Toqer Goes to the City Counsel of San Jose

[KJSandman]

My own experience at the last five shows I've witnessed is that 4 out of 5 are running pc's. The one running discs had all burns. I know that isn't proof of anything "piratical", but it is an indicator that further information is needed. I know for a fact, because I asked and observed, that the 3 out of the 4 running pc's DO NOT own the discs to back up their music. 80% pc, 75% of those confirmed illegal. None of them are competitors in my market/area. However; they are doing damage to our industry and indirectly to every manufacturer and individual or firm that operates, legally, to provide the goods and services needed.

Friday night, I got a call from the manager at one of the above mentioned pc run shows. Their KJ had quit and the owner had passed on my number as a potential replacement. When I attended this show I had a conversation with the owner and asked her about karaoke in her establishment. I asked about the history, how many nights, what was the busy night, who sang what genre, crowd demographics and did she own the discs for her music. No, in fact, she did not. She openly admitted that to me and went on to gripe about paying $150 a night to these KJ's who came in and acted like they were a big deal. She also told me that when trying to find a new KJ in the past, she had a guy who came in and told her that every time she played a karaoke song, she was stealing it. She scoffed at the idea, but she listened to me as I simply explained that in order to be legal, you must possess the original cd+g discs that contain the music that you have on your computer. I didn't tell her that mfr's are suing KJ's & Venues who are using stolen music. I deliberately avoided using terms like piracy. I was having a nice conversation with the lady, but now I think she missed my point. I didn't think that she was going to change her practices with regard to karaoke because of what I said, but she got that I was a KJ and didn't hear that what she was doing was illegal. She then, a couple of months later, had her manager call me and attempt to hire me. The fact that I'm already booked and 100+ mountainous miles away from the venue means that I'd never consider it, but I told the manager that I can't work for them unless I bring my own karaoke. She was completely oblivious. I told her to make sure that whoever she hired, to be certain that they possessed the original cd+g's to support their system whether it is disc-based or hard-drive based. Again, no comprehension. I turned down the offer and wished her luck with apologies that I couldn't even offer a referral.

In-line with the OP... What Toquer has done here could be part of the ripple effect that gets the message out. My picture would have been of an attractive young woman who bought a bar that had karaoke for years and continued doing it in the manner they always had. She doesn't know her business is at risk. She doesn't know the damage she's doing to our industry. She doesn't know that she's obligated by law to educate herself on the requirements of operating legal karaoke. Then, I'd hold up the picture of the little old man and say "He knows."

 

[c. staley]

No, Chip, he has suggested that defunct labels are now also going to be fair game because several of them have been purchased by the mfr's. This is fact.

You counter the (admittedly) vague statement by adding your own spin on something that you don't have adequate information on. He didn't allude to a specific mfr. Then comes the conjecture in the form of a sarcastic guess. You think, maybe, that the mfr's actually are successful business people who act with consideration and deliberate purpose. They are not idiots.

There is no bluff here. Thunder can certainly push your buttons, causing you to thrash about and make ridiculous statements. Speaking of being played like a fiddle.

Ask the direct question Chip. Wouldn't you like to know what line you're going to have to drop next in order to avoid a lawsuit?

'ya think?

I'll not have to drop any "defunct" labels and it most certainly is a bluff.

And I'm not thrashing about as you'd like to portray... however, Thunder's opinions of how the law works - or that he'd like it to work - is extremely misleading. Thunder's total legal experience comes from either suing someone (plaintiff) or being sued (defendant) and that's it.

 

[Birdofsong]

Friday night, I got a call from the manager at one of the above mentioned pc run shows. Their KJ had quit and the owner had passed on my number as a potential replacement. When I attended this show I had a conversation with the owner and asked her about karaoke in her establishment. I asked about the history, how many nights, what was the busy night, who sang what genre, crowd demographics and did she own the discs for her music. No, in fact, she did not. She openly admitted that to me and went on to gripe about paying $150 a night to these KJ's who came in and acted like they were a big deal. She also told me that when trying to find a new KJ in the past, she had a guy who came in and told her that every time she played a karaoke song, she was stealing it. She scoffed at the idea, but she listened to me as I simply explained that in order to be legal, you must possess the original cd+g discs that contain the music that you have on your computer. I didn't tell her that mfr's are suing KJ's & Venues who are using stolen music. I deliberately avoided using terms like piracy. I was having a nice conversation with the lady, but now I think she missed my point. I didn't think that she was going to change her practices with regard to karaoke because of what I said, but she got that I was a KJ and didn't hear that what she was doing was illegal. She then, a couple of months later, had her manager call me and attempt to hire me. The fact that I'm already booked and 100+ mountainous miles away from the venue means that I'd never consider it, but I told the manager that I can't work for them unless I bring my own karaoke. She was completely oblivious. I told her to make sure that whoever she hired, to be certain that they possessed the original cd+g's to support their system whether it is disc-based or hard-drive based. Again, no comprehension. I turned down the offer and wished her luck with apologies that I couldn't even offer a referral.

In-line with the OP... What Toquer has done here could be part of the ripple effect that gets the message out. My picture would have been of an attractive young woman who bought a bar that had karaoke for years and continued doing it in the manner they always had. She doesn't know her business is at risk. She doesn't know the damage she's doing to our industry. She doesn't know that she's obligated by law to educate herself on the requirements of operating legal karaoke. Then, I'd hold up the picture of the little old man and say "He knows."

So a question for you, Sandman...why on earth wouldn't you tell the bar about the lawsuits? Are you afraid they would drop Karaoke? Even though you didn't want the gig, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interests, according to the Cheerleaders, to educate the venues to try to eliminate piracy...not just for you, but for other legal KJs?

This gal may be obligated to learn the law, but you were intentionally evasive. Which side are you playing on, because again, I'm getting whiplash.

 

[KJSandman]

Chip, I know what he's alluding to.

You don't.

I told you that it is not a bluff. You contradicted my statement without any facts.

Maybe thrashing about is not the correct portrayal, but taking a blind guess and saying you'd love to see it and the counter suits up the wazoo doesn't seem, to me, to be a calm, reasonable or well thought out response.

Take for example, Joe Chartreuse's simple "Interesting comment. Care to expound on it?".
Calm, reasonable, not sarcastic or reactionary, in my opinion.

It is not a bluff. You can contradict that statement all you want but I am looking at the cards. I know what he has in his hand. I was there and a party to the discussion and have knowledge of the facts. Wouldn't you like to know what he's alluding to?

 

[Diafel]

Chip, I know what he's alluding to.

You don't.

I told you that it is not a bluff. You contradicted my statement without any facts.

Maybe thrashing about is not the correct portrayal, but taking a blind guess and saying you'd love to see it and the counter suits up the wazoo doesn't seem, to me, to be a calm, reasonable or well thought out response.

Take for example, Joe Chartreuse's simple "Interesting comment. Care to expound on it?".
Calm, reasonable, not sarcastic or reactionary, in my opinion.

It is not a bluff. You can contradict that statement all you want but I am looking at the cards. I know what he has in his hand. I was there and a party to the discussion and have knowledge of the facts. Wouldn't you like to know what he's alluding to?

Then why don't you and Thunder just quit playing games here and just tell us, instead of coming off looking like you have a holier than thou attitude with the " I know something you don't know (neener neener neener!)" game?

 

[Birdofsong]

Chip, I know what he's alluding to.

You don't.

I told you that it is not a bluff. You contradicted my statement without any facts.

Maybe thrashing about is not the correct portrayal, but taking a blind guess and saying you'd love to see it and the counter suits up the wazoo doesn't seem, to me, to be a calm, reasonable or well thought out response.

Take for example, Joe Chartreuse's simple "Interesting comment. Care to expound on it?".
Calm, reasonable, not sarcastic or reactionary, in my opinion.

It is not a bluff. You can contradict that statement all you want but I am looking at the cards. I know what he has in his hand. I was there and a party to the discussion and have knowledge of the facts. Wouldn't you like to know what he's alluding to?

Okay, Sandman...It seems like you're feeling pretty pleased with the idea that you have some secret information, and you want to smack down everyone who "guesses" as to what that is. This is a game that is getting quite tiring. Do you want a meaningful dialogue, or are you just interested in baiting those who disagree with SC methods? If you have something to say, just say it.

The problem I'm having here is this attitude that not only do you know something we don't know, but you think somehow it's going to take us down (quote Sandman: Whatcha gonna do when they come for YOU). Remember, you're talking to legal KJs who's difference of opinion is simply about methodology...we are NOT the pirates. It is coming across as quite smug, actually. Why withhold what you feel is IMPORTANT, earth-shattering information that might make a difference in this community?

 

[Guest]

1) I'm concerned about venues skipping on karaoke because the want their businesses to run smoothly. No waves. I'm also concerned about my friends.

If karaoke is making them money no business stops doing it because of the threat of a lawsuit because they are running an illegal host, the simple solution is to simply make sure their host is legal and that is all carefully laid out in the material that is being given to the venues, I know because I am passing it out to every venue including my own, so far not one of mine has even batted an eye.

Of the two confirmed contacts that I know of in NJ, one was a legit KJ that I've known for some time, and I have seen the disc library. This KJ has enough moral fiber not to accede to demands from a vendor. Unfortunately, this KJ's spouse is in a position that could be affected by any negative publicity, so the KJ didn't see fighting it as worth the possible damage. Result: A LEGIT hangs it up for spousal love. A good person. Too bad.

Sounds like he the first one was planning on getting out anyway, since being confirmed legit would have had no legal ramifications at all. To fold up a legit business (if it was making good money) only because you were to foolish to think about it for five seconds just makes him look well.......... foolish!

The second was a multi-rigger that I don't know well, and have no idea whether he was legit or not. What I DO know is that he is still in business, as are most, if not all those contacted by SC are- and no raise in the fee either.

No dent in PIRACY - now or ever.

Give it time!

2) Interesting comment. Care to expound on it? :rolleyespill:

:rolleyespill::rolleyespill: how nice

 

[Guest]

I don't. Keep something else in mind. Many of the defunct labels ended up that way because the music OWNERS went after them for lack of licensing. MM, SGB, etc....

This means ( as it does for SC's many unlicensed tracks) that any logo is not legally there, and therefore cannot be used to win atrademark infringement case.

Just don't have an understanding of what a "trademark" violation is do we?:biggrinpill:

 

[possumdog]

1) Of the two confirmed contacts that I know of in NJ, one was a legit KJ that I've known for some time, and I have seen the disc library. This KJ has enough moral fiber not to accede to demands from a vendor. Unfortunately, this KJ's spouse is in a position that could be affected by any negative publicity, so the KJ didn't see fighting it as worth the possible damage. Result: A LEGIT hangs it up for spousal love. A good person. Too bad.QUOTE]

This really bothers me because there was a third option. He could have taken care of it quietly if it was just in the warning letter stage. You know who to PM and how to help him do it. Maybe he would have just had to photocopy some receipts and write a letter and could have gotten it quickly dropped. It is one thing to not fight to avoid publicity but if he could have done it without publicity why give up your entire business on the principle that he shouldn't have had to fight in the first place? As it was kept quiet, it doesn't strike a blow for anyone or change anything one bit other than he rolled over and died. And can you get out of it by just "hanging it up?" It doesn't go away just because you decide to go out of business does It?

 

[Guest]

1) Of the two confirmed contacts that I know of in NJ, one was a legit KJ that I've known for some time, and I have seen the disc library. This KJ has enough moral fiber not to accede to demands from a vendor. Unfortunately, this KJ's spouse is in a position that could be affected by any negative publicity, so the KJ didn't see fighting it as worth the possible damage. Result: A LEGIT hangs it up for spousal love. A good person. Too bad.QUOTE]

This really bothers me because there was a third option. He could have taken care of it quietly if it was just in the warning letter stage. You know who to PM and how to help him do it. Maybe he would have just had to photocopy some receipts and write a letter and could have gotten it quickly dropped. It is one thing to not fight to avoid publicity but if he could have done it without publicity why give up your entire business on the principle that he shouldn't have had to fight in the first place? As it was kept quiet, it doesn't strike a blow for anyone or change anything one bit other than he rolled over and died. And can you get out of it by just "hanging it up?" It doesn't go away just because you decide to go out of business does It?

Possum,

The truth is Sound Choice has not yet filed anything in NJ they simply sent letters out to those who may be in violation to give them a chance to get right or clearing up any issues before filing suit. Too many think the manus are playing games and those that are blustering and saying that they can't really do anything are simply putting others who swallow that line at risk (and personally I am all for it) because they want someone else to take the first fall.

The way I feel about it is if someone who is legal craps their pants at the thought of an audit then they certainly should go out of business, with a legal host gone that just means a bigger slice of the pie when the pirates start folding as well.

What is funny to me though is Joe claims in one post that no one cares about the suits (because this is Jersey and these people are tough) and then in another claims that venues are stopping karaoke because they don't want to be sued and legal host are folding up shop because they are scared. Doesn't sound like much of a tough guy area to me. Heck here in Virginia even the venues that have been named in a suit simply fixed the situation and continued without missing a step! And suits have actually been filed here.

 

[Big Joe]

In-line with the OP... What Toquer has done here could be part of the ripple effect that gets the message out."

Mis-information at best.

"If we were to try and compete with with some of these guys out here that are running machines with 50,000 songs, we would have to buy $111,000 worth of songs."

I'm a little over a year into Karaoke. I've got about 16.000 songs at last printing. I've spent just short of $3000 for music. Not anywhere near the $35,520 it would cost me in San Jose apparently.

 

[Guest]

Mis-information at best.

"If we were to try and compete with with some of these guys out here that are running machines with 50,000 songs, we would have to buy $111,000 worth of songs."

I'm a little over a year into Karaoke. I've got about 16.000 songs at last printing. I've spent just short of $3000 for music. Not anywhere near the $35,520 it would cost me in San Jose apparently.

Big Joe,

What disc cost today doesn't even come close to what they cost in years past.

But I can honestly say that you have fallen into a great deal getting 16,000 songs at 18 or 19 cents each and doing it in a years time is fantastic I have been buying disc every month since forever and only have 18,000.

 

[Big Joe]

Big Joe,

What disc cost today doesn't even come close to what they cost in years past..

The video is dated 11/16/2010. It would appear that he is talking about making a purchase in the present day. Do you hear it differently?

But I can honestly say that you have fallen into a great deal getting 16,000 songs at 18 or 19 cents each and doing it in a years time is fantastic I have been buying disc every month since forever and only have 18,000.

Several great deals as a matter of fact. I'm actually two years into buying discs. You're not still paying $2.22 per track are you?

 

[KJSandman]

Good for you Joe. You spent 10 times the price of the craigslist hard-drive for 16% or less of the amount of tracks. Doesn't it bother you that your skillful expenditure was necessary at all?

Mis-information at best? Taking for granted that you understand the Toquer's intent, how would you present the issue? Is it simply that you believe he's exaggerating and that is why you take issue with his statements?

I am trying to understand where you're coming from in regard to the issue presented. It seems clear you don't like the methodology or the content as seen in the video.

 

[Big Joe]

Good for you Joe. You spent 10 times the price of the craigslist hard-drive for 16% or less of the amount of tracks. Doesn't it bother you that your skillful expenditure was necessary at all?

Mis-information at best? Taking for granted that you understand the Toquer's intent, how would you present the issue? Is it simply that you believe he's exaggerating and that is why you take issue with his statements?

I am trying to understand where you're coming from in regard to the issue presented. It seems clear you don't like the methodology or the content as seen in the video.

I'm quite happy with my music library and what I paid for it. I was never really in the market for the CL drive, I figured doing the right thing and actually owning the discs would be better.

I absoluteley believe that he is exaggerating. He's a member here, perhaps he'll explain why. I'd kind of liken it to making a 911 call. If I call to get the police to come out to remove some kids that are playing on my lawn, it'd probably take hours for them to arrive, if they did at all. Of course, if I decided to exaggerate a bit, maybe tell the operator they're carrying weapons, cops might show up a bit quicker.

The more dire you can make the circumstances seem, the more you are able to convince folks that drastic measures are called for.

 

[KJSandman]

So a question for you, Sandman...why on earth wouldn't you tell the bar about the lawsuits? Are you afraid they would drop Karaoke? Even though you didn't want the gig, wouldn't it be in everyone's best interests, according to the Cheerleaders, to educate the venues to try to eliminate piracy...not just for you, but for other legal KJs?

This gal may be obligated to learn the law, but you were intentionally evasive. Which side are you playing on, because again, I'm getting whiplash.

An answer for you Birdofsong... I didn't find it necessary to include the same information that causes so much controversy here. I did clearly state that what she was doing was illegal.

Your accusation of intentional evasion got me to thinking though. I'm gonna give the owner a call this week and let her know what I've learned in the past couple of months. Does anyone here have any contacts in the Denver, Colorado area that could provide a legal KJ service more than one night a week? We'd have to work on the fee, but it is an established venue.

Again, I am not a cheerleader. Again, s-l-o-w-l-y... I am not a cheerleader.

I do believe that venues should be educated and fore-armed with the necessary information to make a legal choice. This does not relate to any particular brand or their actions against illegal operators.

I'm not certain why you question which side I'm playing on. I think we're on the same side here.

 

[KJSandman]

I'm quite happy with my music library and what I paid for it. I was never really in the market for the CL drive, I figured doing the right thing and actually owning the discs would be better.

I absoluteley believe that he is exaggerating. He's a member here, perhaps he'll explain why. I'd kind of liken it to making a 911 call. If I call to get the police to come out to remove some kids that are playing on my lawn, it'd probably take hours for them to arrive, if they did at all. Of course, if I decided to exaggerate a bit, maybe tell the operator they're carrying weapons, cops might show up a bit quicker.

The more dire you can make the circumstances seem, the more you are able to convince folks that drastic measures are called for.

By comparing it as you have here, are you saying that the issue is actually unimportant? Are you saying it's just kids playing on the lawn? Are you saying that it really isn't important and there's no harm? What are you saying? You only seem to be saying something about the messenger and the package, you're not commenting on the issue.

And with respect, I say that you're absolutely correct in stating that owning the discs would be better. Kudos.

 

[JoeChartreuse]

1) By comparing it as you have here, are you saying that the issue is actually unimportant? Are you saying it's just kids playing on the lawn? Are you saying that it really isn't important and there's no harm? And with respect,


2) I say that you're absolutely correct in stating that owning the discs would be better. Kudos.

1) Not sure, but I think he's not saying that it is unimportant, only that a law enforcement agency would see it that way, unless it was made to SEEM more serious. At least, that's how I understood it.


2) Ditto

 

[KJSandman]

Then why don't you and Thunder just quit playing games here and just tell us, instead of coming off looking like you have a holier than thou attitude with the " I know something you don't know (neener neener neener!)" game?

Okay, Sandman...It seems like you're feeling pretty pleased with the idea that you have some secret information, and you want to smack down everyone who "guesses" as to what that is. This is a game that is getting quite tiring. Do you want a meaningful dialogue, or are you just interested in baiting those who disagree with SC methods? If you have something to say, just say it.

The problem I'm having here is this attitude that not only do you know something we don't know, but you think somehow it's going to take us down (quote Sandman: Whatcha gonna do when they come for YOU). Remember, you're talking to legal KJs who's difference of opinion is simply about methodology...we are NOT the pirates. It is coming across as quite smug, actually. Why withhold what you feel is IMPORTANT, earth-shattering information that might make a difference in this community?

Holier than thou? Smug? Baiting? Calm down. First of all, I wasn't "talking" to you. I was "talking" to Chip. Chip seems perfectly capable of conversing with me and defending his statements. He accused Thunder of bluffing. I didn't even go into detail, I merely stated that it isn't a bluff. Chip then refuted by statement without any information and made another random statement about a random mfr. and loving the idea of a lawsuit and blah blah blah... you read it.

Second, I asked in both posts: "Wouldn't you like to know" the answer? Not one of you could simply state the rational response which would merely be: "Yes, we would like to know".

I've noticed that you add a lot of emotional words to your posts, especially when you are defending Chip. You also have a habit of telling me how I feel or what I must think about something. I never said that the information was "earth-shattering" or even IMPORTANT. I stated that Thunder's allusion was not a bluff. I never intended to "smack down" anyone. This thread is not about SC's methodology. How can I have a meaningful dialog with someone who is NOT conversing WITH ME, but jumping in and taking pot-shots at my conversation with someone else?

I am probably never going to behave the way you would like me to. Get over it. I have.

 

[Big Joe]

I make no bones about not believing the statistics. If somebody is gonna throw out a number like 90-95%, I'm gonna assume that some actual investigation has been done, and you will therefore be able to show me how you arrived at that number. Asked over and over here, never seen anything to substantiate it. Same goes for the exaggeration in the cost of the music? We all know that music doesn't cost $2.22 a song, so why even bring the $111,000 figure up? I would never think I needed 50,000 tracks to compete with anyone, so why go before a group that knows little or nothing about karaoke and claim that the "little old mans'" future is in jeopardy using these completely dreamed up examples as facts? Is it possible that he's trying to make his situation appear a bit more dire than it really is?