Karaoke Forums

If there are police officers and prosecutors, how is there still crime?

What makes you think you would ever be able to pick out one of our investigators? They are trained to blend in.

it doesn't really matter, because they are still pirates. The one licensee (pirate) that has never owned a disk – still has never purchased a single disc. According to Harrington's own definition and quality standards, everything that pirate runs – is counterfeit.

So please explain to me how it's acceptable for Harrington's company to make money on this pirate, month after month, while they are still in competition with you? Harrington doesn't want to eliminate piracy, he simply wants to license it and it's hard to believe that Phoenix entertainment partners actually wants to even reduce piracy at all when they have created a special license just to enable piracy.

So when it gets right down to "the bottom line," tell me again who actually is supporting piracy?

I would be able to pick them out since I go to private non-profit clubs where you have to be a member to get in. Not to mention non-profit organizations do not fall under the copyright laws, so you would have no standing since it is not a public place. Just like private parties which you can't crash. Well if we have police officers and prosecutors and crime is on the rise, what do you do? You step up and hire more. The problem is you are working with limited resources which are becoming more limited each day, that is why you are losing the battle. You must think hosts are really stupid, if they play any place on a regular basis they know who is a regular and who isn't. I no longer play in public venues, which is all the better since I don't have to put up with your nonsense.

P.S. I guess the answer is no you never recovered the money your agents did you out of in California and Nevada? Wasn't that around $300,000.00 you think maybe you should sue them, just a suggestion.

One other thing I want to add about PEP lawsuits:

PEP doesn't protect the karaoke industry, just themselves. There isn't anything wrong with that in my opinion, but it's silly to feel it protects the industry as a whole.

But let me explain with a hypothetical situation:

Say a pirate is working next door to you. The KJ in question knows full well about PEP lawsuits and decides in order to avoid any legal problems, they drop the SC and the CB lines from his show 2 years ago. You may have even reported him several times for using those brands 2 years back.

He stole EVERY OTHER BRAND of karaoke songs out there. Every. Last. Track.

PEP finally goes to check up on the KJ and watches the show. While the observer sees that the KJ in question is definitely a pirate, they are 100% certain that the KJ in question doesn't have any SC/CB tracks.

So now: Does PEP sue on behalf of the other brands not represented by PEP?

The short answer is no. They might pass along the info about his piracy to another company, but they themselves cannot prove any PEP product is on the machine in question. PEP is actually happy that this particular pirate is not stealing... from PEP.

So do lawsuits work for PEP? Yes. Do they work for the industry as a whole? No.

I realize that pirates will do whatever they want and just grab a hard drive full of product and use it. But if a pirate is smart enough to avoid PEP brands, then lawsuits to him are not an issue. So it doesn't matter to some people if PEP stops suing as they would most likely not be sued in the first place.

LOL

We can only sue regarding brands that we own.

However, we have on many occasions asked judges to order pirates to stop ALL piracy--in other words, a court order to destroy all tracks for which they do not own original media. Sometimes we get it, sometimes not. That's about the extent of what we can do.

I seem to recall PR was going after the Moose, VFW and American Legion how did that go, weren't the PR suits for the most part dropped and not continued by PEP?

There is nothing wrong with asking a judge to do that when it's in addition to your original lawsuit, so that's a good thing. But in order for you do say/do that, you most likely brought them in for violations against PEP branded items.

You aren't going to just bring in a bunch of KJs and waste PEP's resources because its the "right thing to do". We both know that would cost PEP way too much money without getting compensation for those actions. There is nothing wrong with that, that's business.

Lawsuits are about money, not about company ethics. Would PEP like absolute zero piracy in the industry as a whole, I'm sure they would. But in the end, PEP will only help the karaoke industry if it will also make money via the lawsuit.

If there were zero piracy in the karaoke industry, how could PEP survive since they would be out of the insurance business, and they have no other product except a few GEM sets left?

That's simple, PEP would make product, or at least, I hope they would.

You missed my point, which is not your fault, as I was ambiguous.

We cannot legally sue to enforce other companies' brands. In order to sue, we have to have standing, which requires that we have experienced an injury to our own property.

Even if we wanted to, we could not sue on other companies' brands alone.

You did want to and that didn't stop you from trying to get the authority to do so.

A few years ago, you asked other companies (like Zoom, for example) permission to "sue on their behalf." And that went over like a lead balloon.

Who says they are competing against me? Perhaps they are competing against you?

But my success speaks for itself. Pirates are of no concern to me.



How many times do I have to say "I don't like HOW they do it, but I understand WHY they do it"?

It's you that has the hang-up with what PEP does, NOT ME. So again, who is living in who's head?

_________________
-Chris

I didn't miss the point, I completely understand that you can't. But suing for someone else is not up to you, and you have made that point in the past.

You are not an agency, you are a business. If you were the karaoke equivalent of RIAA, you would be more in line to stop pirates in the industry as a whole, not just for PEP. There isn't any wrong doing on PEPs part to collect money it feels is owed for the SC brand.

But PEP suing KJs or venues isn't 'saving' the industry. If its beneficial to the area they get sued in (such as Chrisavis's case), then it's great. A bunch of Seattle KJs getting sued won't help someone in Chicago, Dallas, or Miami.

HELP licenses are a whole different (and off topic) issue, and I am not a fan. In a nutshell I kind of agree with it's a "pirate license". They are knowingly looking the other way as long as the check clears.

We do share the revenue on HELP licenses with participating music publishers, and we have had other publishers tell us that they don't object to the program but aren't interested in participating. (I don't get that, but that's their choice.) Every affected publisher has a standing invitation to participate in the revenue share as well.

I would have a little more comfort over the general future of karaoke in public places.
As I have watched the evolution of the lawsuit game since its inception, it has followed a path of expansion in its claims and its class of defendants that if unchecked, will continue to grow through various power grabs as the end game is for PEP to become the MPLC of karaoke through previously unaddressed technicalities of law.
You may scoff at this prediction, but I may point out that more than five years ago I predicted the step in which this lawsuit experiment would eventually lead to exclusively suing venues (over their vicarious infringement) for they actually had the ability to actually pay a larger settlement.


I think the effect there would be minimal, as the negative effects have already occurred and there would likely not be a roll back of those changes within the industry.


We would still have a rich supply of venues to offer our services in the future.

In addition, I would like to state that I am not opposed to suing pirates or those who seek to profit through piracy. I just think there is a better way to do it.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Baloney. Name a single verifiable publisher that has turned down your offer for free money... .

I don't think one exists.

You haven't invited Red Peters, Tom Lehrer, Rodney Carrington or even Paul Storm....

But then again, it's not like you actually announce, notify or bother to tell any publishers either...

You just expect them to "know and ask you?"

You encourage and support piracy by licensing it.... pure and simple.

Time to admit what you really do.

To share what Jim, how many of these licenses have you sold? Not many compared to the number of hosts that are still out here plying their trade. The amount of money coming to the publishers would be such a small amount after you deduct your finder's fees, that it wouldn't be worth their time. All PEP is doing is bottom feeding to them, much like a catfish.

I'm all ears.