Karaoke Forums

Yeah, that's a lot like understanding the difference between trademark infringement and copyright infringement.

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

The whole point is that these people aren't our customers. They are thieves who are using our good name to make money using product they stole. (Which, by the way, proves my point. You think they're our customers, and they're not.)

Why the (@$%&#!) would we ever thank people who stole our product? No amount of "advertising" is worth that.

You can't prove that they stole anything from you and they are under no obligation to prove what they bought and from whom? The courts have told you numerous times now that you don't have a case. it's time to give up the ghost. How many suckers can be left out there that will fall for your scam? If someone bought a loaded hard drive and went into the karaoke business; the court would consider them a victim of whoever sold them the drive. You're SOL, Jimbo; but keep spinning them wheels. It's fun to watch. SBI, KV and BKD have made hundreds, if not thousands, of new songs in the last 7 years while your enterprise has made zero. Do you really think that the Sound Choice brand is even relevant in today's karaoke world? Everybody already has just about every Sound Choice song ever created and they will spend their karaoke money on new songs; not your old collection from last century.

A-Rod used to be a Major Home Run threat every time he came to the plate. Last year it got so bad that the Yankees released him from his contract and paid him to go away. Your batting average has dropped even lower than A-Rods. It's time to retire your bat and glove and try something new.

I've hosted over a thousand shows and attended thousands more shows than that. One of the most definite and certain things I've learned is that 99% of the customers have no clue karaoke manufacturers even exist, much less anything about differences in brands. Despite seeing a logo every time any song starts all night long. They do not come close to associating those logos with a company that made the track, or the disc the track sits on. The default opinion is these songs grow on trees and they don't even cost money for the host to obtain. They can be looking right at the DK logo when I ask them who made this track, recording, whatever word you care to use, and if it's a Beatles song they will answer "The Beatles". If Pink Floyd starts playing and they are looking right at the SC logo, their answer will be "Pink Floyd". I've banged my head on the wall explaining it for years, but it's only getting worse with the younger and younger audiences.

I've got singers I've had for ten years, and if I have some reason to mention my company name in a sentence with them, they invariably ask who's that? Well it's me, the company name on the cover of the books for gosh sake, the name I use plugging myself on the mic every night. "Oh, I didn't know you were a company, I thought you were just the karaoke guy."

They couldn't confuse hosts with manufacturing companies if they tried, because for 99% of them the manufacturers don't exist in the first place. The logos are just fleeting screen decorations. They can't even associate the host with the host's company, because that doesn't exist to them either.

It's just a guy playing a Beatles song, or a guy playing a Beyonce song, and there's nothing more to it than that. You can't confuse one company with another company, when zero companies exist in your head. You can't confuse a host with a company, when you have zero companies in your head. When you can't even associate the KJ with his own company, despite him repeatedly trying to get you to, you're not about to confuse him with any other company you don't even recognize in the first place.

You are right Jim these people aren't your customers. They have used your product without your permission, and maybe didn't pay for it. Then again back in the beginning it wasn't established that there was any firm rules about how to use your product, or that permission was needed to take product and shift it to a PC. This all evolved because of changes in technology that modernized the karaoke service industry that no one anticipated. Your company did not keep pace with the changes, and only became alarmed when the money stopped pouring in. Other manufacturers have gotten out of the business, just like several karaoke disc player companies have stopped production. The times have changed, and instead of developing new product, you want to use legal action to sell your outdated product. Every product has a shelf life and yours has expired, you just refuse to accept it.

Getting back to the people that are your loyal customers, how have you treated them? You have forced them to get audits most of which had to be paid for by the customers. You have made them feel guilty about shifting their purchased discs to a PC, even though it was for security and convenience reasons. This was a purely business decision made by the owner operator of that business. Then to top everything off you start hinting that new production is going to begin, when you know you no longer have the capital to start up production again. You try to get your loyal customers to buy ahead of time an unseen untested mystery product. The people that have done the most to hurt the good name of your company is not the pirates, but rather you and Kurt. It's time to look in the mirror and take responsibility for your own mistakes, and not blame others.

"(a) use in commerce any reproduction, counterfeit, copy, or colorable imitation of a registered mark in connection with the sale, offering for sale, distribution, or advertising of any goods or services on or in connection with which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; ..."

Again, key words being "...which such use is likely to cause confusion, or to cause mistake, or to deceive; ..."

It's already been proven that there's no confusion, mistake or deception because since we're not selling, offering to sell, distribute or advertise any Sound Choice good or service. A trademarked logo is simply being displayed. Nothing more, nothing less. Good thing the courts see it this way, huh? Not so good for the HELP license thingy, though.

"...provides a strong suggestion that..." but does not definitively prove....

_________________
DJ Don

so if i understand this correctly, any host who does, or has, since 1989 played SC at their show, has been infringing on your service mark and confusing people into believing that they are part of, or affiliated with Sound Choice by using the tracks that Sound Choice sold to them for the purpose of providing karaoke shows.

and since the certifications, GEM licenses, and HELP licenses only provide explicit permission (which is necessary but not necessarily sufficient) for use of the TRADEMARK and NOT the SERVICE MARK (which are two different things i understand) so in the realm of technicalities (in which this entire thing has been for nearly a decade) 100% of us here are infringing.
sounds reasonable

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

Paradigm, Are you feeling the LOVE yet?

We actually started releasing audiovisual tracks in 1992, I think. I don't think that matters to your argument.

If they were using original discs, then no, that wouldn't be infringement, for a couple of different reasons. In any event, the statute of limitations on such activities expired a long time ago.



This is not correct. The GEM licenses and HELP licenses all provide explicit permission for use of both the trademarks and the service marks. For example, the HELP license defines "Marks" as follows:

The term "Marks" refers to the trademarks identified in U.S. Trademark Registrations No. 1,923,448 and No. 4,099,045 (SOUND CHOICE), and No. 2,000,725 and No. 4,099,052 (SOUND CHOICE & Design, also known as the Sound Choice Logo). "Marks" also includes the Licensor's distinctive trade dress as applied to karaoke accompaniment tracks, comprising the non-functional elements of changing-color lyrics, singing cues, the particular typeface and layout of the lyrics, and logos and other graphical elements.

4,099,045 and 4,099,052 are the service mark registrations. The GEM series license also (now) specifically mentions those same registrations. We didn't have the registrations when the GEM license agreement was first written, but there was language that referred to those rights.

That HELP license agreement also includes the following grant of rights:

To display the Marks during a Commercial Karaoke Show to one or more patrons during the provision of live karaoke services

The GEM license expressly calls out the following as one of your rights:

the display of the Marks in connection with your providing live karaoke entertainment services to third parties

The certification Covenant Not to Sue does not explicitly grant rights under the service mark, but it puts the certified KJ in the same position as they would be in with regard to original disc usage, and for that reason, it's also not a service mark infringement.

Where is Chip when you need him?

What's the matter--having a hard time distorting things on your own?

You think maybe Paradigm we all have been chasing the white rabbit down the hole? I know lawyers are supposed to be good at splitting hares but this is too much!

Oh and Jim I guess you have never spun or distorted anything?

According to estimates; 9 out of 10 KJs are using "stolen" tracks. If what they are doing is actionable; you would think the PEP would be winning law suits like shooting fish in a barrel but they seem to be losing battles at every turn.

Wasn't this addressed by the United States Court of Appeals
For the Seventh Circuit?

No. 15-2844
page 23

_________________
KNOW THYSELF

I know that you would love it if everyone just bought your stories hook line and sinker but Chip Staley seems to offer an alternate perspective on this issue so people have more than one source of information to base their opinions on. Chip seems to be correct more often than not so it would be nice to read his take on another district court denying your wishes. Information is always good.

I have no need to spin or distort anything.

Not even all of your legal reverses?

"Performance" is not congruent to "karaoke entertainment services." I agree that the display of a single SC logo displayed in the course of a four-hour show would not necessarily suggest our endorsement. When the logo is displayed 100 times in a night, all on wildly different songs, night after night after night, it's a different story. The Seventh Circuit apparently did not see fit to address that point, probably because it didn't fit their preferred decision.