Questions about the Arizona Suits

[JoeChartreuse]

I have never seen anywhere that SC allowed downloads from Tricerisoft or anyone else for that fact so we can use these tracks in our businesses. Where did I miss that? (I have been around this business a while so the subject is not new to me.) Have you considered calling SC directly and asking them about it for clairfication. Seems to me that would close the book on that subject. If Tricerisoft was claiming as being authorizied as I have seen in the past, well that dosn't count, as have several sites, only to determine later that these sites were off shore and out of the reach of the SC to do anything legal to shut them down.

Tricerasoft WAS authorized. This was years ago of course. On another forum, a KJ well known on said forum was pushing people to go with a download show, and posted all sorts of stuff from Tricerasoft as well as SC, and is still involved with SC in other ventures.

I saw the documents at the time, but this was well before all of the current upheaval so I didn't save them- they didn't pertain to me.

Of course this means that I have no documentation, and am only telling you what I witnessed. I don't ask you to take my word for it, but am just explaining how I know what I know. Maybe one of the PC experts know how to dig back far enough to find them. It was on Sid's forum, 2005 to 2006, I believe.

As for calling Kurt: I actually tried that some time ago, and ended up leaving a message. No call back of course, and after reading some of the things he's posted here since, along with other things that I have learned, I realize that it would be a waste of time.

I wouldn't ask a car dealer how good or bad his cars are either- and for the same reason.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Let me clarify. The one that is on th SC site is different from the one I received. They appear to have at least two, and many revisions of each seem to be floating around.

Ain't THAT the truth.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

I made the choice to submit to the voluntary audit because I had a feeling SC recently had investigators in my area. I did not want to be included in the lawsuit that I knew in my bones was coming, so I volunteered for the audit when Athena made her post in late January.

Since you are 1:1, and any investigation would show no evidence of wrongdoing, I'm guessing that you're fairly certain that SC doesn't DO any investigating ( and so far, the preponderance of evidence would show that you would be right)- otherwise you wouldn't have a care in the world.

This particular point makes up 90% of my problems with SC. You "volunteered" to avoid what you thought was the possibility of a law suit. Whether you want to admit it or not, you were intimidated/coerced into "volunteering" by the fear of a suit (for which there were no grounds).

BTW, did they/will they pay you for your time?

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Honestly , this is not only true but the full description of his posts in a nutshell. The reason these debates get so ridiculous and out of hand is because some here are so close minded and have made up their minds that they will argue anything just because for example it was posted by a manufacturer. They see manufacturers suing people and can see nothing else.

Kind of right- sort of like arguing religion. Some could argue the Koran and the New Testament forever- no one will change their mind. People are from different cultures and have different sets of ethics.

Not good or bad, just that some ethic sets allow for what SC is doing, and some ethic sets won't. People from each set of ethics argue from their point of view, but since the ethics are so different, neither can comprehend ( by this I don't mean logically, but ethically and emotionally) the others' view.

Lone, I and others DO see something besides mfrs lawsuits. In my case, I have MORE problems with actions OTHER than suits than I do with the suits themselves- and as of yet, only with ONE mfr. I kinda thought I was pretty clear on that......

 

[Singyoassoff]

Since you are 1:1, and any investigation would show no evidence of wrongdoing, I'm guessing that you're fairly certain that SC doesn't DO any investigating ( and so far, the preponderance of evidence would show that you would be right)- otherwise you wouldn't have a care in the world.

This particular point makes up 90% of my problems with SC. You "volunteered" to avoid what you thought was the possibility of a law suit. Whether you want to admit it or not, you were intimidated/coerced into "volunteering" by the fear of a suit (for which there were no grounds).

BTW, did they/will they pay you for your time?

I think they send investigators into venues to gather facts, some of which would indicate one way or the other whether or not infringement may be taking place. Is it perfect? No.

I doubt they will pay me for my time. I will write off the mileage. In a roundabout way I believe I will be more than compensated for my time in the long run. There is only one venue paying decent money in my market that I am aware of and I am working there. I was making $150-200 a night seven nights a week fifteen to twenty years ago. Most of the venues around here currently scoff at anything over $125. Some are paying $75 or less. When the supply drops and the demand stays the same, prices will rise. And even if they don't at least I probably won't hear anymore about how so-and-so up the road has WAY more songs than I do. That really irks me, when I am almost positive that so-and-so doesn't own a single disc.

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

You're so close to the forest, you can't see the trees....

FIRST:
If you do not "voluntarily submit" to a search you will be sued - correct?

umm....nope. where did you see that?

SECOND:


And it "may deem" to use this information to sue and/or threaten to sue, sell to other manufacturers, post on the internet or anything they want.... It's open season... on someone who "volunteers?"

nope. cant sue, i got the signed doc saying i have permission to shift to pc, what are they gonna sell to other manus? the info that i am 1:1 compliant? post on the internet...already done, check out their site, i am the first name on their "good" list. what is the problem again?

THIRD:

Nice. You volunteer for them to permanently "mark" your discs?... They trust you and appreciate your "proactive attitude?" Let them if you like, they'd never touch my property with anything. (It's simply the principle of the matter here.) How many KJ's that attended the meeting at SC studios and had audits had their discs "marked?" I'll bet none and they volunteered too.

and unless i am multi-rigging on 1 set of discs what is the problem with a small mark on the inside ring of a disc? many of the used discs i got have numbers, or the previous owners name written in the same place. problem is........?

FOURTH:

What they don't tell you is just as important as what they do tell you. For example


a) None of the "other factors" mentioned above are included in this agreement. You could theoretically have 100% discs and still fail based on undisclosed factors in this agreement.

dont know what factors they are referring to either, the audit is all it took for all of us.

b) This agreement states that it is basically an audit to get ONLY a piece of paper (the "Covenant Not To Sue document") and that is all. However, the rest of the document is loaded with unreasonable requests and conditions. Such as marking your discs, sharing your information, allowing invasive software to be parked on your machine, etc. etc.....

there is no software put on the computer, it doesn't say that they will either. the POST suit form does, but thats to make sure you didnt ditch the stolen car to avoid getting nailed for stealing it, but not on the voluntary form.
c) There is no statement as to what your liabilities are if you fail an audit. However, you are granting them the right to use whatever information they get against you.


FIFTH:
How you acquired your digital library, or how you ripped them or even WHEN should not matter as long as you have an original cd+g for each song right?

ok, i can follow you here. shouldn't matter. come to think of it, all he asked was which software i used to rip and what i liked about it. i think we have all been grilled harder than that on software on this forum.

The whole idea is "1:1 compliance" right? I certainly keep hearing the same rhetoric: "Get legal or get out!"... But in this case, even if you ARE "legal and compliant" it's still no good and just another way to extort more sales or this wouldn't be necessary at all:

if you bought a loaded drive, then you don't have the discs to back it up and you do not have to buy discs. but you cant keep the illegally copied tracks either. thats why they said work with them to acquire discs, you still need the discs. if you got them already, your good.

"Acquire discs" in this case is nothing more than a push for the Gem Series because: you have the cd+g and you have the digital copy that should be all that matters.

if you have the discs, you do not need to buy the GEM. you can have a digital copy as long as you have the discs. i dont see anywhere that if you own the discs you STILL need to buy the GEM......anywhere.........at all.........

SEVENTH:

This agreement is full of traps, otherwise, you wouldn't need this:

sign the doc and don't have discs, yup, it would affect your rights. that is in larger print as well letting you know to have a lawyer check it over, as many here did and attorneys found nothing wrong at all in it.

or this:

so suggesting that you have an attorney check over a document before signing it is bad? if there was something to hide wouldn't they avoid attorneys seeing it? so several attorneys, including IP attorneys, looked over this doc and see no issues. i am assuming that you believe you know more about IP law than IP lawyers? you are directly contradicting their findings on this document........


Even Singyoassoff sees lots of "superfluous language" here.... it's unnecessary.... right?

Lots of traps...

But you're big boys and girls, sign it if you like.

agreed. and i did sign it. leaving me as given written permission by the manufacturer to transfer my discs to PC, have YOU such written permission?

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

First question: Are you saying that if a KJ with the gem series loses a disc, and wants to replace it with the standard CD+G? that he can get at the store NOW? Do they send the KJ a FREE replacement as part of the licensing agreement? Are you saying that a track has to be 1:1 with a specific series? If I replace Spotlight series track with a Star Series or Power Picks would they claim that I'm not 1:1?

Good question Joe. there is a record from SC that you leased the set, what WOULD happen? maybe just shipping like the other replacement policy.
Kurt, are you hangin' around to answer this one?
as far as Spotlight to Star etc., as long as you remove the tracks that are not on the replacement disc it's fine of course.
silly luddites :winkpill::laughpill:

 

[c. staley]

I realized a long time ago that Staley does not use logic to back up his statements.

And which statement(s) would that be?

He denies a vendetta or a grudge but he constantly stirs up irrational fear and anxiety as he predicts that the mfr's are going to go out of their way to screw over a legit KJ.

Still pushing the grudge & vendetta "prediction" of your own? Good luck with that.

He has no facts to back up his predictions, he just plays on his own fear of the unknown and his animosity towards the manufacturers.

I, for one, appreciate your (Singyoassoff) reasoned and civil response.

No fears here, but if you want to talk about fears, how about those that are so afraid of being sued, they rollover for an "audit" at the drop of a hat? I'm sure the sky is falling on them too.

Remember that Singyoassoff is more likely to be running for an audit to protect his application with the state bar more than anything else here. And he's even mentioned that he doesn't want to jeopardize that application by SC filing suit.... even if he IS 100% "legal." He's an intern in the public defender's office (no offense intended) but that really is currently a very limited -and little- exposure to the law.

"There must be a word for what he is"...

YouTube Link to the Beatles "Nowhere Man"

What a childish game this youtube crap is....

 

[c. staley]

since you are 1:1, and any investigation would show no evidence of wrongdoing, i'm guessing that you're fairly certain that sc doesn't do any investigating ( and so far, the preponderance of evidence would show that you would be right)- otherwise you wouldn't have a care in the world.

This particular point makes up 90% of my problems with sc. you "volunteered" to avoid what you thought was the possibility of a law suit. Whether you want to admit it or not, you were intimidated/coerced into "volunteering" by the fear of a suit (for which there were no grounds).

bingo!

 

[c. staley]

agreed. and i did sign it. leaving me as given written permission by the manufacturer to transfer my discs to PC, have YOU such written permission?

And which of the multiple versions that they use did you sign? How different is it than the one above? Time to pull it out and make some comparisons.....

 

[c. staley]

Maybe, maybe not. This is a big country. It would be near impossible for them to hit every venue in every town. A KJ has other choices before suit is filed.

It is in their best interest to hit as many as possible. They are not out to stop piracy no matter what you think, they are out to sell product and threats of a lawsuit is simply their tool to accomplish that. Most "pirates" they find are simply given the opportunity to PURCHASE tracks at highly discounted and financed rates. There's no economic advantage for you either now or in the future. Take a look at the others here : rumbolt is "legal and certified " and is out of work. Paradigm isn't far behind... what makes you think the world will turn rosey for you?

I made the choice to submit to the voluntary audit because I had a feeling SC recently had investigators in my area. I did not want to be included in the lawsuit that I knew in my bones was coming, so I volunteered for the audit when Athena made her post in late January.

You did not want to be included because you didn't want your state bar application to be held up.... these are your words, not mine. How would you know that a lawsuit was coming? You just said "it's a big country" right? So let's call a spade a spade here, you were frightened (by rumor) into submitting to their audit. And that's exactly what they want. You're being played like a fiddle as well as the others.

 

[Singyoassoff]

You did not want to be included because you didn't want your state bar application to be held up.... these are your words, not mine. How would you know that a lawsuit was coming? You just said "it's a big country" right? So let's call a spade a spade here, you were frightened (by rumor) into submitting to their audit. And that's exactly what they want. You're being played like a fiddle as well as the others.

I saw nothing wrong with spending an afternoon showing them my discs when I found out the auditor was going to be in the area. I would have volunteered for the audit bar app or no bar app.

Apparently they are not very good fiddlers. Athena said:

"Auditors have started planning trips to diffrent areas purely to conduct voluntary audits. In the Tampa Bay Area (my little piece of the world) ads were placed, calls were made, and emails were sent to over 100 KJ's....only 7 wanted more info...only 2 requested audits..."

If the scare tactics are working so well, why did only 2 out of 100 request audits? I have my thoughts on this, but I'll let you answer first.

 

[c. staley]

If the scare tactics are working so well, why did only 2 out of 100 request audits? I have my thoughts on this, but I'll let you answer first.

It worked on you just fine.

 

[Singyoassoff]

Is that an answer to the question I asked? I don't think it is. I have answered many questions you asked me.

Again I ask you - If the scare tactics are working so well, why did only 2 out of 100 request audits?

 

[rumbolt]

rumbolt is "legal and certified " and is out of work

Really, I am? Thats funny, just last week my wednesday nite venue owner and i had a meeting where i was able to negotitate a raise in my fee primarily beacaue, now here it is, hold on, wait for it.............."I am glad you are legal and kept me out of trouble" his words, not mine. Sounds like an endorsement if you ask me but you didn't. Can I get an Amen! He also proceeded to tell me that 2 of the 3 bars named in his area had called him to ask who he was using and why he didn't get named.
I may have lost my Tues and Thurs gig (1 bar/2 gigs) but it wasn't due to piracy but due to illness of ownership. Working to replace them soon.

I have also done karaoke private events the last 2 weekends that paid me more that a weeks worth of bar gigs each. And, I have just picked up another private event, just signed the contracts Monday that I recieved and was referred to by the Chartbuster legal kj web link. Oh my, life is good and it is good to be legal and vetted!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[JoeChartreuse]

If the scare tactics are working so well, why did only 2 out of 100 request audits? I have my thoughts on this, but I'll let you answer first.

I know this was directed toward Chip, but if I may:

I believe that the answer you wish to hear is that the rest are pirates, and so wish to avoid an audit.

Sorry, but though that may certainly be at least partially true, there are other reasons.

You are newer here, and may not know it, but I am a manufactures' disc based host. No computer at all, and original mfrs. discs on the table. Despite this, I wouldn't knowingly let any mfr.'s rep or anywhere near me. I consider it an invasion of privacy by someone unauthorized by any government agency to do so, I would consider it theft of my billable time, no benefit for me, and all documentation is heavily biased toward the mfr.

Others way have similar reasons, but the biggest reason is that educated hosts realize that SC ( who has no U.S. licensing for their tracks) simply doesn't have a valid case to present in court. As a matter of fact, though they still have offices here, I'm not sure if the actual base of operations ( in other words, the corporate entity) is still U.S. based or not.

Without U.S. licensing ( and SC has stated that their only licensing is in the U.K, where their discs are now manufactured by a subcontractor) their Trademark Infringement case is invalid- the logo is not legally attached to the tracks .

People can't seem to shake the image of the decent sized and well-marketed karaoke music production company that SC used to be, and that helps the intimidation process.

The thing is, the company, in that form, no longer exists. The new business model no longer includes new karaoke production (They are out of that business at this time). The current tiny company derives most of it's income from monetary settlements through intimidation, and forced disc sales (recycled tracks) the same way.

 

[Bazza]

The current tiny company derives most of it's income from monetary settlements through intimidation, and forced disc sales (recycled tracks) the same way.

And don't forget the kick **** GEM series which I understand is doing very well.

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

And which of the multiple versions that they use did you sign? How different is it than the one above? Time to pull it out and make some comparisons.....

what did i say? did i not say that he posted one is the same one I signed?

 

[Paradigm Karaoke]

It is in their best interest to hit as many as possible. They are not out to stop piracy no matter what you think, they are out to sell product and threats of a lawsuit is simply their tool to accomplish that. Most "pirates" they find are simply given the opportunity to PURCHASE tracks at highly discounted and financed rates. There's no economic advantage for you either now or in the future. Take a look at the others here : rumbolt is "legal and certified " and is out of work. Paradigm isn't far behind... what makes you think the world will turn rosey for you?

i am running 4 nights a week, just got a call from another bar owner who saw me at my first bar, and the owner there asked me to make copies of my SC & CB certs (did SC but just waiting for the physical CB cert to get through mail.) to put on the wall where i set up cause he loves the idea (he joined safe harbor on his own as well). after reading the cert itself, the other bar fired their KJ when he could not prove his 1:1 and they "want to be on the up and up" as she put it. so, it is actually starting to turn a bit more rosey. one bar , for 4 nights a week, excited and proud to post my certs and another hiring me because of my certs, and even at $150.00 a night, the avg is $75.00 - $100.00 so i am making more than most out here at least so i am considering that a bit rosey too. what do you know.......those useless certs are actually showing some worth.

and while we are at it....care to answer any of the questions posed to you? we have answered yours, some more than once.

the CIA killed JFK, then RFK, the moon landing was faked, 911 was a government plot, the manus want to ruin KJ's......

 

[KJSandman]

FYI: SC also derives income from their recording studios among other activities revolving around music production.