Questions about the Arizona Suits

[JoeChartreuse]

Well, here is what I have done. I may not agree with Kurt's tactics, or trust him, but I don't believe ANYONE'S private e-mails should be posted on a public forum. Therefore I e-mailed him and let him know what happened. He has to know ( whether I have issues with him or not, or whether he thinks I'm a @#$%^ idiot or not) that he has to be more careful with private e-mails. I wouldn't want it happening to me, and he deserves no less.

I will happily debate him here, but will not take advantage due to someone else's descrepancies. Not right.

 

[c. staley]

Found the entire document online: https://www.prsformusic.com/SiteCollectionDocuments/Karaoke New Agreement 01 07 10.pdf

Section 3.14 DOES NOT apply to Sound Choice and the GEM Series. Read it carefully. GEM series was manufactured completely prior to commencement date of 1 July 2010. It was shipped to U.S. prior to 31 December 2010, so it falls under previous agreement, which did not have the restriction that is listed on territory.

Like I said; "Let the speculation begin."

While I'm not about to get in the business of translation (anymore), keep this in mind - the Gem series has 6,000 out of a stated 18,000 song library. That leaves 12,000 songs unaccounted for (or 2 more "sets"). Are you to assume (or believe) that they've already been made ("under the wire") and are simply sitting in storage to be "distributed" later?

Eric, you claim that the previous agreement did not have the restriction listed on territory - how do you know that?

Nice try guys, but all of this is not applicable to the GEM sets of discs, unless you can prove they are still shipping out of UK.

It will be interesting to say the least. Anyone can ship a few sets -and pay the license fee- out of the UK and simply crank out more here and claim them as part of the initial set... Mediaplas (even if audited) can be well within the UK licensing, and MCPRS can't touch the "U.S. branch" since they are simply "distributors."

And of course, all this speculation could be entirely wrong... including your interpretation of the MSPRS "commencement date" or territory.

Like I said; we'll all know soon enough.

 

[Guest]

Well, here is what I have done. I may not agree with Kurt's tactics, or trust him, but I don't believe ANYONE'S private e-mails should be posted on a public forum. Therefore I e-mailed him and let him know what happened. He has to know ( whether I have issues with him or not, or whether he thinks I'm a @#$%^ idiot or not) that he has to be more careful with private e-mails. I wouldn't want it happening to me, and he deserves no less.

I will happily debate him here, but will not take advantage due to someone else's descrepancies. Not right.

Well, then be fore-warned. I do not share this public/private distinction.

Anything said to me I retain the right to share. It's public the minute it leaves someone's mouth or is sent it in an email. Once you let go of the words they are no longer yours to control.

 

[starzkj]

Like I said; "Let the speculation begin."

While I'm not about to get in the business of translation (anymore), keep this in mind - the Gem series has 6,000 out of a stated 18,000 song library. That leaves 12,000 songs unaccounted for (or 2 more "sets"). Are you to assume (or believe) that they've already been made ("under the wire") and are simply sitting in storage to be "distributed" later?

Eric, you claim that the previous agreement did not have the restriction listed on territory - how do you know that?



It will be interesting to say the least. Anyone can ship a few sets -and pay the license fee- out of the UK and simply crank out more here and claim them as part of the initial set... Mediaplas (even if audited) can be well within the UK licensing, and MCPRS can't touch the "U.S. branch" since they are simply "distributors."

And of course, all this speculation could be entirely wrong... including your interpretation of the MSPRS "commencement date" or territory.

Like I said; we'll all know soon enough.

Commencement date is not speculation - From document - 1.8 “Commencement Date” shall mean 1st July 2010.

Ths "new" agreement was actually put into place out of pressure from the US Publishers that have been suing Karaoke manus and individuals (RIAA suits) for several years. They viewed the MCPRS agreement prior to be a huge whole in their rights as many more companies besides Sound Choice were using their system to get rights and importing. Since the old agreement did not limit that they put out a new one. Of course in taking effect they had to put in dates to use as deadlines and those had to spell out how previous agreements were treated.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

Well, then be fore-warned. I do not share this public/private distinction.

Anything said to me I retain the right to share. It's public the minute it leaves someone's mouth or is sent it in an email. Once you let go of the words they are no longer yours to control.

That's fine. I was speaking in regard to my personal set of ethics, not a law or someone else's rule. I've have worked long and hard over a lifetime for financial independance ( "FU money") and to make me the type of person I am today, which includes living by my own rules and ethics.. No reason that you shouldn't do the same...

As for me, if we have a discussion about the weather, it's private-period. I make the assumption that if someone wants something broadcast, they will put it on the air.

I have had several discussions with "other-siders" as well as those who agree with me in regard to these debates, and have learned a lot- not just about the subject, but the people. I don't think they would have been kind enough to share with me if they didn't believe that I could be trusted.

Again, no rule or law, only that which I have learned from my father in regard to earning trust..

OK, blathering and explaining myself is over- please return to the regularly scheduled.......um,.... well, you know....

 

[possumdog]

Those in the UK don't seem to have become aware of any changes in the export laws. The MPRS people said that perhaps I should consult American law if we have enacted some sort of ban over here. It is a bit confusing as it is the MPRS law that everyone is quoting. Guess I will try again with some citations and section numbers.

 

[Guest]

That's fine. I was speaking in regard to my personal set of ethics, not a law or someone else's rule. I've have worked long and hard over a lifetime for financial independance ( "FU money") and to make me the type of person I am today, which includes living by my own rules and ethics.. No reason that you shouldn't do the same...

As for me, if we have a discussion about the weather, it's private-period. I make the assumption that if someone wants something broadcast, they will put it on the air.

I have had several discussions with "other-siders" as well as those who agree with me in regard to these debates, and have learned a lot- not just about the subject, but the people. I don't think they would have been kind enough to share with me if they didn't believe that I could be trusted.

Again, no rule or law, only that which I have learned from my father in regard to earning trust..

OK, blathering and explaining myself is over- please return to the regularly scheduled.......um,.... well, you know....

It's not the "words" people say that I hold in trust - it's the people themselves. There are persons for whom I would respect their proprietary business information, or their personal lives irrespective of the issue at hand.

Then there are people who have earned no such trust who prefer to assume themselves confidentiality in order to serve or subvert a particular agenda. The mere fact that a piece of information or opinion would be rejected in open discussion is not a valid reason to assume it deserves to be "confidential."

People not in a position of trust should not assume they have earned any such confidence. Confidentiality is an understanding or agreement between people not an inherent protection of anyone's agenda.