Karaoke Forums

...and yet "disappearing investigators", at least one "investigator who lied", "disappearing lawyers", and at least one contractor or simply says "no", along with a possible statement from said subcontractor stating that a supposed "investigation" never even happened, with a suit actually based on an unanswered letter. A statement from SC in court, that- when simplified by me here, says that presenting such evidence would be too much trouble. "Investigational" evidence going to court?

I ask any person here- whether legally trained or not- the following:

Working with the fact that a court will not find against a defendant unless there is some evidence of wrongdoing compelling it to do so, would you go to court without said evidence if you had it?

Timberlea, splitting legal and verbal hairs in regard to evidence/documentation doesn't change the fact that it's not ending up as part of court records, leaving people like California's federal judge to characterize the case as he has for the record. I am aware of other judges being less verbally aggresive, but less than thrilled with SC in court.

I truly don't see the courts as being much help to SC as far as individual KJs too far in the future.

On the other hand, if KJ's continue to start and run businesses without educating themselves in all the aspects of it, they will continue to be targets for SC intimidation "settlements" If they are uneducated enough to pay, I'm sure SC will be happy to take their money.

Of course, If I were SC, and really did want to attempt production again, I would want to clean the tarnish off of my label to insure it's viability. The fact that they don't care is why I don't believe they will be producing NEW tracks anytime soon.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."

That's pretty weak James you are depending on the operator to give up his 5th amendment rights and incriminate himself.

I didn't say they weren't a big deal. I said that they were not to be used as evidence at trial.



The reports are important. They are not evidence.



The untruths are emanating from your keyboard.

What you are suggesting does not accurately describe what happened.

The defendants in California were dismissed because Donna Boris did not complete the necessary steps to meet the scheduling order. There was a report that had to be filed by a certain date, and it was not. The judge dismissed the defendants for failure to prosecute the case. The existence of the investigative reports, and whether or not they were provided to Donna Boris, had absolutely nothing to do with the dismissal.

Maybe if your side would have paid Donna she wouldn't have withheld Kurt's money, you wouldn't have to sue her, and maybe the 40 defendants wouldn't have been dismissed due to her lack of prosecuting zeal. If what I write is not true, then I should at least get an A on a good fiction piece. The only one according you who knows the truth is you, and that leaves only your telling as the factual one, even though you have a vested interest in placing SC in a positive light. Since your bread is buttered on the same side. One thing I am sure of that I'm glad I never started using your label in the first place. Just too much drama. Have a blessed day.

That wasn't the arrangement. It was a contingent fee arrangement, which is both normal and an accepted business practice. Your suggestion that SC did something untoward that justifies her misconduct is (a) wishful thinking on your part and (b) misplaced responsibility.



There is no drama for anyone who complies with the policy, or who makes a reasonable effort to do so.

Here is the latest developement:

http://soundchoicelasvegaslawsuit.com/a ... s-lawsuit/

Correction....the latest development as per an attorney that is representing some of the people that were sued.

I think it is only fair that if people are going to constantly question Harrington and Sound Choice because they have a vested interested in their side of the coin, that we also fairly question the information and intent of an attorney that is blogging about cases he is involved in.

-Chris

_________________
-Chris

Correction in addition to the correction... It's a BLOG Site. Do I need to say more??????????

Why would you assume a blog site has no credibility? It's 2013, some of the most accurate information on the web comes from bloggers as they are quickly taking the place of the old media. Blogs are as, or more credible as as forum.

There is no Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination applicable to civil cases.

but "I don't recall" is a perfectly valid answer for just about any question asked in a court room.

Yep, but remember the judge and/or jury will make a judgement on the believability and credibility of the testimony. So in the end the old "I don't recall" can damage a person's case more than help it. This is especially true if the witness had made statements prior to the trial and even more so if their previous statements were made under oath.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

"ORDER Granting 68 Motion to Sever. All parties other than Defendant Ellis Island Casino & Brewery and its associated entity, Defendant Fame Operating Company are SEVERED. Terminating without prejudice 13 Motion to Dismiss, 20 Motion to Sever, 46 Motion to Dismiss, and 106 Motion to Dismiss. If Plaintiff wishes to proceed against any Defendant severed from this action, including Defendants that were dismissed without prejudice, it must file a new and separate action, consistent with this order, on or before March 1, 2013. Signed by Judge Kent J. Dawson on 2/11/2013. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - SLR)"

so far the only thing according to justia that has happened in Vegas are dismissals.
http://dockets.justia.com/docket/nevada/nvdce/2:2012cv00239/85925/

_________________
Paradigm Karaoke, The New Standard.......Shift Happens

Just like the 40 dismissals in California. It would seem the current legal strategy of SC is to file these mass case shakedown suits, pressure hosts and venues to settle out of court, and any who don't cave and come to court are dismissed, once SC isn't going to win a default judgement. James brags about the 2 or three cases they have won out of the 300 or more they have filed. Most defendants settled out of court to get rid of these harassment law suits, they figured it was cheaper to pay of SC than go through a trial. Anytime any type of defense has been mounted SC has been sent packing. Donna Boris made a strategic mistake legally when she went after the Casinos with the deep pockets. Instead of staying with the easy prey SC had been feeding on before Las Vegas, and California. In Panama City Florida case Big Bob Feller walked and beat James and had no lawyer. Naturally SC is going to win if the suit is not contested. So James can have his cheap victories, and keep talking about what SC is going to do. The only way SC has any power over anyone, is by using their product. Just like the vampire cannot get into your home unless he is invited in. That is why more venues and hosts are simply not using the product, not letting the blood suckers in. Have a blessed day.

So is "I examined the defendant's computer hard drive during discovery and this is what I found."

Or did you think we would just rely on the defendant's testimony to establish our case?

WOW do you really think that someone that has been named would leave pirated material on their hard drive? Don't give me this crap "OH WE CAN FIND IT" obviously you do not know as much about computers as you think you do. I can delete stuff from a hard drive and you would never ever know it was there and I'm positive that there are many many more that can too.

_________________
I like everyone when I first meet them. If you don't like me that's not my problem it's YOURS!
A stranger is a friend you haven't met yet

They can't keep their own investigators and lawyers from ripping them off but we are supposed to believe that they can tell if and when someone deleted files from their hard drive and then defragged it 5 or 6 times? Or prove when someone's hard drive crashed and had to be replaced with a new one, that NOW has no Sound Choice materail on it? When EXACTLY did your hard drive crash and what did you do with the original hard drive that failed?

Well, Gee I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY when it happened BUT HERE IS THE HARD DRIVE I'VE BEEN USING SINCE I threw away THE OLD ONE THAT CRASHED. I FIGURED SINCE IT DIDN'T WORK; IT WAS GARBAGE.

I guess the judges always take Sound Choice's word on things of this nature because they have such a great reputation and all with judges calling them shakedown artists and all.

If someone from Sound Choice says so; then they must have had some Sound Choice music on that hard drive. Hmmm, maybe th ekJ had 2 hard drives and only one of them had the Sound Choice songs on it? All this talk of scientific mumbo jumbo and forensic wizards findind out what used to be on a hard drive is nothing more than more scare tactics by the man behind the curtain. The only cases these clowns win is when people succumb to the phony threats of a law suit and they pay up. Yes. Sometimes the shakedown method pays off but when have they ever won a case when it actually got to a trial? I don't recall reading about anyone's hard drive being torn apart by a forensic's lab to determine what was on it on a particular date. It's all TALK. It's been going on for years and there are nothing but pirate shows around my neck of the woods. No is even trying to hide their Sound Choice tracks and nothing ever happens to them. If they give SC the proverbial finger; they move on to the next KJ who might be more afraid pf the boogie man than most and they pay the shakedown man his pound of flesh. and it goes on and on. The weak pay and the strong stay. If they do absolutely nothing and they can get 10% of the pirates to cave in; they walk away with some easy money and they're happy to move on to the next area and grab at some more low lying fruit. Their losses now, both in CA and Nevada are opening up many people eys to there strong arm tactics, judges included, and many more people will start standing up to them. Many other just stop using Sound Choice product and spread the word around as to why. Bars and KJs alike refuse to use their products any longer. And now there is software to make your Sound Choice tracks look like anythng but a Sound Choice track. Go figure. I'm sure that the Mighty Poerful OZ will try to convince people that their tech wiz people can tell one track from another but you don't get to go into a karaoke show and bring in a whole bunch of sound and video testing equipment with you. Once the logo is gone and the font is different and the colors are different; where is the trade dress issue now? Heck! You can even fix all of Sound Choice's lyrical mistakes now while you're at it. Their spelling mistakes too.

If you want to believe that's true, go ahead.

That's just what the WIZARD would say. I guess a WORD WIZARD counts as a wizard. Be careful. Toto is pulling back the curtain again.

....and if you don't want to, feel free. Only factual information matters.

_________________
"No Contests, No Divas, Just A Good Time!"

" Disc based and loving it..."