What's new
By:

Questions about the Arizona Suits

rumbolt said:
My point was that if the bar had a problem with the filing, then they would have had plenty of time before it was made public to do what they needed to do for damage control regardless of how the or why the suit was filed. I wasn't defending SC in the prior post since I never saw the evidence that was presented to them. Wrong, right or otherwise.
Click to expand...

The point was that there shouldn't have been a filing in the first place, or anything for them to defend against. SC never investigated for evidence of wrongdoing, because if they had, they would have found none. Hence the term "Witch Hunt". However, they claimed that they did, which wasn't true.
 
JoeChartreuse said:
The point was that there shouldn't have been a filing in the first place, or anything for them to defend against. SC never investigated for evidence of wrongdoing, because if they had, they would have found none. Hence the term "Witch Hunt". However, they claimed that they did, which wasn't true.
Click to expand...

To monday morning quaterback and issue is easy so it is a moot point, to file or not to file. I was told there was an investigation done by a contractor for SC that got it wrong but SC unknowingly used the bad information gathered to form the filing. Lesson learned, hire qualified investigators. In the same investigation, another venue named settled and fired the kj. Why are we still discussing old news? We all know how it turned out and some are still relishing in the the failures of others when we really should be working together to find ways to improving our overall value to the venues so we can make a fair living as once was possible.
 
Rumbolt said:
I don't expect any lawsuits against me anytime soon. That is what business insurance is for, of which I carry.
Click to expand...

Your insurance will not cover you for illegal activity. Just ask Complete Music:

After settling a piracy law suit for around a quarter-million dollars they turned to their insurer for payment who promptly denied the claim. CM sued the insurer claiming coverage under "errors and omissions" citing the advertising of it's unlicensed compilations to it's franchise members. The court ruled in favor of the insurer on the basis that neither liability or errors and omissions provides can provide protection from the insured's own illict illegal activity.

Thus, if you are sued by SC and settle (whether guilty or not) you will be all on your own.
 
Proformance said:
Your insurance will not cover you for illegal activity. Just ask Complete Music:

After settling a piracy law suit for around a quarter-million dollars they turned to their insurer for payment who promptly denied the claim. CM sued the insurer claiming coverage under "errors and omissions" citing the advertising of it's unlicensed compilations to it's franchise members. The court ruled in favor of the insurer on the basis that neither liability or errors and omissions provides can provide protection from the insured's own illict illegal activity.

Thus, if you are sued by SC and settle (whether guilty or not) you will be all on your own.
Click to expand...
I won't be sued by SC therefore no settlement. My dj insurance is if my equipment causes harm to someone. My other business insurance does not cover any illegal activity and I know that. I do not do anything that is illegal so, moot point.
 
Guys I just kinda felt the need to expand upon my post #148 "It appears that SC has changed methodology to help prevent future mistakes "
SC has changed the way they are doing things alot since we were named. For one they are now attempting to educate KJ's about the responsibility they have to request a proactive audit that gives them permission to use digitized files. Even if you dont agree the fact is EVERYONE who has made a media shift, regardless of whether or not they have all their discs, has made unauthorized copies, if they do not have written permission to do so.( sorry still waiting for the letter from my IP attny to post here as to why she says this is so...will post when I get it ). I have decided to try and reach as many KJ's as I can to try and inform them personally..That is why I post on these boards (even when it gets so nasty at times)...if I help just 1 or 2 then I have made a diffrence.
SC/CB are trying to reach as many KJ's as possible to inform them of proactive audit...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...what does that tell you ? I wish this offer had been made before we were named because I would have jumped on the offer in a heartbeat.
This board(and some others I have found) tend to have a vocal few that do most of the posting.....it is the "lurkers" that find these boards doing a internet search I hope to reach
 
I am in the Sarasota/Bradenton area, and at least 6 of the KJs named in the most recent suit are local. Thankfully, I was not named. I play three nights a week in a bar on Siesta Key (part of Sarasota) that has been doing karaoke for almost 20 years. If an investigator was in Sarasota, they would have been to my bar.

I own over 700 spotlights, all the foundations and bricks as well as a smattering of other SC series. I was one of the 2 that volunteered for the audit.

I am a recent graduate of Stetson Law, I have passed the Florida Bar Exam and am awaiting admission. Being named in a lawsuit could hold up my application indefinitely.

I can't help but believe that my volunteering for the audit kept my name off the suit. Thank you Athena for making me aware of the opportunity, and thank you Sound Choice for the opportunity to submit to the audit.
 
Singyoassoff said:
I am in the Sarasota/Bradenton area, and at least 6 of the KJs named in the most recent suit are local. Thankfully, I was not named. I play three nights a week in a bar on Siesta Key (part of Sarasota) that has been doing karaoke for almost 20 years. If an investigator was in Sarasota, they would have been to my bar.

I own over 700 spotlights, all the foundations and bricks as well as a smattering of other SC series. I was one of the 2 that volunteered for the audit.

I am a recent graduate of Stetson Law, I have passed the Florida Bar Exam and am awaiting admission. Being named in a lawsuit could hold up my application indefinitely.

I can't help but believe that my volunteering for the audit kept my name off the suit. Thank you Athena for making me aware of the opportunity, and thank you Sound Choice for the opportunity to submit to the audit.
Click to expand...

Good. A law student... Read your "audit agreement" carefully and let us know what/how much you're actually signing away.... Unless the audit agreement has changed RADICALLY in the last year, signing it will hold up your application as well. (google: "Trademark Extortion")

And please don't be afraid to tell us who you really are..... No need to hide behind anything right? (You might find that there may be a LOT more information for you as well.)
 
Singyoassoff,....I am happy to help any legit hosts in my area in any way I can. I may not be able to help in other areas except by posting on these boards and getting the word out. You helped revive my faith that there are other legit KJ's in our area. I would have jumped at the opportunity for an audit if I knew they existed before being named.

Congrats on your graduation and dont let they naysayers get under your skin.

Athena
 
I have no problem with signing the two page document titled "Karaoke Library Voluntary Audit Acknowledgment of Terms" dated 11/12/2010 that was sent to me.
 
Twist, twist, twist away Staley... READ the post. Recent GRADUATE (not student). I read my agreement, as did my attorney (who also could be called a law school GRADUATE). I gave away exactly NOTHING. I agreed to operate in a legal, ethical manner while utilizing their product/license/trademark for my purposes. I was doing this BEFORE any audit took place and of course, I will continue to do so.

http://youtu.be/Tzm5LDHL6Gw

google: Vendetta, Grudge
 
Singyoassoff said:
I have no problem with signing the two page document titled "Karaoke Library Voluntary Audit Acknowledgment of Terms" dated 11/12/2010 that was sent to me.
Click to expand...

Please post a copy. Do you have a Pacer account?
 
Anyone who wishes to read/pick apart/admire/analyze etc. the current SC audit agreement can go on their site and link to their section on what to do if you are contacted by APS Associates.
 
KJSandman said:
Twist, twist, twist away Staley... READ the post. Recent GRADUATE (not student). I read my agreement, as did my attorney (who also could be called a law school GRADUATE). I gave away exactly NOTHING. I agreed to operate in a legal, ethical manner while utilizing their product/license/trademark for my purposes. I was doing this BEFORE any audit took place and of course, I will continue to do so
Click to expand...

Just want to see if it contains the same admission of guilt clause that the first ones had.... Why do you ask? Do you have a problem with this document being made public? Is there something buried in the 2 pages you don't want us to see?

I'd really like to know why it takes 2 pages....

I'm not "twisting anything" and quite the contrary, I'd like to "UN-twist" the pretzel of information generated and "offered" to unsuspecting KJ's.
 
possumdog said:
Anyone who wishes to read/pick apart/admire/analyze etc. the current SC audit agreement can go on their site and link to their section on what to do if you are contacted by APS Associates.
Click to expand...

I'd like to trust that, however since even Jennifer Price stated that her agreement was altered by SC's attorney between what she was shown and and what she was ultimately pressured into signing I can't trust anything on their site. And she was pressured into "settling" remember? She's perfectly legal... I think the term she used was "mob tactics" remember?
 
The one on the SC site it it is a post-suit audit form.


Here is the one I got (the formatting is messed up).


KARAOKE LIBRARY VOLUNTARY AUDIT
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF TERMS


THIS DOCUMENT MAY AFFECT YOUR LEGAL RIGHTS. DO NOT SIGN IT WITHOUT READING IT.



You have requested that your karaoke library be audited in order to have this information considered as one of the factors toward being issued a Covenant Not To Sue document which allows the transfer of musical karaoke content from Sound Choice® Discs to other formats by Slep-Tone Entertainment Corp. (“Sound Choice®”). Your signature below indicates your acknowledgement of the following terms for this audit:

1. YOUR REQUEST FOR AUDIT. Your signature below constitutes your request for an audit of your karaoke library. Sound Choice has agreed to conduct this audit at its own expense (except for incidental expenses you may incur in assembling your materials for the audit).
2. SCOPE OF AUDIT. Sound Choice will conduct an audit of your karaoke library to determine whether you have legitimately acquired a legal copy of every Sound Choice karaoke accompaniment track stored in your karaoke library. A Sound Choice track is deemed to have been legitimately acquired only if you own an original CD+G (compact disc plus graphics) disc containing that track. If you have transferred the track to another format (“media-shifted”), you must own an original CD+G disc containing that track for each such system to which you have transferred that track, in order to be considered in compliance.
If you wish to be audited for other Karaoke Producer Companies as part of a KIAA (Karaoke Industry Alliance of America) Audit, you must let us know in advance and have all corresponding materials for the other brands as requested below.
3. AUDIT PROCEDURES. The following procedures will be used to conduct the audit:
A. Sound Choice is incurring a significant expense to conduct this audit. Your full cooperation with the audit is important.
B. A Sound Choice representative will contact you to arrange for a mutually acceptable time and place for the audit.
C. You should assemble for inspection all of your karaoke discs, CAVS machines, computers (including laptops), and any other apparatus containing karaoke media, whether being used for active or backup purposes, in the designated location at the designated time. If any additional equipment is necessary to access the media (including but not limited to keyboard/mouse, monitor, or the like), you should bring that equipment as well.
D. You should also assemble for inspection all of your song lists and at least two copies of your songbooks and receipts for your discs.
E. During the audit, each disc may be marked using an indelible method. This marking will not interfere with your ability to play the disc but will prevent that disc from being re-used in an audit of another karaoke hosting company.
F. You should be prepared to explain the process you used to move tracks from CDs to another medium. If you purchased a pre-loaded hard drive or CAVS machine, you should be aware that Sound Choice has never authorized a transfer of that type. In that situation, an audit would be inappropriate. Instead, we would suggest that you work with Sound Choice to acquire discs.



4. SUCCESSFUL AUDIT. The target you should be shooting for is where for every audited track, you own one legitimately acquired original disc containing that track for every individual machine (CAVS machine, laptop, or other device you use for media storage for a karaoke show) that contains that track. This is known as “1:1 correspondence.” We recognize that discs do get lost, stolen, damaged, or destroyed from time to time. A successful audit means that at least 98% of the tracks stored on your hard drive can be traced to a unique disc. Of course, you will still need to delete tracks that you don’t have a disc for.
5. USE OF AUDIT RESULTS. You acknowledge that Sound Choice may use the results of the audit it conducts in any way it deems appropriate.
6. ADVICE OF COUNSEL. You acknowledge that you have had the opportunity to review this document and to obtain an opinion of counsel regarding it prior to signing it.
Your signature below constitutes an acceptance of all of the above terms.
IF YOU ARE UNCOMFORTABLE WITH ANY OF THE TERMS ABOVE, DO NOT SIGN THIS DOCUMENT.





SIGNATURE PRINTED NAME





COMPANY NAME TITLE





DATE E-MAIL ADDRESS TELEPHONE NUMBER



END OF DOCUMENT



I do not have a Pacer account.
 
c. staley said:
And please don't be afraid to tell us who you really are..... No need to hide behind anything right? (You might find that there may be a LOT more information for you as well.)
Click to expand...

I'm not quite sure what you mean? My name is David, I live in Sarasota, I work on Siesta Key on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. I have been a KJ for over 20 years. Anything else?
 
Singyoassoff said:
I'm not quite sure what you mean? My name is David Holland, I live in Sarasota, I work at Captain Curt's on Siesta Key on Thursday, Friday and Saturday nights. I'm an intern at the Sarasota Public Defender's office. I have been a KJ for over 20 years. Anything else?
Click to expand...

Naw, That's perfect... Thanks!

I tried to send you a private message, but apparently, you have elected not to receive them.
 
c. staley said:
Naw, That's perfect... Thanks!

I tried to send you a private message, but apparently, you have elected not to receive them.
Click to expand...

I don't know why the message would not go through. I have not changed any settings.
 
rumbolt said:
To monday morning quaterback and issue is easy so it is a moot point, to file or not to file. I was told there was an investigation done by a contractor for SC that got it wrong but SC UNKNOWINGLY used the bad information gathered to form the filing. Lesson learned,
Click to expand...

Lesson learned? Then why go after Athena or Jennifer Price, who came later? Because they never investigate, have continued the same witch hunt- and hope to intimidate and coerce money out of innocent KJs.

Unknowingly? So you're saying that SC just took the word of others without any actual proof- because they figured that they could make few bucks?
 
KjAthena said:
Guys I just kinda felt the need to expand upon my post #148 "It appears that SC has changed methodology to help prevent future mistakes "
SC has changed the way they are doing things alot since we were named..../QUOTE]

Yup, that's what was said when the other innocent KJs were named. That was a lie, as other innocent KJs were named, and continues to be so. Sorry.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top