, I am not trying to convince you of anything i am just putting forward well thought out arguements that are contrary to your own position (debate)!

2) I know Eric is getting frustrated with me because I am not agreeing with him (and the fact that my arguements are soundly based) I am just debating the points made here. I can just as easily argue the other side but like the rest of the arguements put forward by those against the lawsuits they just wouldn't hold up!

1) Steve, I am aware of this, and am doing the same. I am assuming and hoping that some knowledge will be gained by any following this debate.


2) Except for crediting a point that he made ( no one will KNOW until it goes to court), I wasn't trying to make Eric a part of my post. That includes my comments on bankruptcy.

Also, though federal, the courts of each state have different interpretations on how to execute bankruptcy, and use them. However, this is unimportant to my main concern:
*******************************************************
Posted by Joe Chartreuse:

Whatever your beliefs regarding a court outcome, what SC is doing is not a deterrent to REAL pirates, anymore than gun laws are to REAL crooks. The only thing SC does with these tactics is cause problems for LEGIT KJs.- and this has always been my main and original issue. The fact that they have nothing to do with fighting piracy doesn't bother me- the DAMAGE they do to the legits does.

Thunder's answer: Here again I disagree with you, I haven't seen any indication that it has hurt any legit KJs, what I have seen is an increased traffic at my showes and an increase in the number of venues calling trying to get me to bring my show to them.

The complete lack of any investigation does. The pulling names off of the net or out of a hat with no valid reason does. The diminishing of SC's credibility does. The complete lack of ethics nauseates me, and to see these people held up as something good- such as pirate fighters- which they are not- is not only stunningly ridiculous, it's truly a sad commentary...

Thunder's Answer: OK I am going to ask you, what kind of investigation should Sound Choice conduct before filing?
****************************************************


Reply #1 An increase in your customers or in venue calls does not validate the legitimacy of SC's claims, only that other KJ's have been caused trouble and loss of income because of SC, with no proof of any wrongdoing. Since no one has been to court, and proven guilty of anything, you are pretty much giving evidence of what I said.

You are also telling me that you couldn't care less who gets screwed as long as you gain by it. This difference between you and I is probably the main reason you are able to support SC, while I couldn't look at myself in a mirror if I did.

Reply #2 What kind of investigation? How about ANY?

That may sound like humorous sarcasm, but it's not. Nobody has shown, and I CERTAINLY haven't scene ANY evidence of investigation of any sort.

The bulk of claims seem to be based on air. To the best of my knowledge, they have never identified themselves to anyone at the time of a so-called monitoring, or drop-in. It has only been claimed AFTER a particular date that someone "saw" something. Some of those things claimed to have been seen not only never were, but couldn't have been. This means NO ONE INVESTIGATED- period. Some names and venues came from out of date advertising, which means no one WENT THERE. No one investigated. Whether you believe what I say is true or not, MY information sure makes it LOOK like SC has lied for gain TO ME.

I think we BOTH know of one well known case where it's pretty much a given that absolutely no investigation was done...

 

[Guest]

Joe,

Let's try that again

OK I am going to ask you, what kind of investigation should Sound Choice conduct before filing?

Now don't skip over it detail what kind of investigation should be done!

1. How would you go about investigating the issues involved here?

2. Would you conduct interviews with the KJs?

3. Would you take statements from witnesses?

4. As the investigator would you go into a venue while the KJ was working and announce that you were there to watch and see if he was in violation?

Explain what you would do and the order in which you would do these things?

I will respond with a common sense breakdown of your investigative proceedure after you post it!:sqwink:

 

[Jon Tuck]

Favorite reply so far in any of the SC threads!! HOGWASH TO YOU!!! The world is a beautiful place with such fun colorful words.

 

[It's Karaoke]

am sure you don't know, but Sound Choice can file a suit against "John Doe" or others TBN! Any of these suits can be amended at any time during the process right up until the actual trial date. So having a name incorrect or a person incorrectly identified doesn't even slow the process down but a day or so!

Sound Choice can't pick and choose whom they're gonna sue, and keep changing they'er defendents on the way...hilarious. Got news for ya..lol today Joe Doe, oops..i mean Joe Doe's brother klev Doe, oops, i mean klev's cousin Bread Doe once removed from his mother's side second cousin to arther long legs smith...ummm..... miss court clerk my blind investigators called and said it's not him either. Scatch that out and make that they're father Doyle Obama Doe the 3rd...... no..scatch that out and......:sqrolleyes:
Moot anyway, since sound choice and they're pay per case win lawyers won't be taking a single case to trial anyways.....

 

[It's Karaoke]

The answers to your questions thunder is so simple, it's obvious you haven't got a clue yourself. Here's the very simple solution to what you, and a very few others see as a big deal for sound choice.

Simple Answer #1 Hire an investigation service that doesn't need glasses, tell that service your objectives, and what end result you would like to achieve. They are professionals at this, sound choice is not. As is evident with the mess of the karaoke industry that sound choice and there cronies are directly responsibe for.

Simple Answer #2, And this is most important. Hire a good public relations firm, to put sound choice in the best possible light.

Simple answer #3 Engage a good law firm, not the ambulance chasers they now have, {i've done some research}. Whom can't seem to even write a good brief. Negotiate a percentage of all monies collected as their retainer.

Final Simple Answer #4 Stop idiotic post on forums, then running and hiding, saying you're too busy to answer anyones questions...simply because you have no answers. And stop turning one kj from this wonderful community against the other.

Incidently, all monies from actually taking the bad guys to court will pay everyone for their services.
There me lads...you have it in a nutshell......the right way to go about doing something. Of course there is room for compromise. Sound choice has damaged their reputation so badly in the karaoke community, came off as a gang of thuds. That i doubt very seriously they will ever be able to recover. They have a lot of apologizing to do at this point...of course..this will never get done the right way, and will never get to court. So again moot. Nope..damage has been done already...all over but the crying. What caused this fiasco with sound choice? piracy...well sorta..but more importantly..sound choice's greed, and their convoluted idea they are in some way the supreme CDG gods...

 

[ericlater]

Joe,

Let's try that again

OK I am going to ask you, what kind of investigation should Sound Choice conduct before filing?

Now don't skip over it detail what kind of investigation should be done!

1. How would you go about investigating the issues involved here?

2. Would you conduct interviews with the KJs?

3. Would you take statements from witnesses?

4. As the investigator would you go into a venue while the KJ was working and announce that you were there to watch and see if he was in violation?

Explain what you would do and the order in which you would do these things?

I will respond with a common sense breakdown of your investigative proceedure after you post it!:sqwink:

I've already answered that question, at least twice. And my strategy will work for quite awhile, and might even still work after the knowledge becomes widespread of what SC is doing.

Simply, ask the suspected pirate. As of now they all still brag about the size of their library. I met a KJ two weeks ago at the Mobile Beat convention in Vegas. Right on his biz card it states he has over 100,000 tracks.

He, BTW, has gotten drift of SC activities and is trying to legitimize his library. That's one instance, and the only instance I am aware of, of SC benefiting the industry by causing someone to purchase a volume of discs. And keep in mind that while his purchases are benefiting the "entire" community of retailers and manufacturers, his competitors, however, are unaffected. He still has the same number of shows that he had before. And he will decide what he wants to purchase, not SC!

Now my strategy:
Just approach the Kj casually, as a singer and ask reasonable, non-threatening questions
1. why don't you have a song book?
2. Golly, your book is huge, how many songs do you have?
3. Your song selection is fantastic and I appreciate that you have SC tracks. Lots of shows I've been to must have purchased their stuff on the cheap because some have virtually no SC (some pirates will proudly let you how what good businessmen they are and tell you that when they purchased their HD they made sure there was plenty of SC tracks included)
4. How long have you been KJ'ing?
5. Did you start off playing discs or have you always be digital?
6. Do you have other "rigs"/shows?
5. I was looking for a song and didn't find it in you book. Might you have it?
(picking something quite obscure to ask about)
6. go to their website. Some have their entire catalog available on line. Some promote how many tracks they have. One pirate I know has 4 rigs and advertises that all 4 have the same exact library!

Again, this is not rocket science. I have asked these very same questions from time to time just to get a sense of what the person might understand about pirating and whether they realized that they are a pirate?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thunder:

I don't know what it is that you believe that I expect you to agree with me on?

There are a bunch of issues that you don't care about and that's you prerogative.

I stated many things i questioned that you say are not a problem. So, that's the world as you see it!
And if you know the answer to any of the following questions I have posed, please enlighten us all

1. How does it benefit me when a pirate purchases discs from SC and he stays in business?
2. What agency does SC actually have regarding other manufacturers?
3. Is SC actually auditing all tracks on a HD including non-SC tracks?
4. Without said agency, what can SC do about a pirate who has non-SC tracks?
5. After settling with SC, what will a shrewd pirate do with the thousands of non-SC tracks that are on his HD?
6. What is the experience level and qualifications of those performing the audit?
7. If someone has any substantial number of pirated SC tracks why would they agree to an audit in the first place? Yet, one poster (Mr Cowles) claims he did just that. Why did he go through the audit? Why didn't he just say you got me!
8. If we are to take what Mr Cowles says at face value, he wasn't a complete pirate anyway! He had, from what he says, a much larger investment in karaoke discs than the average KJ! So, IMHO, there are more important "fish" to hook than Mr Cowles in the fight to eliminate piracy, perhaps he was targeted because SC believed that he was in a position to and would cooperate with the settlement offer? And he did to the tune of $13000!
9. Why should I be excited to know Mr Cowles is delighted with the deal that SC cut him?
10. What happens if SC finds one set of SC tracks that was ripped from a disc that is unavailable at the time of audit?
11. What happens during an audit if there is a substantial, or even small amount of missing sales receipts?
12. What about receipts on thermal paper that have faded and can no longer be read?
13. Why isn't SC putting pirates out of business rather than supporting them?

 

[Guest]

OK I'm game!

I've already answered that question, at least twice. And my strategy will work for quite awhile, and might even still work after the knowledge becomes widespread of what SC is doing.

Simply, ask the suspected pirate. As of now they all still brag about the size of their library. I met a KJ two weeks ago at the Mobile Beat convention in Vegas. Right on his biz card it states he has over 100,000 tracks.

He, BTW, has gotten drift of SC activities and is trying to legitimize his library. That's one instance, and the only instance I am aware of, of SC benefiting the industry by causing someone to purchase a volume of discs. And keep in mind that while his purchases are benefiting the "entire" community of retailers and manufacturers, his competitors, however, are unaffected. He still has the same number of shows that he had before. And he will decide what he wants to purchase, not SC!

Now my strategy:
Just approach the Kj casually, as a singer and ask reasonable, non-threatening questions And the KJs answers are in red for your questions
1. why don't you have a song book? Don't need them!
2. Golly, your book is huge, how many songs do you have? More than you will be able to sing in one night
3. Your song selection is fantastic and I appreciate that you have SC tracks. Lots of shows I've been to must have purchased their stuff on the cheap because some have virtually no SC (some pirates will proudly let you how what good businessmen they are and tell you that when they purchased their HD they made sure there was plenty of SC tracks included) Well thank you, I am glad you like the selections
4. How long have you been KJ'ing? Too long
5. Did you start off playing discs or have you always be digital? Disc
6. Do you have other "rigs"/shows? No and yes
5. I was looking for a song and didn't find it in you book. Might you have it? If it isn't in the book I don't have it!
(picking something quite obscure to ask about)
6. go to their website. Some have their entire catalog available on line. Some promote how many tracks they have. One pirate I know has 4 rigs and advertises that all 4 have the same exact library! I don't have a website

Again, this is not rocket science. I have asked these very same questions from time to time just to get a sense of what the person might understand about pirating and whether they realized that they are a pirate?

You are right it isn't rocket science and your question got you squat as far as answers to a person being a pirate or not! With the news of the SC suits all over the country right now do you really think a pirate is going to tell anyone asking questions "hell yes I am a pirate"?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thunder:

I don't know what it is that you believe that I expect you to agree with me on?

There are a bunch of issues that you don't care about and that's you prerogative.

I stated many things i questioned that you say are not a problem. So, that's the world as you see it!
And if you know the answer to any of the following questions I have posed, please enlighten us all

1. How does it benefit me when a pirate purchases discs from SC and he stays in business? When he is investing in the product his bottom line changes and the benifit is the price going up for everyone including you!
2. What agency does SC actually have regarding other manufacturers?
I wish I understood the question but i don't, I will make a stab at what i think you are refering to! Sound Choice represents Sound Choice, but if they are successful in this this effort other Manus will follow suit! What a pirate who doesn't want to comply will be left with for music will be the defunct brands like Nutech and All Hits (not much of a selection is it?)
3. Is SC actually auditing all tracks on a HD including non-SC tracks? Does it make any difference if to Sound Choice audits anyone elses music (probably not) and they don't need to be concerned with it
4. Without said agency, what can SC do about a pirate who has non-SC tracks? As previously stated if Sound Choice is successful the other manus still in business will follow suit!
5. After settling with SC, what will a shrewd pirate do with the thousands of non-SC tracks that are on his HD? It seems I am answering the same question over and over here please see the previous answers about "other manus"!
6. What is the experience level and qualifications of those performing the audit? Does it make any difference? How hard is it to compare the files with the disc numbers, if the pirate has used his own tag system (not very likely for someone with 50,000+ songs) then it will be a matter of playing the files and comparing them to the disc, yes time consuming but certianly not that difficult. Sound Choice would know what songs were on what disc and the logos and screen colors have changed several times over the years, pinpoint what disc which files came from is not that hard to do!
7. If someone has any substantial number of pirated SC tracks why would they agree to an audit in the first place? Yet, one poster (Mr Cowles) claims he did just that. Why did he go through the audit? Why didn't he just say you got me! Well if you are charged you have two choices audit voluntarily or aduit under discovery by court order! Which would you choose?
8. If we are to take what Mr Cowles says at face value, he wasn't a complete pirate anyway! He had, from what he says, a much larger investment in karaoke discs than the average KJ! So, IMHO, there are more important "fish" to hook than Mr Cowles in the fight to eliminate piracy, perhaps he was targeted because SC believed that he was in a position to and would cooperate with the settlement offer? And he did to the tune of $13000! Apparently, (and you nor I either one knows for a fact) he had enough pirated files that he felt it was prudent to settle, and that is a smart business man!
9. Why should I be excited to know Mr Cowles is delighted with the deal that SC cut him? I don't think anyone said you should be excited! However I am happy that Mr. Cowels was pleased with the deal he got
10. What happens if SC finds one set of SC tracks that was ripped from a disc that is unavailable at the time of audit? (I believe that Kurt Slep has already addressed that issue, it is up to you to believe him or not!
11. What happens during an audit if there is a substantial, or even small amount of missing sales receipts? I don't know I haven't yet been through an audit, but considering the nature of the beast the only sales receipts you should need would be for files which you couldn't produce a disc for!
12. What about receipts on thermal paper that have faded and can no longer be read? Produce the disc and it is a non issue!
13. Why isn't SC putting pirates out of business rather than supporting them?They are! There are two choices for those charged for and guilty of "TRADEMARK VIOLATION", comply or leave the business, I have already seen two disappear and I have heard of others as well, I got another call today from a place in Richmond Virginia desperate for a KJ, I was sorry but I couldn't help him even though he offered me $500 a night to drop my Wednesday night show and come to his place! His KJ disappeared last week and won't return phone calls! As I was talking with him he told me the KJ that has been working for him for the past 2 years was computer based and had well over 100,000 songs! I asked him if he had ever seen the KJ use disc, he told me that he had never used disc at his place for KJing or DJing!
This is just one that has "left the business" (in other words Sound Choice is "putting pirates out of business" and you can refer this back to your question #1 as well!

I hope this helps you a little in understanding where I am coming from!:sqbiggrin:

 

[It's Karaoke]

His KJ disappeared last week and won't return phone calls!

The unfortunate realization is thunder, that these pirates are maggots that will just move around, and pop up someplace else. They're like ****roaches, you drive them out, and they just appear at your neighbors place... Once a pirate taste that easy money, a threat of a so called lawsuit will not get shun of them. They are here, and they are here to stay in one form or another. I am starting to come to the realization, that we had better learn how to deal with them, instead of trying to be rid of them. Educate club owners, keep a keen eye out, and stay within the law, but show the club owners the error of their ways. Sound choice thus far has accomplished nothing that i can see. If you think you've gotten rid of one,maybe two pirates, which you haven't. Then you will spend the rest of your life chasen, and still not be rid of them. Just gotta figure out a way to deal with this problem in a realistic way, thats the best we can hope for......Sad...but thats the way i think it's gonna be.:sqfrown: