Thunder said:
The need and purpose of accounting records is the ability to see if more than the purchased systems are operating on the same night, of course only a legit operator is even going to bother with accounting records!
And those records and more are going to have to be supplied if one of the suits ever reaches court! Not having them will be a major setback for any defense unless you can prove you have never conducted a show for monetary gain! (note I didn't say for profit)
Steve, there is no implied right to review anyone's records - even in a lawsuit. Such a review can only be obtained
volunatrily or
compelled by a judge.
A judge will
not compell such a review if you cannot sufficiently substantiate your claim
independent of the review you are seeking. It is the basic rule of search and siezure that applies in all cases civil and criminal.
"Might be a pirate" is not adequate cause to compel an audit.
Secondly, a person getting paid to KJ or DJ does
not constitute a
commercial use of music. The
commercial use is that application for which the music is an enticement. In the case of karaoke lounges - that is food and liquor sales,
not the employment of a DJ.
The DJs employemnt status and wages are set by contract and do not change with the music - but the liquor and food receipts do. Being a full time DJ/KJ and having personal property (music collections) does
not make you a commercial user -
the venue is the commercial user.
This is precisely why weddings and private events are exempt from performance royalties because, there is no
commercial gain derived by either party to the contract from the performance or music itself. The DJs employment status and wages are again set by contract and there is no commercial benefit derived by the bride/groom and family as a result of music bing played. The DJ's income is produced directly as the result of his labor -
not the content being played. Unlike the club's liquor sales - your income is unaffected by your choice of the Bride's kindergarten concert or Michael Jackson.
There is a separate contract between the bride/groom and the function hall and gain is derived by the function hall by allowing music during private events. As a result, the venue is still required to have an ASCAP/BMI license even where the DJ and client are exempt. (Note that if you have the wedding in your own backyard instead of a venue - no one is susbject to a performance royalty.)
I cannot undertstand why so many DJs do not understand this very basic reality about commecial use and how it relates their career. It is sad because, they are then easily manipulated by their own ignorance.
The lawyers for SC are visiting venues and suing for trademarks rather than individual DJs for copyright - becasue, without a
venue or other commercial application they have no grounds upon which to act on trademark or copyright. Soundchoice
(clever but evil) is squeezing the venue to get juice from the DJ. Soundchoice with it's public statements is trying to manipulate DJs into believing they are without certain protections to intimidate them into purchases of questionable value.
SoundChoice with it'snew license is not offering you a solution to pirascy - they are trying to sell you a $12 bottle of water.
