GEM Series appears!

[DannyGKaraoke]

The long and short of this all, for me, boils down to this...

My gig is three nights a week at a smaller club, a mostly younger (early 20's to mid 30's age range) crowd. Many want to sing the songs that are popular NOW, and Sound Choice is not gonna be the Manu that will get my $$$'s when I'm buying additional music. My Sound Choice discs, with the exception of 2 were bought used.

I started up new less than a year ago and was able to get what I think is a pretty good selection of about 8,000 songs for about $1,400. All legal, no copies, and good quality manufacturers. When people request current songs I go to Chartbuster, Sunfly, or PHM.

Even for a new startup, or someone adding a second system, the gem series seems to still be overpriced and outdated, IMHO.

That may be so for you. In my area most are singing classic rock and oldies that they grew up on. So the music on the GEM series is just what the doctor ordered. The set wasn't meant to augment an already established legal library, It was meant for those just starting out. And it isn't overpriced if you take in trying to buy discs separately.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Joe,

I don't know how to tell you this but some of these cases have actually already been filed, if they aren't settled they will go to court, it isn't Kurt's fault that the pirates are settling before the case ripens for court!

If suddenly 10 or 12 of the pirates decided to go onto court instead of settling with SC and SC decided to non-suit the cases going to court there would be some major sanctions on them!
!

1) Let me know when SC goes to court ONCE.

2) Major sanctions against people who don't buy the SC line and fight in court? :sqlaugh: See above.

Also, please note that SC is dismissing- with, or without predjudice, WAY MORE people than they are continuing to pursue. Can you say "class action suit?". I've been hearing rumors of this for some time now. Keep in mind that, in real life, SC is a tiny ( less than 10 employee) company with limited resources ( my brother just bought an entire MALL in NH to house his company). If they were still in the karaoke business, they would be one of the smallest companies. If they continue to screw up, the tide will turn- and if they're not VERY careful- drown them.

 

[Guest]

1) Let me know when SC goes to court ONCE.

2) Major sanctions against people who don't buy the SC line and fight in court? :sqlaugh: See above.

Also, please note that SC is dismissing- with, or without predjudice, WAY MORE people than they are continuing to pursue. Can you say "class action suit?". I've been hearing rumors of this for some time now. Keep in mind that, in real life, SC is a tiny ( less than 10 employee) company with limited resources ( my brother just bought an entire MALL in NH to house his company). If they were still in the karaoke business, they would be one of the smallest companies. If they continue to screw up, the tide will turn- and if they're not VERY careful- drown them.

So which cases have they been dismissing? Only the judge can dismiss a case with or without predjudice! Dismissing a case with predjudice means that the complainant can not bring the same case against that same named party at a later date (and John Doe doesn't count)

Other than those who have settled or have proven to have been 1:1, which ones who were known pirates have had their cases dismissed!

A case that hasn't been heard can only be dismissed by the judge, if Sound Choice were doing away with the case there are two ways to do it!

1. if it has not yet been activated then Sound Choice can withdraw the complaint, no harm no foul and they can't be sued for it!

2. If a complaint has been filed and the opposing party has already answered the complaint then Sound choice can non-suit the filing and while the judge can sanction Sound Choice for the opposing parties attorney fees and reasonable expenses, sanctions are very seldom issued on a first non-suit A non-suit can be refiled for a period of 1 year, and again there is no penalty for this action!

In some of the cases where defendants were not identified and can not be identified those are withdrawn, in other cases where the defendant was not identified and a John or Jane Doe filing was made and they were later identified the filing is withdrawn and ammended to include that persons Name and address!

Please tell me where to look for the cases you say Sound Choice is dismissing!

 

[Dan Hutter]

Ay yi yi

 

[Birdofsong]

So which cases have they been dismissing? Only the judge can dismiss a case with or without predjudice! Dismissing a case with predjudice means that the complainant can not bring the same case against that same named party at a later date (and John Doe doesn't count)

Other than those who have settled or have proven to have been 1:1, which ones who were known pirates have had their cases dismissed!

A case that hasn't been heard can only be dismissed by the judge, if Sound Choice were doing away with the case there are two ways to do it!

1. if it has not yet been activated then Sound Choice can withdraw the complaint, no harm no foul and they can't be sued for it!

2. If a complaint has been filed and the opposing party has already answered the complaint then Sound choice can non-suit the filing and while the judge can sanction Sound Choice for the opposing parties attorney fees and reasonable expenses, sanctions are very seldom issued on a first non-suit A non-suit can be refiled for a period of 1 year, and again there is no penalty for this action!

In some of the cases where defendants were not identified and can not be identified those are withdrawn, in other cases where the defendant was not identified and a John or Jane Doe filing was made and they were later identified the filing is withdrawn and ammended to include that persons Name and address!

Please tell me where to look for the cases you say Sound Choice is dismissing!

Not true, Thunder. Any case can be dismissed at any time by stipulation of the parties.
This can be with or without prejudice, depending on what is stipulated.

It's amazing how many "legal experts" we have on this forum. I"m probably the only one that actually works in the field.

Birdofsong

 

[Guest]

Not true, Thunder. Any case can be dismissed at any time by stipulation of the parties.
This can be with or without prejudice, depending on what is stipulated.

It's amazing how many "legal experts" we have on this forum. I"m probably the only one that actually works in the field.

Birdofsong

And has to be agreed to by both parties and can only be done by the judge, amazing that someone who claims to be in the legal profession wouldn't know this!

Being a secratary for a lawyer dosen't mean you are in the legal profession! But since you have his entire library of law books available to you it shouldn't be that hard to look up the proceedures of the court under the rules of the Supreme Court, and the Miches Jurisprudence (or whatever proceedural books your state goes by)!

While I don't have the federal code library I do own the Virginia State law library (current to 2009) and a complete set of Miches (current to 2008) and I know how to read them, I have also made myself familar with the Federal rules of court as well! While you may work for an attorney I have faced attorney's in the courts for the last 12 years in civil cases and have won more than I have lost, how much time do you have in the court room actually using the law you know so much about?

 

[Birdofsong]

And has to be agreed to by both parties and can only be done by the judge, amazing that someone who claims to be in the legal profession wouldn't know this!

Being a secratary for a lawyer dosen't mean you are in the legal profession! But since you have his entire library of law books available to you it shouldn't be that hard to look up the proceedures of the court under the rules of the Supreme Court, and the Miches Jurisprudence (or whatever proceedural books your state goes by)!

While I don't have the federal code library I do own the Virginia State law library (current to 2009) and a complete set of Miches (current to 2008) and I know how to read them, I have also made myself familar with the Federal rules of court as well! While you may work for an attorney I have faced attorney's in the courts for the last 12 years in civil cases and have won more than I have lost, how much time do you have in the court room actually using the law you know so much about?

Seriously? You have no idea what I do, but for the sake of clarification, I am a legal assistant with a paralegal background and 15 years of practical experience writing and drafting court documents. I'm glad you can read, but I'm not going to get into some pissing contest with you.

However, I assure you that I am quite qualified to answer regarding this matter and correct your statement, especially since I filed two stipulation and orders for dismissal today alone.

This is how it works...the parties come to an agreement, file the order and the judge rubber stamps the order. Then the matter is over and done. No hearing or decision of the judge is involved whatsoever.

Now if I were you, I would seriously consider not giving out legal advice.

Birdofsong

 

[Guest]

Well it appears you have three more years than I do, the difference is practical experience!

Don't know if you are smart enough to realize it or not but this is what I said except for the fact that you say the judge doesn't have a say in it! Any matter that has to have the JUDGE'S signature on it is a decision made by that judge! And as you also agree, with the fact that "BOTH" parties have to be in agreement (which is also what I said) before the action can go forward to the judge for his "DECISION" (or rubber stamp as you put it)

If this is done without the agreement of all parties involved it is a little thing called Judical error which can lead to the entire case being sent back by the Appeals or Supreme Court for a rehearing, or if the decision is harmful to the party who was not privy to the DECISION by the Judge then the superior courts have the option of overturning the decision and finding for the damaged party! Again I thought being a secratary you would have known these things!

This is how it works...the parties come to an agreement, file the order and the judge rubber stamps the order. Then the matter is over and done. No hearing or decision of the judge is involved whatsoever.

 

[Birdofsong]

Well it appears you have three more years than I do, the difference is practical experience!

Don't know if you are smart enough to realize it or not but this is what I said except for the fact that you say the judge doesn't have a say in it! Any matter that has to have the JUDGE'S signature on it is a decision made by that judge! And as you also agree, with the fact that "BOTH" parties have to be in agreement (which is also what I said) before the action can go forward to the judge for his "DECISION" (or rubber stamp as you put it)

If this is done without the agreement of all parties involved it is a little thing called Judical error which can lead to the entire case being sent back by the Appeals or Supreme Court for a rehearing, or if the decision is harmful to the party who was not privy to the DECISION by the Judge then the superior courts have the option of overturning the decision and finding for the damaged party! Again I thought being a secratary you would have known these things!

If you want to keep trying to belittle me by using the term "secretary," you should at least learn how to spell it correctly. And 12 years of being sued or filing lawsuits in the courts does not make you a legal expert. Nor does your 8th grade education.

Btw, after an agreement to dismiss is made between the plaintiff and one defendant (co-defendants do not have to agree to the dismissal of another party), the judge does not make a DECISION. It's simply paper pushing and usually stamped by the judge's clerk.

Now if you'll excuse me, I have work to do.

Birdofsong

 

[Guest]

Oh I am spelling it correctly in relation!

Your court must be vastly different than the court system here!

Yes go look it up and find out I am correct (again):sqlaugh:

 

[jclaydon]

Seriously? You have no idea what I do, but for the sake of clarification, I am a legal assistant with a paralegal background and 15 years of practical experience writing and drafting court documents. I'm glad you can read, but I'm not going to get into some pissing contest with you.

However, I assure you that I am quite qualified to answer regarding this matter and correct your statement, especially since I filed two stipulation and orders for dismissal today alone.

This is how it works...the parties come to an agreement, file the order and the judge rubber stamps the order. Then the matter is over and done. No hearing or decision of the judge is involved whatsoever.

Now if I were you, I would seriously consider not giving out legal advice.

Birdofsong

Sounds to me like if it requires the judges signature, then that would involve a decision of some kind. Note a decision doesn't have to require any review or thought, just a choice. Every action is a result of a decision.

So what happens if the judge doesn't "rubber stamp" it?

not trying to be difficult, I have no legal experience of any kind and would geniunely like to know.


-James

 

[JoeChartreuse]

So which cases have they been dismissing? Only the judge can dismiss a case with or without predjudice! Dismissing a case with predjudice means that the complainant can not bring the same case against that same named party at a later date (and John Doe doesn't count)

Other than those who have settled or have proven to have been 1:1, which ones who were known pirates have had their cases dismissed!

A case that hasn't been heard can only be dismissed by the judge, if Sound Choice were doing away with the case there are two ways to do it!

1. if it has not yet been activated then Sound Choice can withdraw the complaint, no harm no foul and they can't be sued for it!

2. If a complaint has been filed and the opposing party has already answered the complaint then Sound choice can non-suit the filing and while the judge can sanction Sound Choice for the opposing parties attorney fees and reasonable expenses, sanctions are very seldom issued on a first non-suit A non-suit can be refiled for a period of 1 year, and again there is no penalty for this action!

In some of the cases where defendants were not identified and can not be identified those are withdrawn, in other cases where the defendant was not identified and a John or Jane Doe filing was made and they were later identified the filing is withdrawn and ammended to include that persons Name and address!

Please tell me where to look for the cases you say Sound Choice is dismissing!

Apparently I have to use very precise language for you to comprehend what I am saying, so I will.

You are correct- SC isn't legally "dismissing" anything, because they haven't been and won't go to court. Of course it doesn't neccesarily have to either, but that's another story.

What they ARE doing is naming people, then realizing that they have done so erroneously- more often than not. There. Feel better? Of course, we disagree on "no harm, no foul", but even you would agree that we've beaten that into the ground.

You do realize that due to the very small size of the SC company, if enough people decide to fight them in court, they wouldn't have the resources to do it.

It is merely my opinion, but I believe SC backs off when the going gets too tough.

Anyway, this whole thing is a hijack, for which I take at least partial blame, and I apologize.

This thread is about the Gem series, and it has been interrupted.

Steve, if you wish to continue this discussion ( I don't, but will if requested. Prefer to let it breathe awhile) howsabout starting a new horse beating thread? :sqwink:

 

[Guest]

And what happens if the judge doesn't "rubber stamp" it. Sounds to me like if it requires the judges signature, then that would involve a decision of some kind.

You are correct Sir!
Any legal issues involved in a case once it goes to the courts require the signature (and a decision) by the judge!

Don't let the secratary confuse you on the issue!

 

[Birdofsong]

And what happens if the judge doesn't "rubber stamp" it. Sounds to me like if it requires the judges signature, then that would involve a decision of some kind.

There is no decision by the judge if a stipulation and order is filed. The overloaded courts are very happy to dismiss cases. They have bloated dockets as it is.

 

[Scott Hanna]

I don't know a lot about the law. I do know when I read posts on a DJ forum that talk about the law, the court system, and exactly how suing someone or being sued works, I ignore those.

I don't go to legal boards to get DJ advice.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Ay yi yi

Yeah, Dan, I know- and I apologize again...:sqembarrassed:

 

[c. staley]

Don't know if you are smart enough to realize it or not but this is what I said ...

... And as you also agree, with the fact that "BOTH" parties have to be in agreement (which is also what I said) before the action can go forward...

Okay, read backwards Thunder because you are doing nothing but repeating (parts) of what Birdofsong said and attempting to claim some credit for it?

You need to look up the definition of stipulation because it is an order. If BOTH parties agree to stipulate then they essentially are agreeing to make it a court order.

Birdofsong said:

Any case can be dismissed at any time by stipulation of the parties.
This can be with or without prejudice, depending on what is stipulated.

"stipulation of the partIES" = an agreement to enter a court order of BOTH of the parties, a plaintiff and a defendant to whatever terms they've agreed to.

If this is done without the agreement of all parties involved it is a little thing called Judical error which can lead to the entire case being sent back by the Appeals or Supreme Court for a rehearing, or if the decision is harmful to the party who was not privy to the DECISION by the Judge then the superior courts have the option of overturning the decision and finding for the damaged party! Again I thought being a secratary you would have known these things!

Let's review: "a stipulation of the parties" means "an agreement to specify the terms of a court order." If there is NO agreement AND a judge signs it, then I would expect the other party would be well within their right to appeal the order.... it is still NOT a "decision" by the judge - it is a court order written by one of the parties, not a decision handed down by the court.

Why not ask Sound Choice if the KJ's in Florida were dismissed by "motion" or by "stipulation" before you begin berating someone else on a subject that obviously confuses you.

And to use your logic;
Just because you're a KJ doesn't mean you are in the music profession... does it?

 

[Guest]

LOL Joe,

There is no need to start another horse beating thread!:sqbiggrin: This one is already takeing a beating!

You are correct- SC isn't legally "dismissing" anything, because they haven't been and won't go to court.

I guess you missed all the filings SC has already made into the Federal Court system in several States!

What they ARE doing is naming people, then realizing that they have done so erroneously- more often than not. There. Feel better? Of course, we disagree on "no harm, no foul", but even you would agree that we've beaten that into the ground.

Yes we will have to agree to disagree across the board on this one! So far you haven't shown where any but one has been erroneously named! :sqwink:

You do realize that due to the size of the SC company, if enough people decide to fight them in court, they wouldn't have the resouces to do it.

You do realize that if Sound Choices attorney's are taking these cases to court on a contingency basis that they really don't need any resources!

You do realize that even if every single one of the named pirates decides to fight them in court that there will be a lot of broke pirates out there!:sqbiggrin:

It is merely my opinion, but I believe SC backs off when the going gets too tough.

I find that it is hard to see where you could formulate that opinion since Sound Choice has continued to expand their filing into state after state! Just which state do you see them backing off in, they are getting ready to file a second round here in Virginia, it doesn't seem to me that it looks like they are backing off any!

What I do see is some who were named and raised all kinds of "I'll show them" statements suddenly got very quiet, so who is backing down?:sqlaugh:

 

[Birdofsong]

You do realize that if Sound Choices attorney's are taking these cases to court on a contingency basis that they really don't need any resources!

I'd venture to guess that those agreements don't cover counter-claims by named defendants against Sound Choice for defamation of character, tortious interference of business, and the like, as well as awards of attorney fees for defendants that are let out by motion for summary judgment (yes, that one requires a decision of the judge).

Birdofsong

 

[Guest]

There is a saying:

"If you can control the information in any industry, you can control the industry itself."

Likewise, if you can eliminate the discs, register the mp3g's or dispense with them entirely and control the "supply" by providing only streaming, then you can also control the industry.

Poppycock.
Many people believe they can control information - but, it never works.

There's no controlling karaoke either - someone with a better idea will always come along.

When was the "height of the karaoke trend" Right now there are more venues providing karaoke entertainment than they are DJ entertainment, there are more people going to regular Karaoke bar shows than there have ever been!

You live in your own fantasy. The height of karaoke would be when there were serious manufacturers who were still interested in it (Sony, Matsu****a - JVC/Panasonic, Pioneer, etc.) All of these companies abandoned Karaoke for an obvious reason.

You also can't claim that karaoke is "king" while at the same time complaining that the wages are low or that pirate KJs are controlling your fate. The fact that SC is more intersted in settlements than they are selling speaks volumes about the market for karaoke - it isn't there.