Karaoke Forums

This is not the complete story. I was laughing too hard....
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Law 360 (a legal publication) writes:
March 28, 2017: Texas Judge blasts karaoke publishers trademark claims.


And of course, there is more. Too Funny!

So trade dress is now a losing proposition, I take it. Now if someone simply deletes the logos, they're home free.

I think congratulations are in order for Sound Choice and their legal team.

They managed to extract operating capitol from the sale of the one asset that would have made these lawsuits a huge success for them, and yet with nothing, they survived by dancing around the legal system for more than seven years before the unprincipled side of their duplicitous argument began to be actually considered and flushed away by numerous courts.

It will be interesting to see how the rest of this plays out as they must now argue how consumer confusion is a factor in playing tracks that they designed to display the very trademark symbol they claim is causing the confusion.

My guess:
Delay, delay, delay, hope for dismissal because of delaying before any more decisions are issued.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

So with nothing to threaten the venues with legally, where do you go from here Jim? Also how are you going to get venues to pay more for your dated material through SCE?

You obviously didn't read the opinion. Despite the headline grabbing phrase, the judge gave a solid endorsement of our service mark claims and kept the venues in the suit. Since we've already changed our approach to focus on the service marks, nothing changes for us at all.

So if a kJ removes the SC logos from his hard drive files he's good to go, right?

I think that would possibly be a classic example of "passing off" in a service mark suit. It would also tend to add credence to any claims of unfair trade practices as well.

Really, the best option would be to not use the product over trying to beat the system.
Seriously, if you are making so much money using the product that you believe you can't live without it, then why not play by their rules instead of trying to dodge them? If you're not making enough money from their product to play by their rules then why even use it?
Even when the courts are agreeing with your perspective on a particular slant of law, there will always be another angle from which to aggravate you and waste your resources.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

Yet. It will. Your theory has yet to pass the legal hurdles first by actually being ruled on.

You're still under the burden of proof (even if only a preponderance) that any patron, anywhere can possibly be "confused" by simply seeing a logo --after 20 years of seeing that same logo from disc sales-- that "Joe Schmo's Karaoke" is somehow affiliated with sound choice entertainment.

It's like trying to convince the world that Coca Cola must be confused as being affiliated with Ford Motor because customers see Ford delivery trucks with each delivery....

It just ain't gonna fly in my opinion, but the courts are willing to let you take your shot in convincing them.

I would disagree only on the basis that their claim is SERVICE mark and not PRODUCT marking which is trademark that identifies a product and not a service.


100% agree.

It's amazing how an Hawaiian Federal judge can overrule (over reach) an executive order on immigration, but a Federal judge's interpretation of PEP/SC trademark claims has no merit.

Trademark/service mark protection/enforcement is really powerful stuff.

Just because you can proceed with the suits doesn't mean that you will push them all the way. These suits are filed with the hope that they get settled before they go to trial.

And that is exactly correct.

Interesting choice of words that Harrington uses the phrase "…judge gave a solid endorsement of our service mark claims…" trying to make it sound as though the judge would rule in his favor in a lawsuit. "a solid endorsement" is not a ruling. And I wouldn't call that an endorsement at all, the judge is simply letting him take his turn at the bat and he's cheerleading for himself.

It's all simply smoke. He hasn't even had the opportunity to present his case to the courts and is already trying to make it sound as though he would come out the clear winner. Nothing could be further from the truth because it takes a lot of evidence and a lot of arguments before a judge can make a ruling. What Harrington is hoping for however, is that it will never get that far, and he will simply get settlements long before a ruling is ever handed down.

I don't think that these lawsuits are going to last.

Who says the judge's interpretation has no merit?

Again, rather than reading the superficial Law360 article, I suggest you read the actual opinion.

Here is the important language, if you're pressed for time:

"Displaying the Sound Choice logo at the beginning of a digital karaoke file could not plausibly confuse a bar patron about the source of the file. But displaying the Sound Choice logo throughout the course of a multi-hour karaoke show in a bar could very well confuse the customer—whether a bar patron or owner, the immediate purchaser of the jockeys’ services—about whether the karaoke jockey was affiliated with Sound Choice Entertainment, Phoenix’s karaoke-jockeying subsidiary. That confusion could lead to a loss of goodwill or reputation for the Sound Choice Entertainment karaoke-jockeying brand if the quality of the show fell short of the Sound Choice brand’s standards."

While we disagree with the judge's opinion as to the goods trademarks, we can live with that. The section I quoted, however, shows that the judge understood and accepted our theory regarding service mark infringement, and denied the defendants' motion to dismiss because the judge found our claim plausible under the facts alleged. And since the facts we alleged are actually true, this puts us "over the hump" as far as these cases go. I would not have a problem taking this case to trial on the service marks alone--the only question is, will we have to? Or will there be a settlement, or summary judgment for Phoenix?

BALONEY-DEFLECTOR OVERLOAD:
it's obvious from the above text that the judge does not realize that the "sound choice brand" or logo in this case, has been around a lot longer than the roughly the one year that "sound choice entertainment" has been in existence.

The judge also does not understand what"sound choice's standards" actually are. DO YOU? Other than requiring a certain bitrate on an audio file, I don't believe that there are any other "standards" when it comes to running a karaoke show that a host could fall below. Has anyone here seen any sort of instruction manual, policies or guidelines on "sound choice brand karaoke host standards for professionalism?" I didn't think so. Even his own "controlled licensees" are not required to give precedence to play a sound choice branded track over any other brand in their library. Even if the rest of their library has been pirated.

Once again it's nothing more than Harrington trying to convince you (not the court) that his logic or his case, is somehow ironclad in every way. The judge has not given it a "sound endorsement" of any type but as required by law, she does have to give them a chance to present their case.

If you read his last two sentences, that is what he is going for: a settlement. I believe that Harrington will do anything he can to avoid the court making a judgment on the merits of this case because if this tactic goes down the tubes – and I believe it will – then I don't believe he has any other cause that he can try to scrape up from the bottom of the barrel that would be actionable in a court of law. His concept of "media shifting" as legitimate as that sounds, has been shot down so far in two federal districts comprising almost a dozen states. His attempt at a lawsuit in Illinois over trade dress also burned up and fell flat faster than the Hindenburg.

In the legal world, Harrington is doing nothing but trying to invent some sort of an endorsement by the judge out of thin air and what is normally referred to as "saber rattling." Exactly like fireworks: a lot of smoke with a lot of noise – it's nothing more than a display.

It's just business as usual.

Carry on.

The mute button is a wonderful thing.

Instead of WHARRRRRRGARBLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I get:

This post was made by c. staley who is currently on your ignore list. Display this post.

Fully endorsed.

Cracks me up! He can't resist responding to even an auto message if it mentions me!

Talk about living in his head rent-free!
(You KNOW if he has a "display this post button" that he's used it. He can't help himself.)

Tee hee....

The "Wizard" is hoping that there are still some Cowardly Lions left out there.

I hope you realize, the fact that you are posting/mentioning this means YOU ARE responding to Chip. You may not be saying anything in direct response to what he may have posted, but regardless, YOU ARE responding to him.

Colorado is in the 10th Fed Circuit. PEP must be beginning to start the suits here because I was informed last night at my gig that they had received several mails in the last week regarding Karaoke Piracy and TM Infringements. She let me read the letter.

She told me of one host that informed them that he has another venue that received the same. That host immediately secured the GEMs. I assume that many venues here received like correspondence.

I believed, and still do, that PEP was in the area 4 years ago conducting investigations and apparently lost their legal representatives here. Just a few months after they began suits in Chicago I had several new singers from the Chicago area, likewise visits from WA and OR. Funny they did not mind informing me of that and a couple said they were Hosts in the past. That is why they were such accomplished singers. They would invariably ask where else I had a show but with a different countenance than true Karaoke junkies. One from WA has been published about Karaoke Piracy on this site's monthly Mag. and is also a member of this site. He was on Facebook wearing the same Hawaiian shirt he wore at my American Legion show, yet intentionally gave me a different name. He has since removed that pic as his welcoming picture.

Just a few months back Mr Harrington responded to me, in a post, that they were initiating investigations in my area. It appears he was not misrepresenting PEPs intent for this vicinity publicly. I do have respect for that, regardless of how I feel about what I strongly perceive as SCE's recent engagement to compete in DJ/KJ/Trivias arena.

Yes, everybody, I am legit and passed audit back in 2014 and hold a CNS, so I am not in any way experiencing any stressors of what to do and how to go about it. I am sure there are others in the area feeling otherwise.

PEP, how about some music?

_________________
You can never argue with a crazy mi-mi-mi-mi-mi-mind ----B. Joel
I have great faith in fools; My friends call it self-confidence ---- E.A. Poe
I became insane, with long intervals of horrible sanity ----E.A. Poe
I don't know, I don't care, and it doesn't make any difference! ----A. Einstein
Double bubble, toil and trouble ----W. Shakespeare & Walt Disney
I hate it when I get on FaceBook ----Me
Karaoke might be Groundhog Day ----?
Of All the Martial Arts, Karaoke Inflicts the Most Pain ----?

wait...you passed an audit and your venue got the letter?

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