Karaoke Forums

i agree Lon, he has addressed this before as well.
if they are not compliant with PEP, then they should not be doing karaoke at all anyway.
"This is actually a good thing, because no venue deserves to use pirate KJs. There is an oversupply of karaoke entertainment in the first place. If a venue quits having karaoke because it can't have pirate karaoke, that's fine by us, and it should be fine with you, too."
i do not agree at all with that assessment since any host who has bought the discs and never stolen a single track is a pirate by the standards set forth. no different than the 200,000 track torrent host.

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

"You know, the beautiful thing about computers is that it only takes a few seconds to remove unwanted Tracks and even FASTER from a MSAccess database...ask Hillbilly about how quickly emails can be removed from a computer."

If you think that will solve your problems, have a talk to Hillary or many others who have deleted things from their computer, smartphones, etc. Just because you erase something doesn't mean you're safe. Many times it just digs you in deeper.

_________________
You can be strange but not a stranger

It appears to be their "scorched earth policy" because look at this logically:

#1. Have they supplied any new product to the industry over the last 6 years?
Nope. Nothing, nada, zip and zilch. Lots of promises and nothing.... at all. So they are not a manufacturer and haven't been for more than half a decade.

#2. It's far more profitable to sue a venue and get a 10k settlement once than it is to put some yahoo SCE "partner" in place for a tiny monthly cut, or even a "help license" that can be canceled after a year. (i.e. "take the money and run")

#3. Why should PEP care one bit about karaoke hosts? They don't. If they can sucker a host into paying them for some kind of license it's important, but otherwise if the KJ doesn't have any money --- even if they are a pirate -- then just let them go and focus on the venues. They don't really distinguish between legitimate hosts and pirates on the subject of "piracy" (because that flip-flops to "failure to get permission") but only on the subject of checkbook availability.

#4. Harrington admonishes hosts that don't advertise their gigs because it's now obvious that this information is the easiest "research" to send scary form letters to venues. However, I don't happen to see him "advertising his SCE gigs" at all, do you? Notice that he hasn't told anyone which two cities they've sent these letters to? Wonder why he's keeping this under wraps if he's so confident that his scheme is so bulletproof?

#5. PEP is a trademark trolling company pure and simple. It's all they really do. Harrington admitted that they purchased the CB trademark specifically for the purpose of litigation. They can make all the noise they want about "getting the band back together" or their "national booking service" but it's so small (or non-existent) in comparison to their litigation income that it might as well be considered nothing more than a distraction.

#6. KJ's have a pretty clear choice for the future: Make the brand extinct before it makes your business less profitable by charging you for using it or worse, makes your business extinct because they really don't give a squat about you or your business. They license piracy; They'll look the other way if you're a pirate and don't own a single disc but pay them monthly to display their logo and sue you if you own the discs and didn't pay them "for permission" - they are the true "pirate supporters."

The TOPIC is sending letters to VENUES. NOT sending the KJ a letter. It's already been established that NOTHING can happen to a KJ...that's why they are "TARGETING" Venues.

So, what the hell does it mean where you state that a KJ is digging deeper? This is rhetorical. I'm only pointing out what SHOULD HAVE BEEN OBVIOUS.

Gee, is this an offer? I thought you didn't want to do business with me because I'm having a helluva time trying to find a single publisher that is part of your program... or even knows about it. And we know that your contract indemnifies you if a "third party rights holder" decides to sue me or my venues even with your license.

Your legal advice that your licenses "may be sufficient, but not enough" seems to be right on the money because it's looking like even with your "help license" getting sued by the vast majority of publishers is still a very real possibility. The reality is that your "license" isn't a license at all, but instead a "tax" that can still get you sued.

I'll have to pass on your $6,000 - $7,200 per year offer to pirate tracks I never purchased and can still get me and my venues sued....

Yes. I haven't been on here since 2007.

Ok, so, if an establishment owns their own karaoke system, laptop included, would they have to have discs also, even though they pay their fees?

Yes, this letter has James M. Harrington signature on it. Vice President and General Counsel

According to the letter, the KJ has to supply discs to go with the music on the laptop. The it says, "Or ...Obtain a license from us that allows the use of copied tracks." One of the options is that the kj should be licensed.

I have the original Foundation, 7500 series, the original Brick, 7500 series, and some Sound Choice in the 8000 series.

Is it me or does NO ONE understand what a SET of STATEMENTS that outline a case are.
One understanding LAID OUT was that all the questionable DISCS would be removed.
Now, with that UNDERSTOOD (please read that SLOWLY [U N D E R S T O O D]), how is it that ONE would be CONCERNED about anything "referred to" in the QUOTE above?
Again, RHETORICAL. Alas, so sad for some people.

kameragurl, What city is your son in law in? San Antonio?

We sue pirate hosts AND the venues they service, usually in the same lawsuit.



You continue to be stuck on the idea that we are trying to sue people who have 1:1 correspondence.

Those people are pretty close to being unicorns. In an average year, we sue 300-400 defendants, and 1 of them has 1:1 correspondence.



We don't "go after" people who advertise 30,000 songs--at least, not just because they are advertising 30,000 songs. 30,000 songs times 4 rigs is a likely pirate. A 30,000-song single-rig catalog with 20 years in the business is probably not a pirate. We have a thorough screening process that has been very effective in screening out those kinds of operators from our suits.

I have to assume, based on your continuing to invoke Mr. Cable's name, that you did not see the evidence I posted.

Mr. Cable admitted, in writing, to having virtually everything we ever put out. He also admitted that he owned only enough SC discs to cover about 20% of the SC tracks on his hard drives. I have no idea what Mr. Cable might be saying to you and others in other forums, but if it is something other than an admission that he pirated the vast majority of his SC tracks, he's not telling you the truth.

We are not "ignoring" the pirates you're referring to. It just takes time to get to them--it's more than just a will to go after them; we have to have qualified investigators, solid leads, and an available attorney. I just signed an agreement with a new attorney in your area on Friday, which is the final piece we've been looking for.



Again, you seem to be stuck on the idea that this letter only targets people who (a) have 1:1 correspondence but (b) failed to pay us for that privilege.

That is an extremely rare occurrence, but even when it does occur, it is still wrong. It is a wrong that we will allow to be quickly corrected at minimal (often no) expense, but it is still wrong.

I really don't care especially what "the industry" thinks about copying. This step is necessary because this kind of behavior makes it impossible for us to determine conclusively whether someone owns the products they are using or not. If the piracy rate were 10% or 20%, we would probably not be litigating. At 95% (and at 99.5%+ of the defendants we sue), we have to do it this way.

It's in a dying mode because it is being murdered by pirates.

When anyone can download all the tracks that have ever been made for nothing or virtually nothing, and set up with a $200 POS PA, and work for $50 and a bar tab, it kills the industry through oversupply.

The keys to the success of karaoke as entertainment are as follows:

(1) We need fewer bars that have karaoke and fewer opportunities to sing. When singers can go anywhere and sing 8 times in a night, it's because there aren't enough patrons spending money at the bar. If the number of shows were cut by 50% by removing pirates from the equation, the singers would redistribute over a small set of shows, meaning more patrons per show.

(2) More money in the bars' hands means they can afford to pay more for the shows. If a bar can pay $50 for pirate karaoke without any fear of retribution from the people that pirate is stealing from, they will do it all day long. When it costs them $15k or more to do that, they will stop doing it. When karaoke is more profitable for the bars, they will hire it at reasonable rates ($200 to $300). That's more money in legit KJs' hands.

(3) More money in legit KJs' hands means a greater ability to buy legal music, which means more legal music gets made. It also means that legit KJs can afford to promote their shows and develop a following, which makes it easier to get hired at professional rates. That, in turn, means more money for the bars.

This is not rocket science. But it does require somebody to step in and break the cycle of pirate karaoke. We are the only company that's both willing and able to do that. Instead of support, we catch all kinds of hell, even from the very people who stand to gain the most from our efforts. It's incredibly short-sighted.

This is absolutely true, when you consider that being compliant with our rules can mean simply dropping the product.

Either follow the rules for using our product, or don't use the product.

If you can't do those things, get the hell out of the business.

Tell that to the hundreds of KJs we've sued.

We are also targeting venues because venues gain the most from pirate karaoke.

Not an offer to you, no.

And you're right that we have no interest in doing business with you.

A venue that owns its own system is treated just like anyone else.

If you use SC tracks, you must:

(1) use only the original discs you own (no copies of any sort), or
(2) get a license from us for the use of SC tracks on non-original media.

The type of license that's required depends on your specific circumstances.

If you have 1:1 correspondence between your original discs and the tracks on your hard drive, you need "certification."

If you want to obtain SC tracks on hard media, you need to license the GEM series.

Otherwise, your best bet is the HELP license.

That is not what the letter says.

It says:

Outside operators who use Sound Choice or Chartbuster tracks in their shows can only operate legally in one of two ways. They must either:

• Use only the original media (CDs) they purchased from us, from a dealer, or in the “used” market. No copying—including to a laptop or computer hard drive—is allowed.
  
  OR
  
• Obtain a license from us that allows the use of copied tracks. The specific type of license required will depend on a number of factors.

It is not enough for the KJ to "supply the discs." The KJ has to use the discs or get licensed, or not use SC tracks at all.

That's EXACTLY what the letter says and even you quoted it:

Now you're having problems with your own words? It's a description of your "help (pirate) license" which doesn't require discs at all, or your "certification" which allows copies or your "gem agreement" which allows copies.
I can only hope your're playing dumb because this is just another description of your "help license":
But all they have to do is send you money and everything will be coming up roses for them right?What planet are you really from? They won't and they haven't. They'll just dump it and go to trivia or some other (less expensive) form of entertainment. I haven't seen a single of your "licensed" KJ's come back and tell us that all they did was license with you and their pay went up. Not even for multi-riggers like Athena. Over the last decade, almost all prices have gone DOWN, not up for these people and even for someone like Lonnie who has been in the business for 20 years, spent THOUSANDS of dollars on music and hardware, has had his pay dropped by at least a third as well.

You mistakenly think that these people are signing your contracts to make more money. They're not. They just want to make their carrying of music around easier for them. It doesn't affect the bar.
Except, after 6 years, that's not about to come from you. Not even exclusively for your "controlled licensees."

It's all hogwash.