- Messages
- 137
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 102
whachoogonnadoo when they come for u?
roflmao!
whachoogonnadoo when they come for u?
So why dump all your discs? Cutting off your nose to spite your face. Stand up and be the test case.
Not quite cutting anything.
Are you offering to "stand up and be the test bank" to pay for the legal services of the "test case?" I'll get the popcorn!
That question is rhetorical, yes? You aren't really unable to comprehend what I'm saying, are you?
I would believe it to be obvious that I am not stepping up to finance the test case because I do not believe that the defendant would prevail.
The point is moot as I've already been vetted and will not be a party joined to the test case.
If you truly believe that you would prevail, perhaps you could gather the funds from those that support your beliefs. Think of it as an investment that could potentially pay off huge, if you prevail.
I'll take mine un-buttered, thanks:laughpill:
So Kurt is not responsible for the actions of the attorney he hired, then?Yes, but Kurt was not told by his attorney that we owned discs and had been in business 20 years. Kurt is making this up to us as I've posted numerous times. You can continue to hate, but I'm not playing that game or being your poster child. I am happy with my current relationship with Kurt and SC. I have no complaints with how he has treated me. Please find someone else to point to when you want to slam Kurt or SC. If you want to slam his attorney, I have no problems with that. Just don't assume that Kurt was told every detail of my conversations with his attorney. Having had an attorney of my own in the past, I was only notified when settlement offers were made or motions were filed.
First, that will never happen since I'm dumping SC. But, on the off chance they ever do, I guess I would pick the dusty suckers up and throw them at them! LOLWhachoogonnadoo when they come for U?
What happened to me happened because I was aware of the law enough to KNOW that there was no legal precedent involved when it came to media shifting. I knew I owned discs. I knew i would pass an audit. I also knew that I WAS GUILTY OF MEDIA SHIFTING WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. .
First, that will never happen since I'm dumping SC. But, on the off chance they ever do, I guess I would pick the dusty suckers up and throw them at them! LOL
Well, what it has to do with anything is this... no one is obligated to settle. Specifically if they can prove compliance or if they truly believe that they can contest the lawsuit and prevail under the current statutes. How you feel about that has absolutely no effect, your brownie points are exactly that: worthless. I care if they are illegal and get caught. No, nothing opens up more venues for you or increases your pay rate except you. Please, let's get over that. The mfr's are interested in providing you with legal, quality, protected product period. They will provide that, through legal channels, to your competition. Why? Because that is the intended result. Isn't that obvious? Get legal or get out. This can be applied equally and without bias to every single KJ out there. This is not an intrusion upon your rights. This is a standard to which you will eventually be upheld if you continue to operate in a commercial capacity in this industry.
It has occurred to me that it could have happened more than once. You want to quibble about statistics? Where do you come up with the prediction, the clairvoyance, that gives you the "hundreds" of people that have experienced what Jennifer did?
You are confusing criminal and civil proceedings.
Take a moment and consider the widget... the euphemism for any tangible product that may be marketed. If you produce a widget that has specific, unique characteristics that identify it as YOUR widget and someone else produces a replica of YOUR widget and uses YOUR widget to their financial gain without compensating you in any way. You have a prima facie case. You have legally sufficient: sufficient in law to establish a case or fact, unless disproved, evidence that your creation, your tangible product, your trademark, your intellectual property has been infringed upon. This is a civil matter. There is no burden of proof. There is no assumption of innocence in this situation. The fact that cannot be refuted is that if you have replicated or transferred the widget from its original state to another state, you are in violation of rights reserved. Facts. Not conjecture, not fear based assumption, not predictions based on reactionary impulse. If you truly believe that you can support a defense based on your reasoning, why haven't you stepped forward and challenged these companies yourself? Initiate the class action now. You also have the power to assert yourself and make the difference that you seem to suggest could exist if the mfr's didn't act in the way they have.
If only you were simply waiting. No one here has control over the temporal aspect of this process. Not the plaintiffs, not the defendants, not the courts. It takes the time it takes. This is pandemic in our judiciary system. It is certainly not isolated to our particular concerns. Thanks for holding, we'll be with you as soon as we can. Quit griping about waiting. The industry is relatively young and the issues associated with digital piracy are even younger. It is a big, grown-up world out there and it takes time to adapt. The recording industry has been around 70 years longer than our little niche and as a whole they've moved slower than we have.
What is that? An excuse? Passive aggressive deflection. Truly, if you had any concept of assertion with integrity, you'd have asked the direct questions in open forum. Slinking around the outskirts of the issues with isolationist attitude and skepticism, taking pot shots at statistics and semantics is futile at best. At worst, it is counter-productive. I believe that if you could find it within your capability to decide that it is worth it to assume responsibility for your own education, that you could eventually dispose of the defeatist attitude and actually contribute towards getting the intended result. I reiterate: Ask Debi or Kurt a DIRECT question. Do it with respect and reservation (just as you would have done unto you). I believe there are a few of us here, on both sides of the fence, that would be interested in the results.
Agreed, we'll be better off. Legal precedent will establish the playing field and the game will continue and the rules will be clearer and enforced. Agreed, there hasn't exactly been a united front on this. This is no longer the case. Ask any of your fellow OKJT members who attended the meeting at SC. Please, I ask you to pose any question you want to me regarding the information we received. It is the dialog that is the catalyst for change. You speak of the party as if you are an invitee. Tell me, if you're at the party and the police show up. If there is evidence of criminal activity in plain site, wouldn't you reasonably assume that you would be detained and questioned? Hey, guess what, I was just at the party... I'm not selling or doing drugs, I'm not under-age, I don't live here, etc. You are obligated to prove your innocence. Only because you are at the party. So, yeah, sorry backatya Charlie, but it is gonna happen.
***QUESTION FOR SOUND CHOICE***
Kurt, How many times has this happened in the past, to your knowledge? Is Jennifer is the only one to date that has owned discs but still felt that settling in lieu of an audit was in her best interest? Was she offered an audit?
***END OF QUESTION***
I chose to make the settlement within hours of getting my letter in the mail. My husband wanted to go through the audit, but I wanted it over and done with. At that point, the attorney didn't have audit proceedures in place and so he highly discouraged that option. He also wanted to get paid for his part in this lawsuit.
Ok, prove compliance right? So i'm out happilly doing my karaoke one night. Unbeknownst to me, an inspector for SC saunters in. He notices that a use a Cavs machine, thumbs through my books, requests a song or two, and takes a couple of pics showing the SC logo on the screens. Weeks or months go by and I get the dreaded letter of intent for Trademark Infringement because even though I bought all my music legally, it may or may not be a crime to formatt shift. Legally, morally, (you choose whatever standard you wish to apply) I should be obligated to show discs for the one or two tracks of which the alleged infringement occurred. But that's not what this is about anyway, SC doesn't give a chit if I formatt shift, they'll gladly allow me to do so after I submit and allow them to do what they have absolutely no legal right to do. They can't outright accuse me of theft, so they have decided to use this underhanded method as a backdoor into my business.
Sound Choice never approved, authorized, granted permission etc. fror any of their product to be used on the CAVs system so unless it was played directly from the disc on a CAV player it is a violation.
If you take the time to read the copyright law you will find that it is indeed a violation to format shift product (anyones) for use in commercial use without permission.
Pure speculation, I am certainly not stating it as a fact. How many is too many for you? 1...6....1000?
Is there a point when the does end not justify the means for you?
***QUESTION FOR SOUND CHOICE***
Kurt, How many times has this happened in the past, to your knowledge? Is Jennifer is the only one to date that has owned discs but still felt that settling in lieu of an audit was in her best interest? Was she offered an audit?
***END OF QUESTION***
And while I'm on this, let me just say to Jennifer. No one is using you as a poster child. You came here on your own and offered up information that simply verified what many had speculated was happening, and what others claimed was not happening.
Why on earth would I want to initiate a class action suit to resolve a grey area that the manufacturers don't seem to want to resolve themselves. I'm out doing karaoke 3 night a week. My location is listed in my profile. So is my picture. My name is actually Joe. If they wish to sweep the area, I'll still be right here waitng.
Give them time eventually one of the manus will get around to you!
Well, Kurt has claimed that an extremely high percentage of KJ's ignore the letters. I'll keep waiting, but I better see hundreds, if not thousand of cases coming sooner or later.
Even Joe C. confirmed what Kurt said, in fact Joe C. even said the Pirates were laughing at the letters, the manus are now not even considering doing the letters before the suits are filed, the letters will be sent after the filing is done now!
Direct question asked above. BTW, it is not unusual for Kurt to ignore direct questions on this forum. Many have been asked, and remain unanswered. Your opinion of my opinions aside, I stopped holding my breath waiting for the answers.
:nopill:Are you talking about a party in the United States of America??? Last time I checked, all I have to do is show some ID and shut my mouth. I don't have to prove my innocence to anyone. And if the Govt. decides to bring charges against me, they better be able to tie those drugs to me.
It appears you confuse criminal law with civil law! But even in criminal law if you just show your ID and shut your mouth 99% of the time you would be convicted on the evidence presented if you made no effort to counter it! In Civil court it doesn't require proof beyond a reasonable doubt it requires a perponderance of the evidence (is it more likely that you did do something than you didn't)!
Using your example, SC might as well send letters of intent to all of the patrons at a computer show. After all, every one at the party needs to prove their innocence, right?? Might even make a few more bucks while they're at it.
Granted.
What are you going to do when CB comes after you?
What are you going to do when Stellar comes after you?
Dump 'em.
Good luck.
I seriously doubt CB & Stellar are going to be making the same huge mistakes that SC has. They watched and learned. I have no issue with showing my discs, but just ASK. Don't sue first and ask questions later. And don't DEMAND that I do this or that either. On my end, I will NOT sign a contract like SC was making defendants sign before they went through and audit. It there is to be an audit at all, it will be done on terms I am comfortable with. Otherwise, I'll see them in court. Simple.
You might also consider dumping some of the other stuff from your system as well (some you wouldn't even think about)!
Okay Thunder, this is the second time that you've alluded to SC "purchasing defunct labels"....
If you purchased the Music Maestro "trademark" and then started going around and suing KJ's, it wouldn't do you much good. I would LOVE for that to happen.... then you'd be talking counter suit up-the-wazoo.
Try as you might to bluff others that you can, you can't. Anymore than you can get a $1,000,000.00 life insurance policy on the homeless guy with only a year to live.... you can't do it.
If that was brought up at your "meeting/karaoke party" and you believed it then you are being played like a fiddle.
Nice try though.
1) Aren't you disc based? If so then what are you concerned about?
2) You might also consider dumping some of the other stuff from your system as well (some you wouldn't think about)!
I believe there would be a valid suit here
A place to debate everything and anything!