I might be off base, but I figured that they were FIRST AND FOREMOST BUSINESSES. And for the most part (as long as they are not-for-profit) their goal is to maximize profits. They would not add karaoke or any form of entertainment that did not add to their bottom line - that's why there are always so many new "gimmicks" in the nightclub and bar business. Presumably if they are paying attention to the bottom line (which is why they usually consider hiring a $75 a night pirate host) they are going to look at their receipts on the nights they have karaoke and also from season to season or year to year and compare them. If there were fewer singers as measured by body count and receipts, because there are other bars in the area springing up with new hosts, they SHOULD be concerned and evaluating what to change, either internally in their operations or externally in their market.
Sure, there are lots of bar gimmicks and karaoke is just one more.
And our Safe Harbor program was developed partly for the reason that you mention - no hassle for the bar and no PITA problems - for the bar that is. For the pirate host, it's a different story, possibly. Remember they are choosing to remain pirates, we aren't making them that way. With our products and financing possibilities, they really have no VALID excuse for continuing to steal our content.
Your "safe harbor program" is IN MY OPINION, nothing more than a "contract for the stupid." It's all a PITA... I'm sure that there are some idiots that will be tricked into signing it, but I can't understand why unless they simply don't read it at all. Why would any business sign away their rights in a contract that gives you permission not only to sue them, but dictate to them who will be working in their club? All for what? A $75/night KJ? You'd really have to either and idiot or an 8th grader to fall for that.
One of our new Licensees for the Gem set today told my sales rep that the bar who was hiring him fired the pirate host (named in our suit and who did not take the opportunity to settle) and was hiring him ONLY on the condition that he was legal. So, he contacted us and we got him set up. This is an example of our "plan" working perfectly.
Your "plan" (as you call it) is nothing more than a sales game based on fear IN MY OPINION. Because all the KJ would have had to do is to stop using SC products. No letter, no suit and he wouldn't have been fired.
"We got him set up" is nothing more than another "sale" isn't it Kurt? Please don't make it sound like you're some kind of angel saving the world from piracy - you're simply selling your products to anyone you can convince to rent them. You're not "helping legitimate KJ's" in any way, shape or form. You're simply making it much CHEAPER for the current pirates to stay right where they are.
Another host from CA today said his buddy got a Letter of Intent to Sue and warned him to contact us ahead of being investigated, which he was doing. He is getting licensed product from us and said he was going to save his money and buy another license as soon as he could because he was aware of other pirate hosts quitting the business in LA since we began actions out there. He said he recognized that meant new opportunities for him, especially since he could openly solicit these venues without fear of being asked if he were legal.
Did some advertising copywriter jot that paragraph down for you? It reads like a fairytale on a cereal box:
1.
"A host from CA"
2.
"Said his buddy got a letter"
3.
"and warned him to contact us"
4.
"ahead of being investigated"
(time out: shouldn't they be "investigated BEFORE they get a letter? Or are you just mailing letters to everyone and waiting to see who will fall for it? )
5.
"He is getting licensed product from us"
6.
"said he was going to save his money and buy another license as soon as he could"
7.
"because he was aware of other pirate hosts quitting the business"
8.
"He said he recognized that meant new opportunities for him"
(Absolutely: he now has the opportunity to pay you for a long time.... just the kind of sucker you're looking for right? Because he won't get many more jobs and he certainly won't be able to "command more money" but who cares? He's already on your hook.)
9.
"especially since he could openly solicit these venues without fear of being asked if he were legal"
Asked by who? You? The club? What's there to stop that? Your own agreement with your licensees specifically grant you the right to ask that question whenever you friggin' want.
How about helping out the "legitimate" KJ in NV that is so legal (and broke) he can only update his music every 6 months? His KIAA membership isn't helping him much as half of his investment in your products and equipment sits in a corner 6 out of 7 days a week? You are not helping him one bit are you?
These two cases alone today give me encouragement that we are making POSITIVE steps to improve the market for legitimate hosts and hosts who want to become legitimate and run their shows like a business.
How are you "improving the market?" IN MY OPINION, you've done (and are doing) nothing for the "legitimate host" that spent much MORE on your product
in advance than you are offering the pirate competition at a cheaply financed discount price.
I went back and looked at my old receipts.... I paid $46.10 per disc for a Spotlight disc from one of your national distributors.... or about $3 per song... the ones you now "finance" are at $0.67 each. So how are you helping me again?