Legal stance on Sound Choice and Stellar Records

[admin]

Thank you. Our digital rights attorney in San Francisco has already been contacted to start an analysis. As far as I am concerned at this moment, there is a "Restraint of Trade" legal violation occuring here. I respect Stellar Records, as they are the reason we entered the Karaoke field in 1996. SC is another story...

We are evaluating our options.

The problem is DISCS ARE DEAD, but those who still make them don't yet know it.

We have been working on securing our software, and now KMA songs and we will very soon have an alternative to offer the producers... who are willing to move to Internet digital downloads.

The real problem is the USA Publishers. I know some of the background facts, and I read the pressures from these Publishers in both the SC and Stellar "position papers".

Also, if you read their papers carefully, they are really hot about the true bootleggers who copy and sell discs (some as many as 5,000 at a time), and those KJs who have bought hard drives from EBAY with 35,000 songs for $400 (including the HDD). Also, SCDG discs with songs that cost $0.20 are doubtfully legal as the going rate for USA royalties is $0.12 to $0.27 per song. Thus, SC and Stellar have my support to go after true bootleggers and illegal theft. We will aid them where possible to protect YOUR and MTU's interest in the Karaoke Industry where we all make our living, and provide a valid service to the world.

However, to claim that you honest customers don't have the legal right to format shift and play from a HDD, or play from copies of your purchased discs is NOT the law as our Attorney tells us. Their Attorney is saying the opposite. There is no court case to prove who is right. If they won't back off, we may have to spearhead a test class-action law suit against them to establish the law in a Court. Frankly, we don't want to do that, but if our product sales become affected, we will.

QED

[Beavis]

admin you need to start selling music as well as software. i would buy all my music downloads from MTU.


i bet alot of others here would also.

anyone else ???

[goonie227]

Originally Posted by Beavis

admin you need to start selling music as well as software. i would buy all my music downloads from MTU.


i bet alot of others here would also.

anyone else ???

I Sure Would I could stop my auto ship of THM's and not have to fight them to load anymore. although the last update fixed all my problems with loading anyway.

[kilith]

yeah I would do it! CAVS make their own why can't MTU start working on making downloads for their own player I know it does take some time to make it legal with the holders of the orginal music but sure I would go with MTU downloads over SC, THM, PHM, or any other company if their quality matched or was better of at least THM (which is OK but not the best in anyway so far I think Zoom is starting to be the best out there) MTU should maybe even setup some sort of download program with Zoom and THM like CAVS has. I would start with the basics of songs like start with DK 1-99 songs list. It would take a heck of a lot of time to build a database but for MTU users I think it would be worth the wait!

[kilith]

I would have to agree disks are dead... but they are also a great proof of ownership

[Beavis]

if you download .kma's exclusively from MTU to play on their software, ownership would be in the software purchase.

kma's are smaller than mp3-g's

[kilith]

Originally Posted by Beavis

if you download .kma's exclusively from MTU to play on their software, ownership would be in the software purchase.

kma's are smaller than mp3-g's

well yea that I know :p and I also know that if you download the songs that your reciept would be your proof of ownership

[admin]

Originally Posted by admin

However, to claim that you honest customers don't have the legal right to format shift and play from a HDD, or play from copies of your purchased discs is NOT the law as our Attorney tells us. Their Attorney is saying the opposite. There is no court case to prove who is right. If they won't back off, we may have to spearhead a test class-action law suit against them to establish the law in a Court. Frankly, we don't want to do that, but if our product sales become affected, we will.

Notice to ALL Karaoke Hosts...


PLEASE... gather information from every Forum, Chat Room, Emails any Producer sent to you (or that you have a copy of in your possession), and hold them safely (write a copy to CDROM). Please forward all documents to MTU using a Support Ticket so the Producers don't know what you have sent to us. Where possible, send URL LINKS so our Attorney has the original sources and proof they were made public.

Read this legal background post I made in 2003.

Read this legally posted letter from Priddis posted in 2004.


In the past when SPIN and KAPA found a Host that was using even one copy of a disc in a show, their tactic to overcome having to force a "test case" was to get a Host to SIGN A CONTRACT that they would NEVER AGAIN copy a disc. This converts from WEAK COPYRIGHT LAW to ENFORCEABLE CONTRACT LAW. I have heard of a USA Court case where a Hostess with a ONLY ONE legally copied disc in her show told SCs owners - SlepTones company - to take her to court. The Judge threw it out saying that SC was wrong. Since there was no legal rulling and "closure" on this, it did not appear when IP Justice searched the legal databases for Court cases. If you know anything about this, please post it here. This could be sufficient to end it all now before it goes any further.


Read what the prior OWNER of S.P.I.N. posted in 2002. He has facts that would be very damanging to a certain company and its owners when he is called to testify in a Court of Law.

Read what was posted on the KAPA site in 2002.

This was a weak defense, and Hosts started to refuse and challenge them, TODAY... they are taking a different approach to attack you. They are going after the BUSINESS OWNER who hires you. This falls under Restraint of Trade, and that action may itself be against the law, and thus may be grounds to bring suit against that Producer as "THE" test case for Digital Rights for Karaoke to be the same as for Audio.

The best offense is a good defense. If we get ALL the facts, together as a class action, I am confident we WILL WIN if it goes to Court. When a technology shift happens, anyone who stands in its way will be run over. Apple ushered in the era of digital download of music. Karaoke, no matter how you look at it, is also entertainment just like audio music.

UNDERSTAND THIS! If you have even ONE song or disc that you did not pay for, you are on your own, you CAN be taken to Court, and you WILL loose your songs, gear and even your car/van you transport them in. Clean up your library NOW!!!!

FYI: We have been told by Hoster customers who are Sherriffs, State Attorney Generals, and Police, that the ONLY WAY your equipment can be legally confiscated, is with a COURT ORDER, executed by any Federal Agent (FBI, US Marshall, CIA or your County Sheriff). If anyone else trys to take your gear, call the Police or Sheriff to protect yourself!

If anyone threatens to take you to court if you don't sign... AND... you have a legal original of each disc you have a backup copy of that you are using, contact MTU immediately. If you call us, say "I am being threatened by SC or Stellar with a law suit" and I will personally be on the phone ASAP.

[a2kmike]

This is a link on the Sound Choice website

http://www.dopikaraoke.com/

definitely some file conversion going on here

[kilith]

Originally Posted by a2kmike

This is a link on the Sound Choice website

http://www.dopikaraoke.com/

definitely some file conversion going on here

Yeah SC claims there are only 1000 songs to be able to download from that site. They also claim they have the right from the producers to sell the files that way. I do not know much about iPod but would you not be able to transfer any iPod file to computer? They also have all over their terms and conditions that the iPod files can not be used to commercial-use.... Yeah right you will see cheep karaoke systems using iPods... just wait and see.

[billyo]

Originally Posted by kilith

Yeah SC claims there are only 1000 songs to be able to download from that site. They also claim they have the right from the producers to sell the files that way. I do not know much about iPod but would you not be able to transfer any iPod file to computer? They also have all over their terms and conditions that the iPod files can not be used to commercial-use.... Yeah right you will see cheep karaoke systems using iPods... just wait and see.

i have an ipod and you can not transfer from ipod to a comp...you can transfer music file from your pc to ipod..you can connect your ipod to your mixing board and use it as a player and you can also use it as an ext. drive.. i'm not sure if you can use ipods to do a karaoke shows though..havent tried it yet..

[kilith]

Originally Posted by a2kmike

go here and check item #3 in help section

this is part of item #3
Our Commitment

[company] is committed to continually adding new Video Songs to our library. Eventually our library of over 10,000 Video Karaoke Songs will be available for download! We want you to know that we are dedicated to offering our extensive library to you, our customer. Thank you for your understanding and patience

also check item #5

I was only quoting what BC said on his forums. i guess he lies about almost everything. He said they had 1000 for download. I do not know if maybe that

Eventually our library of over 10,000 Video Karaoke Songs will be available for download!

Maybe there are only 1000 right now? However if all of a sudden there are 10,000 and they are format shifting 10,000 songs... then there should be the right that we can format shift the songs as well. I also bet since they include the way to put it onto TV and through audio alonsg with microphone... we will end up seeing iPod Karaoke and god that would really tick me off lol...

[kilith]

Well I dont know you guys... But since Sound Choice keeps saying how THEY can not give us rights to format shift to computer... but they allow and give out their licensing rights for format shifted songs.

I think this is enough proof against them.

[kilith]

Also if you look at the bottom of the home page or anypage pretty much you will see this gif

If you click on any of previewable downloads on that site you clearly see they are sound choice style karaoke format songs.

[shanold1]

I found this artical on the
http://www.drudgereport.com/
12/31/2007
if this is true acording to
Recording Industry Association of America
hoster is not legal
steve in albany or





By Marc Fisher
Washington Post Staff Writer
Sunday, December 30, 2007; Page M05

Despite more than 20,000 lawsuits filed against music fans in the years since they started finding free tunes online rather than buying CDs from record companies, the recording industry has utterly failed to halt the decline of the record album or the rise of digital music sharing.

Still, hardly a month goes by without a news release from the industry's lobby, the Recording Industry Association of America, touting a new wave of letters to college students and others demanding a settlement payment and threatening a legal battle.

Now, in an unusual case in which an Arizona recipient of an RIAA letter has fought back in court rather than write a check to avoid hefty legal fees, the industry is taking its argument against music sharing one step further: In legal documents in its federal case against Jeffrey Howell, a Scottsdale, Ariz., man who kept a collection of about 2,000 music recordings on his personal computer, the industry maintains that it is illegal for someone who has legally purchased a CD to transfer that music into his computer.

The industry's lawyer in the case, Ira Schwartz, argues in a brief filed earlier this month that the MP3 files Howell made on his computer from legally bought CDs are "unauthorized copies" of copyrighted recordings.

"I couldn't believe it when I read that," says Ray Beckerman, a New York lawyer who represents six clients who have been sued by the RIAA. "The basic principle in the law is that you have to distribute actual physical copies to be guilty of violating copyright. But recently, the industry has been going around saying that even a personal copy on your computer is a violation."

RIAA's hard-line position seems clear. Its Web site says: "If you make unauthorized copies of copyrighted music recordings, you're stealing. You're breaking the law and you could be held legally liable for thousands of dollars in damages."

They're not kidding. In October, after a trial in Minnesota -- the first time the industry has made its case before a federal jury -- Jammie Thomas was ordered to pay $220,000 to the big record companies. That's $9,250 for each of 24 songs she was accused of sharing online.


Whether customers may copy their CDs onto their computers -- an act at the very heart of the digital revolution -- has a murky legal foundation, the RIAA argues. The industry's own Web site says that making a personal copy of a CD that you bought legitimately may not be a legal right, but it "won't usually raise concerns," as long as you don't give away the music or lend it to anyone.

Of course, that's exactly what millions of people do every day. In a Los Angeles Times poll, 69 percent of teenagers surveyed said they thought it was legal to copy a CD they own and give it to a friend. The RIAA cites a study that found that more than half of current college students download music and movies illegally.

The Howell case was not the first time the industry has argued that making a personal copy from a legally purchased CD is illegal. At the Thomas trial in Minnesota, Sony BMG's chief of litigation, Jennifer Pariser, testified that "when an individual makes a copy of a song for himself, I suppose we can say he stole a song." Copying a song you bought is "a nice way of saying 'steals just one copy,' " she said.

But lawyers for consumers point to a series of court rulings over the last few decades that found no violation of copyright law in the use of VCRs and other devices to time-shift TV programs; that is, to make personal copies for the purpose of making portable a legally obtained recording.

As technologies evolve, old media companies tend not to be the source of the innovation that allows them to survive. Even so, new technologies don't usually kill off old media: That's the good news for the recording industry, as for the TV, movie, newspaper and magazine businesses. But for those old media to survive, they must adapt, finding new business models and new, compelling content to offer.

The RIAA's legal crusade against its customers is a classic example of an old media company clinging to a business model that has collapsed. Four years of a failed strategy has only "created a whole market of people who specifically look to buy independent goods so as not to deal with the big record companies," Beckerman says. "Every problem they're trying to solve is worse now than when they started."

The industry "will continue to bring lawsuits" against those who "ignore years of warnings," RIAA spokesman Jonathan Lamy said in a statement. "It's not our first choice, but it's a necessary part of the equation. There are consequences for breaking the law." And, perhaps, for firing up your computer.

[ddouglass]

There was another article in the New York Times, that the Oregon Attourney General had files a counter to the RIAA lawsuit againts the University of Oregon students that RIAA was trying to invade their privacy. So the fight goes on.

[kilith]

Originally Posted by shanold1

I found this artical on the
http://www.drudgereport.com/
12/31/2007
if this is true acording to
Recording Industry Association of America
hoster is not legal
Steve in Albany, OR.

If you go and read the copy write laws about CD's and copying them to computer... a law was already passed to allow this to happen. Where they are saying it is illegal is the sharing of these copies from hard drive to other people across the internet. This also deals with record companies and not Karaoke companies. They are two separate entities one deals with it’s clients as in the people who sing, record, and produce the CD’s. Companies like Sound Choice and others of the sort have gone many years without paying a cent to recording companies. That is the reason that DK and other companies are now out of business. However when it comes to karaoke CD’s there is no law to say it is or is not illegal. Before reading this crap like above go and read the copy write laws yourself. This article was only against for what I understand saying copying with intent to share is illegal.