KARAOKE SCENE MAGAZINE ONLINE! - A question for Harrington Public Forums Karaoke Discussions Karaoke Legalities & Piracy, etc... Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums Home | Contact Us | Site Map  

Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene Karaoke Forums

Karaoke Scene

   
  * Login
  * Register

  * FAQ
  * Search

Custom Search

Social Networks


premium-member

Offsite Links


It is currently Mon Dec 11, 2017 10:38 pm

All times are UTC - 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 1:07 pm 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2964
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
Smoothedge69 wrote:
Harrington, we would ALL be confusing people with all the brands we use, if what you are saying were the case. I use a TON of KV. NOBODY thinks that I work for them, or represent them in any way, shape or form. I use plenty of DK, that I HAVE converted from disc. NOBODY thinks that I am affiliated with them. I have Radio Starz and Music Maestro, and some SGB, (although, I have been phasing them out, little by little), all converted from disc, and NOBODY thinks that I am affiliated with those companies.


You're missing the point, and frankly I'm tired of trying to explain it.

If you are not using original Sound Choice discs, but you are displaying the Sound Choice logo, your customers are likely to be confused into thinking that you are using genuine SC tracks, when you are not. We didn't make the physical goods you're using. We did not have the ability to specify the quality level of your rips. We did not get to inspect your tracks to make sure the graphics are complete and accurate to our standards. Yet our mark--the mark that means a certain level of quality--appears on those tracks. That mark means WE stand behind the quality of the product, and it's a lie--we didn't have anything to do with the tracks you made.

Smoothedge69 wrote:
There is no confusion. That is some wacky crap that you and your boss came up with to drive your lawsuit machine, and as a way to make MORE money off the people you made money off of already!!


I know you're not that stupid, Bobby. You know that we aren't making any MORE money off people who actually bought our product. We're not interested in making money from people who legitimately bought what they are using. That simply doesn't describe 90%+ of the people who are using our product to make money.

The sooner you accept that basic fact, the faster I will give your views any credence at all.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 1:40 pm 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:11 am
Posts: 714
Location: Ocean County, Jersey Shore
Been Liked: 153 times
JimHarrington wrote:

If you are not using original Sound Choice discs, but you are displaying the Sound Choice logo, your customers are likely to be confused into thinking that you are using genuine SC tracks, when you are not. We didn't make the physical goods you're using. We did not have the ability to specify the quality level of your rips... We did not get to inspect your tracks to make sure the graphics are complete and accurate to our standards. Yet our mark--the mark that means a certain level of quality--appears on those tracks. That mark means WE stand behind the quality of the product, and it's a lie--we didn't have anything to do with the tracks you made.


The ninth circuit court seems to disagree with that 'confusion' thing. Here's a youtube clip of the Slep-Tone v Wired For Sound appeal hearing. Start at about 6:00.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xNleIeLKK5A&t=224s

_________________
DJ Don


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:24 pm 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2964
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
djdon wrote:
The ninth circuit court seems to disagree with that 'confusion' thing.


The Fourth and Eleventh circuits don't, and district courts in the Second, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth don't either.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:41 pm 
Offline
Super Extreme Poster
Super Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Mon Dec 10, 2001 3:57 pm
Posts: 21750
Songs: 35
Images: 3
Location: Tacoma, WA
Been Liked: 1673 times
JimHarrington wrote:
We did not get to inspect your tracks to make sure the graphics are complete and accurate to our standards. Yet our mark--the mark that means a certain level of quality--appears on those tracks. That mark means WE stand behind the quality of the product, and it's a lie--we didn't have anything to do with the tracks you made.
question, I have original discs that graphic error out and skip as a playing disc (cleaned as well as I could, 3 players refused to play them correctly), however with the software I use - it has really good error correction, it ripped the discs perfectly with no graphic errors or skips on playback. What would be the preference in the two?

_________________
LIKE Lonman on Facebook - Lonman Productions Karaoke & my main site via my profile!
Image


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:44 pm 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6462
Songs: 1
Location: Hollyweird, Ca.
Been Liked: 548 times
JimHarrington wrote:
jdmeister wrote:
My buddy Bishop Morgan, a retired Navy veteran, enjoys the Cadillac line.
Even when he bought a Toyota truck, he plastered it with Cad emblems..
(Yes, he has Cads also.)
So far, so good..


Is he selling non-Cadillac autos as Cadillacs, as a commercial activity?


Actually, no, and as a kicker, he's not working for SC/PEP or selling any SC CDs either..
Just like all the other KJs..
But he does have his venue pay their Pro fees so he's legal to perform karaoke in public.
Just like a lot of other KJs.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:57 pm 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2964
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
Lonman wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:
We did not get to inspect your tracks to make sure the graphics are complete and accurate to our standards. Yet our mark--the mark that means a certain level of quality--appears on those tracks. That mark means WE stand behind the quality of the product, and it's a lie--we didn't have anything to do with the tracks you made.
question, I have original discs that graphic error out and skip as a playing disc (cleaned as well as I could, 3 players refused to play them correctly), however with the software I use - it has really good error correction, it ripped the discs perfectly with no graphic errors or skips on playback. What would be the preference in the two?


Either one is fine, as long as you get permission to rip.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 2:59 pm 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2011 8:59 am
Posts: 2964
Location: Pineville, NC
Been Liked: 984 times
jdmeister wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:
jdmeister wrote:
My buddy Bishop Morgan, a retired Navy veteran, enjoys the Cadillac line.
Even when he bought a Toyota truck, he plastered it with Cad emblems..
(Yes, he has Cads also.)
So far, so good..


Is he selling non-Cadillac autos as Cadillacs, as a commercial activity?


Actually, no, and as a kicker, he's not working for SC/PEP or selling any SC CDs either..
Just like all the other KJs..
But he does have his venue pay their Pro fees so he's legal to perform karaoke in public.
Just like a lot of other KJs.


PRO fees only compensate the publisher, not the creator of the audio-visual work.

And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.

_________________
Since there has been some confusion:
1. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer. Statements I make here about legal issues are for informational purposes only.
2. I am an officer of Phoenix Entertainment Partners, but my opinions on matters not involving Phoenix's business are my own and may not reflect the opinions of the company.
3. If you have questions you'd like answered officially, you are welcome to email me at jim@phxep.com or send me a private message here.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 3:28 pm 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6462
Songs: 1
Location: Hollyweird, Ca.
Been Liked: 548 times
JimHarrington wrote:
jdmeister wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:
jdmeister wrote:
My buddy Bishop Morgan, a retired Navy veteran, enjoys the Cadillac line.
Even when he bought a Toyota truck, he plastered it with Cad emblems..
(Yes, he has Cads also.)
So far, so good..


Is he selling non-Cadillac autos as Cadillacs, as a commercial activity?


Actually, no, and as a kicker, he's not working for SC/PEP or selling any SC CDs either..
Just like all the other KJs..
But he does have his venue pay their Pro fees so he's legal to perform karaoke in public.
Just like a lot of other KJs.


PRO fees only compensate the publisher, not the creator of the audio-visual work.

And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.


So, your saying the Pro fees are a ripoff? They shouldn't pay them?
Sounds a bit harsh.
So let me get this straight.
The Pro fees, are paid to the original holder of the music copyright.
But not to the publisher of a karaoke audio visual work.
Hmm, how did you let that happen. Asleep at the wheel?
Technology moving too fast?

And you say playing is the same as selling? Hmm, let me think on that one..
I guess it's the same as karaoke downloads, eh?
Download (SELL) a million tracks, you still have the originals..
I'm glad none of the producers of karaoke tracks ever sold more tracks than they had paid license for..
Or did they?


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:31 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster

Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4582
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 365 times
JimHarrington wrote:
jdmeister wrote:
Quote:
likely to cause consumer confusion as to our sponsorship or approval of the goods and associated services


Bullshit..
I drive a Ford, and they are not confused about my approval or sponsorship.
So, I say, NOT Likely..

:mrgreen:

Presumably the Ford you drive was actually built by Ford, so there's no possibility of confusion.

If you were in the business of selling cars and you put the Ford logo on cars that you built yourself by copying Ford's designs, do you think people might be confused into thinking that you were actually selling Fords and not something you put together yourself?

Harrington seems to forget that in real life, the difference between the Sound Choice trademark and the Ford trademark is that Ford actually has and continues to build new products....

PEP makes and has for years made NOTHING. All PEP has done in 7 years is dumpster-dive for trademarks...

_________________
"For all the back-and-forth I have with Mr. Staley, the thing about him is that he follows the law and our policies in his karaoke operations. We have no interest in putting him out of business, because he's not violating the law." -- HarringtonLaw (a.k.a: Jimmy "The Weasel" Harrington)


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:44 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster

Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4582
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 365 times
JimHarrington wrote:
PRO fees only compensate the publisher, not the creator of the audio-visual work.
So? The creator of the audio-visual work was compensated when they sold the track which was/is EXACTLY what they are entitled to. I know you want to become the "ASCAP of karaoke" and now start collecting just because a KJ hit a "play button" but it ain't happening. You've fooled your help licensees into believing you are because you know they don't have the tracks just to show off a trademark.

JimHarrington wrote:
And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.
And I call bullshit on this one... I know he'd like to have us all think that trademark law works the way HE and Kurt want it to work... but that ain't happening either.

Look up the definition of "shyster."

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shyster

_________________
"For all the back-and-forth I have with Mr. Staley, the thing about him is that he follows the law and our policies in his karaoke operations. We have no interest in putting him out of business, because he's not violating the law." -- HarringtonLaw (a.k.a: Jimmy "The Weasel" Harrington)


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 4:58 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster

Joined: Thu Jun 06, 2002 7:26 am
Posts: 4582
Location: In your head rent-free
Been Liked: 365 times
JimHarrington wrote:
djdon wrote:
The ninth circuit court seems to disagree with that 'confusion' thing.


The Fourth and Eleventh circuits don't, and district courts in the Second, Fifth, Sixth, Seventh, and Eighth don't either.

But notice he isn't about to cite a single court ruling to support his fantasy... he just expects you to believe him....

And Trump says that a LOT.... "believe me"

_________________
"For all the back-and-forth I have with Mr. Staley, the thing about him is that he follows the law and our policies in his karaoke operations. We have no interest in putting him out of business, because he's not violating the law." -- HarringtonLaw (a.k.a: Jimmy "The Weasel" Harrington)


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jun 29, 2017 8:14 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3693
Images: 0
Been Liked: 369 times
JimHarrington wrote:

I know you're not that stupid, Bobby. You know that we aren't making any MORE money off people who actually bought our product. We're not interested in making money from people who legitimately bought what they are using. That simply doesn't describe 90%+ of the people who are using our product to make money.

The sooner you accept that basic fact, the faster I will give your views any credence at all.

Yes you are. Charging people, ( and I know, you are going to go back to that tired line of "we offered you a free audit")to audit a product they already paid for. Some might call that "double dipping". Look, you see the negative responses you are getting FROM those who USED to support you. Yes, those that USED to support you, say it is time to quit. You lost ALL credibility, and respect, when you came up with the HELP license. Instead of fighting piracy, you encouraged it, just so long as you could profit from it. You have nothing to sell, so you sell pieces of paper that say you won't sue people. That is it. You sell contracts, on a product that is rapidly becoming more and more irrelevant. As other companies release those SC only songs, your legacy is diminishing. Your name is fading, and you are regarded as nothing more than a defunct Karaoke music provider. But you refuse to see it.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jun 30, 2017 5:09 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:11 am
Posts: 714
Location: Ocean County, Jersey Shore
Been Liked: 153 times
JimHarrington wrote:
Lonman wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:
We did not get to inspect your tracks to make sure the graphics are complete and accurate to our standards. Yet our mark--the mark that means a certain level of quality--appears on those tracks. That mark means WE stand behind the quality of the product, and it's a lie--we didn't have anything to do with the tracks you made.
question, I have original discs that graphic error out and skip as a playing disc (cleaned as well as I could, 3 players refused to play them correctly), however with the software I use - it has really good error correction, it ripped the discs perfectly with no graphic errors or skips on playback. What would be the preference in the two?


Either one is fine, as long as you get permission to rip.



So you don't care about the quality of the graphics from the disc which we can use without permission, but you DO care about the quality of the graphics from a rip, which we, according to PEP, DO need permission to use.

Got it.

_________________
DJ Don


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:33 pm 
Offline
Extreme Poster
Extreme Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Dec 19, 2004 2:55 am
Posts: 3693
Images: 0
Been Liked: 369 times
Unbelievable, tat you would rather a KJ play a CD that is putting out lousy, glitchy graphics over a computer file, that is perfect. Whatever. James, you need to revise your priorities.

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:17 am 
Offline
Senior Poster
Senior Poster

Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:54 am
Posts: 198
Been Liked: 59 times
JimHarrington wrote:
And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.

Even deeper BS. The customer who hears/sees a track played in a bar has not bought that track. They don't leave the bar with a copy to take home. To the extent trademark law applies to physical goods, that can hardly apply here.

As to the other side of it, treating the trademark as a service mark, a KJ would have to be actively pretending to work for Sound Choice and impersonating your employees to infringe that mark. Merely playing something SC once manufactured is in no way actively pretending. Are bartenders impersonating Coca-Cola Company employees every time they serve a customer a Coke? Absolutely not.

The real service Sound Choice provided was in manufacturing and selling the tracks, not in playing them or staging shows. You can't just jump into someone else's business years after the fact and now try to control and limit competition because you sold that competition the tools of their trade back in the day, with or without your name on those tools.


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:38 am 
Offline
Advanced Poster
Advanced Poster

Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:49 am
Posts: 440
Been Liked: 104 times
Speaking of HELP licenses:

It seems PEP is having a sale on them this month.

For those who want to view the details of this crap, it is on the website. I'm too disgusted to post any of it.

PEP giving a discount to the very people who have stole their product is a kick in the crotch to everyone who has tried to do right by PEP.

Bottom line is that PEP supports piracy, so long as they make a (now discounted) buck on it.


Last edited by Toastedmuffin on Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:47 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 4:45 am 
Offline
Extreme Plus Poster
Extreme Plus Poster
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2002 4:12 pm
Posts: 6462
Songs: 1
Location: Hollyweird, Ca.
Been Liked: 548 times
I'm waiting until "Black Friday"..


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:09 am 
Offline
Super Duper Poster
Super Duper Poster
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jul 10, 2008 5:13 pm
Posts: 2938
Images: 1
Location: Florida
Been Liked: 1204 times
jdmeister wrote:
I'm waiting until "Black Friday"..

That's racist :wink:


Top
 Profile Personal album Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 5:48 am 
Offline
Super Poster
Super Poster

Joined: Fri Jun 03, 2011 8:11 am
Posts: 714
Location: Ocean County, Jersey Shore
Been Liked: 153 times
JimHarrington wrote:
And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.


That's like paying for the privilege of looking at bottle of Budweiser but not being able to drink it. I'm buying the privilege to 'look' at your trademark?

OK, Budweiser is a bad example because it's THE worst beer on the market, but the analogy is spot on.

With the exception of the GEM series, PEP should be sued by Stingray (or whoever now owns the music that the SC trademark is being associated with) for allowing the use of music PEP doesn't own or control in association with the trademark. Or at the VERY least be forced to dissolve the HELP "license".

"Don't use our music with your trademark."

_________________
DJ Don


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
PostPosted: Fri Jul 07, 2017 6:09 am 
Offline
Advanced Poster
Advanced Poster

Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2015 6:49 am
Posts: 440
Been Liked: 104 times
djdon wrote:
JimHarrington wrote:
And if he is playing tracks in public on demand from patrons, he is "selling" those tracks for purposes of the trademark act.


That's like paying for the privilege of looking at bottle of Budweiser but not being able to drink it. I'm buying the privilege to 'look' at your trademark?

OK, Budweiser is a bad example because it's THE worst beer on the market, but the analogy is spot on.

With the exception of the GEM series, PEP should be sued by Stingray (or whoever now owns the music that the SC trademark is being associated with) for allowing the use of music PEP doesn't own or control in association with the trademark. Or at the VERY least be forced to dissolve the HELP "license".

"Don't use our music with your trademark."


I agree... the HELP license advocates the outright theft of copyrighted material.

It's like paying Nike for the use of their "swoosh" mark, and then putting it on a bag of heroin... it's doesn't make the contents of the bag legal at all.

The only way you CAN use the Sound Choice marks (without owning the original CDs, on which we assume royalties have been paid for by PEP/SC) is by stealing an artists copyrighted work.

PEP holds itself harmless in their contract they make HELP licensees sign, but they knowingly sell those licenses to people who have not bought the product in question (IE "Red Label" SC products). Because if you have the original CD's, you don't need a HELP license, do you?


Top
 Profile Singer's Showcase Profile 
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 88 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

All times are UTC - 8 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: GenerationX and 7 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group

Privacy Policy | Anti-Spam Policy | Acceptable Use Policy Copyright © Karaoke Scene Magazine
design & hosting by Cross Web Tech