Any other questions just let me know because i've been through it all and know all of the other details, it's the hearsay that seems to spring these huge debates that get outta hand
Fighting Back
- Thread starter ericlater
- Start date
Lone,
Have you heard this first hand?
Makes sense to me .
HELLO ERIC !!! There would be your " What is SC gonna do for ME'???
Even though they owe us NOTHING !!!
They owe ME nothing and they owe YOU nothing!!! But you act like they should be responsible for fixing the karaoke world. Kinda like Joe wants " bnew karaoke world order government".
But hey, they might have something here that would be beneficial.
Wow, that would sorta be like an " agency". Almost like a gov't agency that could help all legit KJ's beat up the bad guys and run them outta town. WOW !!!
No, Uncle Sam is the ONLY cure. ( barf)
Wait the KIAA is just trying to stab us with out own knife. puuhhleeeze.
They are only doin it for themselves. There will be NO possible way what these thugs are doin could help MEEE !!!
Rant over!!!
Have you heard this first hand?
Makes sense to me .
HELLO ERIC !!! There would be your " What is SC gonna do for ME'???
Even though they owe us NOTHING !!!
They owe ME nothing and they owe YOU nothing!!! But you act like they should be responsible for fixing the karaoke world. Kinda like Joe wants " bnew karaoke world order government".
But hey, they might have something here that would be beneficial.
Wow, that would sorta be like an " agency". Almost like a gov't agency that could help all legit KJ's beat up the bad guys and run them outta town. WOW !!!
No, Uncle Sam is the ONLY cure. ( barf)
Wait the KIAA is just trying to stab us with out own knife. puuhhleeeze.
They are only doin it for themselves. There will be NO possible way what these thugs are doin could help MEEE !!!
Rant over!!!
nothing wrong with hearsay just in this instance as i've been reading here in multiple topics, this thing gets blown waaaay up. Yes the company i own as well as two companies i work closely with were named in the suit along with venues that we work for, and i know every detail of these cases......on thing i should add to my earlier post though , if the kj at the venue tucks tail and runs instead of clearing the venues name then there is also a settlement offer for the venue of $5000. But if the KJ " takes care of business " Then the Venue is let off the hook
Thanks,
That is what i wanted to know. I was at venue last night that was named, but it was too busy to talk to the owner. I was curious what he has done if anything. Pretty sure his KJ is gonna settle.
We'll see what happens to the rest of his library. Guy has NO discs.
That is what i wanted to know. I was at venue last night that was named, but it was too busy to talk to the owner. I was curious what he has done if anything. Pretty sure his KJ is gonna settle.
We'll see what happens to the rest of his library. Guy has NO discs.
Yeah, once you get involved with there lawyers, your either 100 percent innocent or you settle, there isn't really an in between option so any smart business owner would settle
- Messages
- 1,268
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 402
Loneavenger said:
If that's the case what incentive does the KJ really have other than covering his own ****.... why would he do so just to save the venue's ****...
Good point, but i don't see any option other then a KJ to take care of this, if your innocent the venue will get cleared, if your guilty and settle the Venue will be cleared. But if your just hiding well then the venue is on their own AND they are still going to catch up to you eventually, I don't see the point. But The Venue's were sent basically the same letter that everyone else in the case was the two major differences is that 1) the venues do not get a copy of sound choice's library with their settlement, and 2) they amound is 5,000 instead of 6,500. Also they do not tell the venues that they can be cleared by their KJ's that is just something that i know first hand from clearing my venue's and the other companies i'm friends with clearing there's
Thunder said:
Loneavenger said:
Wow, even more coercion from a coat tail rider! Gotta love it! :sqwink:
Mantis1 said:
1) Agreed- They owe us nothing
2) Well, apparently they are being held up as the saviors of legal karaoke by many. Which one is it?
3) Nope, Uncle Sam may not be the ONLY cure, just one WAY better than a company that says outright that anti-piracy is NOT their goal. However, many seem to want to argue with the President of said company for some reason....go figure..:sqerr:
4) Stab? Nah, just another "send two boxtops and some money and we'll send you a nifty certificate or something....eventually.." coat tail rider.
5) Oh, anything is possible, just not likely. And as I said to Steve, your new biz may be because of LEGIT KJs tied up in this stupidity, not because of any real pirates- or it could be real pirates- but you have no idea which...
Loneavenger said:
If you are legit to begin with: As a business owner, do you really think it beneficial to be named in this suit?
ASIDE TO THUNDER: This host says he's legit, and we have no cause to doubt him. If that's the case, please explain how- if SC actually INVESTIGATES, he was named in the suit?
G
Guest
Guest
G
Guest
Guest
Joe, I sure hope NB wasn't one of those PMs who "informed you"!:sqlaugh:
Thunder said:
Nope- Don't even know who that is.
BTW- gonna PM you on a completely different subject that might interest you- you'll love it!
G
Guest
Guest
JoeChartreuse said:
Cool
I look forward to it!
- #98
Thread Owner
"thunder" said:
Some questions were already posed directly to the party who settled for which no response was forthcoming.
Frankly, no one who claims to have direct knowledge of the answer(s) to the questions that have been posed needs a special invitation to respond to them. And, again, the first person we were aware of who was in a position to answer, ignored a request from me for his input!!!
And to remind you of some of the key, but not only, questions that have been posed:
Did those who passed the audit have ANY SC tracks that weren't on a purchased disc?
Were there any other manufacturers tracks included in the audit scope?
If yes, were any of those manufacturers' tracks found not to be on a purchased disc? If so, what were the ramifications?
Pretty simple! Pretty straightforward. Yet, those simple questions remain unanswered after all of these months since SC began their campaign!
BTW, Thunder, you say one party has been "cleared". What exactly has he/she been "cleared" of?
I apparently was unclear in my post. I have been through the Legal Mumbo jumbo and my company is now cleared but i settled i was not " cleared ", I just meant that we were now in the clear. Sorry for the confusion, I'm not sure why you feel questions remained unanswered, i have answered all questions asked to me directly and noone has pm'ed me about anything related to sound choice. I am also closely involved with 2 other companies locally who went through this and are now finished with it. I do not know of anyone who has even agreed to submit to an audit, until i read kurt's post recently, the paperwork i received stated that even one track which you did not have a disc for would result in a failing of the audit, not to mention that to even have the audit means you declared innocence and once you agree to the audit if you fail the settlement more than doubled in cost, you would have to pay something like 15,000 as opposed to 6,500. We decided this risk was too great considering over the years we have accumulated some tracks we did not have disks for. We have 2 sets of discs for ALL of the music we own, and in the days since we have verified that there is not a single track in our possession that we do not own a physical disc for. I do know that they are only auditing for sound choice products, they do have the right to report back to other companies ( In the legal documents Pop Hits Monthly, Pocket Songs, And chartbuster along with other i don't remember off the top of my head are named individually ) and let them know what they saw on your system and then they could bring more lawsuits against you separate from the Sound Choice Suit. There are no ramifications straight from Sound Choice regarding discs from other manufacturers though, they make that clear in the paperwork that that is outside the scope of their rights. If you have any other questions Eric and Joe feel free to ask them, I feel the future of Karaoke is looking brighter because of this situation. The people who settled and were pirates will be put out of business because they do not have physical discs to operate off of and the cost of buying a new collection is probably too great for most, i know because i have already taken over for one such companies gigs. And those who have the money will buy discs from all of the manufacturers making karaoke better for all of us and evening the playing field on selection and not having to worry about people having 100,000 tracks. I see nothing but good coming from this situation.
- #100
Thread Owner
Thank you for your timely response. For my benefit I will be highlighting what I found to be extraordinarily important. Please don't take anything personally, my notations have nothing to do personally with you or your company!
Sounds like a major confirmation of some of my most serious concerns. And clearly, what I highlighted refers to the suspicions I have had about what NOT to expect from the SC audit, suspicions that I have clearly stated long before any actual evidence became available to support my concerns!
Of course, I and maybe Joe C might be the only ones who see a problem with any of what I highlighted above, since so many others want to look to SC as their "savior".
But you don't want to consider my concerns because I am not trusting of what SC is doing as some of you are, AND I am also not praising the benefits that will be derived from SC efforts. And for determining the benefits we will have to wait until the first law suit is completed and the dust settles on all aspects of the SC strategy!
I will end this post with the reminder that neither Joe C or I would be injured by the removal of every SC track from our libraries! So, if nothing else, it's hard for us to understand why SC is considered to be so important to others that the fact that they are standing alone doesn't concern very many of you.
Oh, and don't forget that in another post Loneavenger shared with us the SC told him that they intend to use (needs) the money they get for their new venture. And while they are are entitled to do whatever they like with their money, I don't want to hear from anyone how I am benefiting from SC efforts. I have not as of yet and don't expect to!
Loneavenger said:
Sounds like a major confirmation of some of my most serious concerns. And clearly, what I highlighted refers to the suspicions I have had about what NOT to expect from the SC audit, suspicions that I have clearly stated long before any actual evidence became available to support my concerns!
Of course, I and maybe Joe C might be the only ones who see a problem with any of what I highlighted above, since so many others want to look to SC as their "savior".
But you don't want to consider my concerns because I am not trusting of what SC is doing as some of you are, AND I am also not praising the benefits that will be derived from SC efforts. And for determining the benefits we will have to wait until the first law suit is completed and the dust settles on all aspects of the SC strategy!
I will end this post with the reminder that neither Joe C or I would be injured by the removal of every SC track from our libraries! So, if nothing else, it's hard for us to understand why SC is considered to be so important to others that the fact that they are standing alone doesn't concern very many of you.
Oh, and don't forget that in another post Loneavenger shared with us the SC told him that they intend to use (needs) the money they get for their new venture. And while they are are entitled to do whatever they like with their money, I don't want to hear from anyone how I am benefiting from SC efforts. I have not as of yet and don't expect to!
