LoudKaraoke.com sued by publisher

[Kevinper]

I have no doubt it is less expensive to settle as there are no damages to pay. If in fact someone thinks they can win, then they can counter sue for costs at the minimum.

I'd like to know where the law states that because someone is guilty of an unlawful act in the past (and paid their dues, by-the-way) that it would have any bearing on a case where someone did something to them. "This case needs to be thrown out your Honor. Even though I did steal his tractor and used it for years to plow my fields, he stole someones tractor 10 years ago". Not gonna fly.

Joes 2 lawyers were Copyright lawyers in previous posts and now they are Trademark lawyers. Okay to be both but kinda weird calling them different things. Still, they could be defending a bunch of lawsuits and putting SC, CB, and publishers to shame if what he says is true.

 

[KjAthena]

I think it is sad that the Manus have been chased of this board by people that just get nit-picky. Although I personally would prefer more dirrect answers from lot of people that post here....I have to say that if my posts were jumped on like Kurt and Debi's I would feel the need to withdrawl as well. They should not be held to higher standards than the rest of us. I hope they will return and we will again be able to converse on this forum. Look at how few people now post here.:huhpill:

 

[c. staley]

I have no doubt it is less expensive to settle as there are no damages to pay. If in fact someone thinks they can win, then they can counter sue for costs at the minimum.

I'd like to know where the law states that because someone is guilty of an unlawful act in the past (and paid their dues, by-the-way) that it would have any bearing on a case where someone did something to them. "This case needs to be thrown out your Honor. Even though I did steal his tractor and used it for years to plow my fields, he stole someones tractor 10 years ago". Not gonna fly.

Joes 2 lawyers were Copyright lawyers in previous posts and now they are Trademark lawyers. Okay to be both but kinda weird calling them different things. Still, they could be defending a bunch of lawsuits and putting SC, CB, and publishers to shame if what he says is true.

Copyright lawyers are usually Tradmark lawyers as well, it's all part of intellectual property and not unusual at all.

You make it sound like manufacturers "accidentally" made some minuscule mistakes... when the fact of the matter is that they willfully pirated MILLIONS of dollars worth of intellectual property. Had they not been sued by the publishers, they'd STILL be in the pirate business and I'll bet that there are plenty of songs that are still sold (or have been sold for years) that are STILL unlicensed.

And yes, the law does look at their past and sit in judgment of the future. If they didn't, there would be no use for a parole board of any kind. The manufacturers made their own bed, you don't think they should lay in it.

 

[DannyGKaraoke]

I think it is sad that the Manus have been chased of this board by people that just get nit-picky. Although I personally would prefer more dirrect answers from lot of people that post here....I have to say that if my posts were jumped on like Kurt and Debi's I would feel the need to withdrawl as well. They should not be held to higher standards than the rest of us. I hope they will return and we will again be able to converse on this forum. Look at how few people now post here.:huhpill:

Seems until today's post that it went two days between posts.

 

[c. staley]

I think it is sad that the Manus have been chased of this board by people that just get nit-picky. Although I personally would prefer more dirrect answers from lot of people that post here....I have to say that if my posts were jumped on like Kurt and Debi's I would feel the need to withdrawl as well. They should not be held to higher standards than the rest of us. I hope they will return and we will again be able to converse on this forum. Look at how few people now post here.:huhpill:

I did notice how few "proud cheerleaders" have posted in this thread..... Where have they gone? Where is the support from all the "certified and vetted" and "legit and legal" karaoke customers?....

You can lament that they are now quieter than before but you have to admit that it's all been based on their own attitudes backfiring in the face of their exposed dishonesty.

 

[Thunder Hag]

Seems until today's post that it went two days between posts.

I must say, I wonder how Thunder is doing...
If he were here, I bet this topic would have 50 pages of argument.
The lack of posts is getting tiresome.

 

[KjAthena]

Chip...I dont see a lack of honesty in the posts what I see is alot of picking apart every word. As I see it Debi posted this info as she was made aware of it. The legal filing was everything but clear. Most people do have a tendency to react when they feel attacked and I see reaction on both sides here. As CB did not file this suit why would anyone expect them to provide all the answers about it ? I can not speak for all the "cheerleaders" as to why they have not been posting. I have not because 1. I have had very limited internet available and 2. I am unsure as to where to start...the current threads have been so negative I am starting to wonder why I would subject myself to them. I hope that the boards here can revive...it would be a shame for "soapboxes" to end the flow of communication.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Seems until today's post that it went two days between posts.

That what I show as well. Today, is "Blue Monday" and is traditionally the time of greatest depression of the year for those prone to it 9 as well as a day or two before and after)- wonder if that has anything to do with it....?


As for manfacturor "errors": It's kind of hard to believe that after ten or fifteen years of suits that doing the same thing over and over can be thought of as "oopses". This is why I see no legal standing in court for the cases.

Both Kevin and Chip have brought of the cost of a legal battle versus that of settling. While both are correct if such a battle reaches a courtroom, I don't see that happening with individual KJs, at least in SC's case ( who is the only one that seems to be bothering them), especially in light of recent legal statements regarding Mass Suits.

1) SC would have to spend a lot of money for each and every court battle as well ( seriously depleting an already low economic reservoir). In other words, the more KJs they actually take to court, the less money they will have to do so.

2) ONE LOSS IN COURT sets a precedent- and effectively ends SC's "Settlement/forced disc sales" income. Why bother, when it's so much easier to pay a contingency lawyer to write letters, and just give them a piece of each "settlement"?

With no court battle, no legal fees.

PLEASE KEEP IN MIND: What I have stated above is ONLY APPLIES to hosts that have LEGALLY ACQUIRED MUSIC - (own original mfrs. discs) - that are being harrassed. IF one IS a pirate operating with stolen music, and enough actual investigation has been done to prove it, then one WILL probably lose in court despite mfr. history- and will deserve to do so. However, the burden of PROOF does lay on the mfr.- and they had better have it...

 

[JoeChartreuse]

I think it is sad that the Manus have been chased of this board by people that just get nit-picky. Although I personally would prefer more dirrect answers from lot of people that post here....I have to say that if my posts were jumped on like Kurt and Debi's I would feel the need to withdrawl as well. They should not be held to higher standards than the rest of us. I hope they will return and we will again be able to converse on this forum. Look at how few people now post here.:huhpill:

In the beginning, I was in total agreement, Athena. However, as of late I start to see that maybe they did this with their own - ever-changing- statements, which created a loss of credibility.

Also, apparently it didn't just happen here. I have visited Sound Choice's OWN FORUM, and see very little support for them even THERE. That has to tell you something....

The thing is, even I - "Darth Chartreuse"- would have been right there with them if only they had gone about things in a very slightly different way and had looked more closely before they leaped.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Chip...I dont see a lack of honesty in the posts what I see is alot of picking apart every word. As I see it Debi posted this info as she was made aware of it. .

Up until very recently I had absolutely no issues with CB. They aren't bothering individual KJs as of yet, and they aren't demanding licensing fees. Good to go...

However, I DID ask CB whether all available tracks are now licensed in the U.S. and CB said yes. Then I find a Permanent Injunction agains the production of 180+ tracks that are still out there, and that's just one suit.

While this has no real effect on a disc based host at this time, it may in the future. My problem with it is simply that the answer wasn't an honest one.

Also, since CB said their tracks are all licensed, I asked about including licensing documentation with each new disc, like they used to do with lyric sheets. No answer.

I didn't ask about this to be a stinker, but to cover the KJ's butt in case the music PUBLISHERS decide to get in on the act. Just good business. Why no answer?

Repeating ad nauseum: I have NO issues with CB, they've done nothing to hurt me or my business.

I just think if they are here to help, then help they should.

 

[KjAthena]

Joe, people are people and tend to be imperfect. I have read a few posts on the SC boards and see the same negativity there as well. It is my hope comunication will improve and more people will start to see how fighting piracy will be of benifit to all involved. The less comunication the more aleinated people will feel. When and only when people see how the fight will help them will they get involved. As I see it the manus need to have a much "thicker skin" than the rest of us who post on either side of the issue and we need to understand that behind the "manu stamp" are people who act,react and are as imperfect as we are

 

[KjAthena]

ok Joe so you want info from CB that they are not providing...stop for a minute and ask yourself why they may not be providing it. They have to be much more cautious from a legal standpoint than ANY of us do. It is my opinion that they may have been advised not to answer certian questions.If you had an attny advising you to not answer ??'s would you go against legal advise and answer anyway ?.
I drive my DH nuts sometimes with my "wording" as often the same sentence can be taken diffrent ways...with the dissection that goes on here (on this public board) the last thing I would want to do is provide ammunition to be used against me (vaild or not). Sometimes there is no black or white, yes or no answer to a question

 

[Diafel]

ok Joe so you want info from CB that they are not providing...stop for a minute and ask yourself why they may not be providing it. They have to be much more cautious from a legal standpoint than ANY of us do. It is my opinion that they may have been advised not to answer certian questions.If you had an attny advising you to not answer ??'s would you go against legal advise and answer anyway ?.
I drive my DH nuts sometimes with my "wording" as often the same sentence can be taken diffrent ways...with the dissection that goes on here (on this public board) the last thing I would want to do is provide ammunition to be used against me (vaild or not). Sometimes there is no black or white, yes or no answer to a question

So then, how hard is it to just say, "Sorry, but our attorneys have advised we not answer that question"?
Happens all the time when people involved in litigation are asked questions that they've been advised not to answer.

 

[KjAthena]

Diafel....I understand what you are saying and happen to agree if that is the reason I would just say so. I do not know what the reason is but that was the first thing that came to mind....there may be other reason(s) I just think sometimes we should put ourselves in the other persons shoes and ask why they may be responding in a certain way.
Just for a moment think about what the responses would be if they were to respond with "sorry but our attorneys have advised us not to answer that question"...based upon other responses I think they would have been bruttal.
We are involved in a situation that is changing almost daily....none of us have all the answers or information as much as we may want to(or not)...but without 2 way communication we will have even less

 

[possumdog]

So then, how hard is it to just say, "Sorry, but our attorneys have advised we not answer that question"?
Happens all the time when people involved in litigation are asked questions that they've been advised not to answer.

I think they finally said it on page 13, post 130:

It's informational, and supports our assertion that any commercial enterprise must carefully evaluate the source of their music.

We don't speak to specifics about the case to prevent prejudice if we are required to later become involved. It's possible we'll need to file briefs, and so we don't want to make any public, specific statements about the particulars.

 

[c. staley]

Chip...I dont see a lack of honesty in the posts what I see is alot of picking apart every word. As I see it Debi posted this info as she was made aware of it. The legal filing was everything but clear. Most people do have a tendency to react when they feel attacked and I see reaction on both sides here. As CB did not file this suit why would anyone expect them to provide all the answers about it ? I can not speak for all the "cheerleaders" as to why they have not been posting. I have not because 1. I have had very limited internet available and 2. I am unsure as to where to start...the current threads have been so negative I am starting to wonder why I would subject myself to them. I hope that the boards here can revive...it would be a shame for "soapboxes" to end the flow of communication.

Apparently, you've been sleeping. CB was fully aware of the suit and the reasons behind it - that's why they've been so cryptic in their discussion about it. Most of this thread isn't about the distributor being sued anyway, it was the "holier than thou" attitude when in fact CB has - almost 3 MILLION dollars in judgments against them for pirating intellectual property from the publishers.

There are plenty of other topics to discuss on these boards other than piracy, monitoring pirates, auditing discs, reporting pirates, sharing pirate HD sales sites, stopping pirates etc.... Funny how it got real quiet when it was pointed out that the cheerleaders themselves are actually the ones that are -- and have been -- "supporting the pirates" which turned out to be the very manufacturers they cheer for.

Which reminds me: Has CB set up the next meeting in March as they've offered?

 

[Bazza]

Funny how it got real quiet when it was pointed out that the cheerleaders themselves are actually the ones that are -- and have been -- "supporting the pirates" which turned out to be the very manufacturers they cheer for.

In my opinion it has become quiet because, frankly, the pitbull attacks are just monotonous and boring at this point. I used to check this forum daily. Now it's weekly, and its still just more of the same old - same old every time I visit. The cheerleaders no longer have the energy or desire to just argue endlessly, the manus have been run off and there are no new participants. It's just the same dog pack barking on & on to themselves. It's become one of those forum arguments that never end, like the Christian/Atheist threads on other sites.

This forum had so much potential, what with an open dialog with the actual CEO's of the two remaining large karaoke companies. Now, it's just full of bile and for no apparent reason that I can see, other than to pump up egos and prove some point. So, you win. You are right. You have proven everyone wrong and bested us. The manus are all thieves & liars. Congratulations on your work.


On a side note, I got a call yesterday from CB indicating they were shipping me a full set of legit Essentials Discs (at no cost), in return for me sending them my gray market SCDG discs for forensic examination...just like they said they would. Thanks Pirate Debbie. :winkpill:.

 

[Audio One]

Which reminds me: Has CB set up the next meeting in March as they've offered?

Nothing has been setup yet. But if the meeting happens, you should come down to Tennessee and join us. You'll meet some really nice people who have a sincere passion for their profession.

 

[Chartbusterette]

1) Here's the link again: http://dkusa.com/CHB/2million.pdf See Exhibit A for song list.

That document didn't include an Exhibit I - could you please post the link so I can see the titles you are referring to? I'll go through them line by line and let you know where the licensing stands for now.

2) As far as I can tell, NONE of these titles is clear for CB to produce, and again, the masters were demanded to be destroyed.

Not necessarily - it would depend on the settlement terms.

3) Can't go with a "falling through" of ABKCO. It's too much like Kurt's "verbal agreements" that fell through. If it's not not DOCUMENTED as licensed, it's not licensed. Jumping the gun is the mfrs. problem.

I said "fell out," not "fell through." To be clearer, it was more a function of the repercussions of that decision.

4) Still awaiting thoughts on providing licensing documentation with each disc...

As I said, I will inform the forum when we've reached a decision on this.

 

[KjAthena]

Debi..thankyou for returning to the forums and continuing to try and keep comunication lines open. I think you would be suprised at how many here do appreceate your efforts