online downloads

[George]

Originally Posted by George

There's a tremendous difference in using copywrittem material for personal use or public performance.

...therein lies the confusion, and most of the legitimate marketing thrusts referred to here are at the individual user.

Thanks ADMIN for the input.

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by admin

Our legal experts say that paying CAVS or Tricerasoft for songs does NOT give you the legal right to perform them, even if you keep their invoices. I'm simply reporting what I have been told by those who know and are in touch with the Record Labels who hold the digital rights.

If I were going out doing shows, I would NOT buy digital downloaded songs because I know of no one in the USA with digital download rights to Karaoke music.

Admin,
THANK YOU FOR CLEARING THIS UP!
This point is not mentioned anywhere on Trcerasoft's web site.


I have purchased hundreds of MP3+g's in good faith fron Triderasoft over the past few months with no intention of breaking any laws. I'm learning that there are alot of grey areas when it comes to the karaoke track production business in general. Until this point I believed that I was buying the rights to make money with the tracks I downloaded but I now know this is not the case.

I see where I need to aquire as many hard copies of the MP3+G files (that are still available) that I bought from Tricerasoft (and delete the rest) to be legal in the USA. Do the Karaoke Monthly CAVS MP3+G's work well in Hoster? If so I will by the MP3+G's on disc dirctly from Karaoke Monthly in the future.

Thanks!

Jim

[madjim- with the Lord]

George,
Thanks for your input as well!

Jim

[George]

Your welcome..have a good one

[admin]

Here is another little "tid bit"...

From their own "About" page... BuyKaraokeDownloads.com is owned and operated by 4726236 Manitoba Corporation.

First, they are in Canada... selling illegally into the USA.

Second, who is 4726236 Manitoba Corporation?

Now tell me they are aboveboard and not hiding to make it legally expensive for anyone to go after them...

[cartunesdj]

Regrettably, I have to agree with madjim. Thank you for setting the record straight ADMIN.

I had assumed "legally licensed for distribution" meant what I thought it meant.

But to your point, they are not making this statement with regards to digital download distribution specifically. Nor are they referencing what country(ies) they are "legally licensed" in, nor by whom are they licenced.

Looks like there's a lot more homework to be done.
Fortunately, I haven't downloaded the volume (or dollar amount) madjim has. Sorry Jim. Bummer news, eh?

[ddouglass]

This is from the Terms of Use at buykaraokedownloads.com:

Content; Copyright and Trademark Notice. All media (downloaded or samples), software, text, images, graphics, user interfaces, music, videos, photographs, trademarks, logos, artwork and other content on the Site (collectively, "Content"), including but not limited to the design, selection, arrangement, and coordination of such Content on the Site is owned or licensed by or to BuyKaraokeDownloads.com, and is protected by copyright, trade dress, and trademark laws, and various other intellectual property rights laws. Except as expressly provided in this Terms of Use, no part of the Site and no Content may be reproduced, recorded, retransmitted, sold, rented, broadcast, distributed, published, uploaded, posted, publicly displayed, altered to make new works, performed, digitized, compiled, translated or transmitted in any way to any other computer, website or other medium or for any commercial purpose, without BuyKaraokeDownloads.com's prior express written consent. (This tells me you can't do anything but play this on the computer you down loaded too and only at home!! ) Except as expressly provided herein, you are not granted any rights or license to patents, copyrights, trade secrets, trade dress, rights of publicity or trademarks with respect to any of the Content, and BuyKaraokeDownloads.com reserves all rights not expressly granted hereunder. BuyKaraokeDownloads.com expressly disclaims all responsibility and liability for uses by you of any Content obtained on or in connection with the Site. (And this is their out or so they think)

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by cartunesdj

Regrettably, I have to agree with madjim. Thank you for setting the record straight ADMIN.

I had assumed "legally licensed for distribution" meant what I thought it meant.

But to your point, they are not making this statement with regards to digital download distribution specifically. Nor are they referencing what country(ies) they are "legally licensed" in, nor by whom are they licenced.

Looks like there's a lot more homework to be done.
Fortunately, I haven't downloaded the volume (or dollar amount) madjim has. Sorry Jim. Bummer news, eh?

cartunesdj,
Thank you for your expression of concern over the lose caused by the shananagins these karaoke disc compaies are perpetuating. It won't cause me much grief other than the time it takes to loacate and remove the KMA files from the hard drive. It will be fixed in no time, the ballance will be made.

When I started hosting karaoke, a music store in town was selling all of their Sound Choice discs for $5 each. I bought all of them that I didn't have. It was hudreds of discs so I saved thousands of dollars. As a matter of fact there were so many discs that the total amoout crashed the stores cash register system! They had to ring them up as three seperate sales.

I see this incident as growing pains for the karaoke industry. Karaoke Monthly sells their MP3+G tracks on a disc for $10 a disc or $1.11 each (not too different from downloading) totaling $2.10 per track, less than Sound Choice custom disc at $4 per track. I'll buy hard copies of the tracks that are sung frequently and delete the rest. It amazes me that I have over 10,000 tracks and my singers seem to sing the same couple of hundres songs no matter where I go. I can loose a few hundred tracks and still keep my singers happy.

NOW, I will delete the KMA copies of the MP3+G files that I don't buy a hard copy of from my gig computer but I will save the KMA copies of the tracks. Down the road downloading digital content will be a standard procedure and the companies that are "protecting their cash cows" (custom karaoke discs) will have no choice but to start distributing their tracks through legal downloads. Once this happens I'll put the KMA files back in the database of my gig machine. I believe it will be something similar to how the record companies had to embrace MP3's. Maybe one day we will be able to purchace our karaoke track from MTU as KMA file, HOW COOL IS THAT GOING TO BE!

GOD has everything under conrtol, IT'S ALL GOOD!

And this is their out or so they think.

Dale,
Your statement reflects a thought I just had while walking my dog, why is it that the record companies aren't informing karaoke hosts that no karaoke tracks are licensed to be downloaded for professional use in the USA? It seems to me that this leaves a loop hole for the karaoke hosts. SHOOT, IT SEEMS TO ME THE WHOLE KARAOKE TRACK PRODUCTION BUSINESS IS ONE BIG LOOP HOLE! I'm going to get my gig machine "legaled up" the best I can because it's not worth the hassel BUT it seems to me that if the record companies aren't concerned enough about this problem to inform anybody, that they won't be able to make a case stick againt an honest karaoke host who has made evey effort to be legal. It's very similar to entrapment in my opinion.


Thanks as always!

Jim

[George]

[quote=ddouglass;66256](This tells me you can't do anything but play this on the computer you down loaded too and only at home!! )

With one exception:

Regardless of the producers stance against making reproductions, it has been determined that you do have the legal right to protect your investment and make a copy for backup purposes only, in the event of a loss of, or damage to the original that you paid for.

I believe that was among ADMIN's findings. I'm tempted to say it was posted on the Singers and Hosts Forum two or three years back. Starting to wish I'd bookmarked such threads now for easy reference instead of relying on this old memory.

[ddouglass]

This is true George and I agree a backup is a must. I guess you could say though that importing the files into Hoster creating a KMA file would be a back-up. Actually the main point I was trying to make was the explicit prohibition of using them for comercial gain.

[George]

Found it.

http://forum.mtu.com/showthread.php?s=&postid=25020

[George]

Originally Posted by ddouglass

I guess you could say though that importing the files into Hoster creating a KMA file would be a back-up.

I believe your right Dale, as you would have the disc you imported from for back up purposes.

[muzicman144]

Jim
I'm not questioning the lergality of using tracks for a paid performance, i fully understand that. My question is why doesn't a live band (no tracks)have to abide by the same rules that those of us who use tracks do. It apears to be an acceptable practice that a band can play any copyrighted music on the market and the only requirement is the club/loounge etc. pay the royalty fees to BMI/ASCAP. Doesn't seem to be much different to me.

muzicman

[cartunesdj]

Originally Posted by madjim

It amazes me that I have over 10,000 tracks and my singers seem to sing the same couple of hundres songs no matter where I go. I can loose a few hundred tracks and still keep my singers happy.

Jim

This brings up a really great thought for an enhancement request!
Wouldn't it be great if every track played (to completion) at a show was logged so we could create a report on the most sung songs, etc?
We could then also weed out those tracks that have NEVER been sung (or even not sung in over a year or two's time)!

Has this been requested already?

I guess I'll have to post that thought in another topic/forum space, yes?

[madjim- with the Lord]

Originally Posted by muzicman144

Jim
I'm not questioning the lergality of using tracks for a paid performance, i fully understand that. My question is why doesn't a live band (no tracks)have to abide by the same rules that those of us who use tracks do. It apears to be an acceptable practice that a band can play any copyrighted music on the market and the only requirement is the club/loounge etc. pay the royalty fees to BMI/ASCAP. Doesn't seem to be much different to me.

muzicman

When a live band performs there is no physical recording produced.

The physical recording that is produced is the issue. They are trying to prevent the recordings from being sold without everybody getting paid. It's to protect the writers, producers ect... from loosing out on their due compensation for all of the money and work they invested to make the song a hit.

I recorded 75 backgroud tracks years ago and wouldn't even think about selling the recordings BUT I still have the 1/4" reel to reel masters of every song, the physical recordings. When I die, somebody may get a hold of these tracks in a yard sale and decide to sell them........ there lies one of the issues.

I do not preform with my self produced tracks anymore because the drum machine I used to record them was a Roland 707, 16 "digitaly recoded" drum sounds for $700. Todays karaoke tracks sound better due to better grear being available and they aren't recorded in a bedroom! Then there's the recording time.....

I'm sure there are other issues as well but this one is clear to me as a musician who recorded and made money with self-produced background tracks.

Jim

[George]

Originally Posted by muzicman144

Jim
I'm not questioning the lergality of using tracks for a paid performance, i fully understand that. My question is why doesn't a live band (no tracks)have to abide by the same rules that those of us who use tracks do. It apears to be an acceptable practice that a band can play any copyrighted music on the market and the only requirement is the club/loounge etc. pay the royalty fees to BMI/ASCAP. Doesn't seem to be much different to me.

muzicman

Who says there's any difference?

Read this.

http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061109/092726.shtml

and this.

http://www.dmcityview.com/archives/2...06/cover.shtml

It's downloading to use for public performance that came into question here, not who's paying what fees. They're after everybody in that regard.

It appears it's the Karaoke clubs that have been getting by up 'till now.

Perhaps I'm not reading something right.

[muzicman144]

Jim
Basically, what you are saying is one perform copyrighted music with a guitar or full band, be paid to do it and as long as he does not record and re-sell the performance, he IS LEGAL. Another can perform the same song using pre- recorded track, be paid to do it, and as long as he does not re-sell the performance, he would NOT BE LEGAL.

This is a gray area that just doesn't seem to be addressed or i just don't get it. Perhaps someone can explain it in layman's terms

muzicman

[Lonman]

Originally Posted by cartunesdj

This brings up a really great thought for an enhancement request!
Wouldn't it be great if every track played (to completion) at a show was logged so we could create a report on the most sung songs, etc?
We could then also weed out those tracks that have NEVER been sung (or even not sung in over a year or two's time)!

Has this been requested already?

I guess I'll have to post that thought in another topic/forum space, yes?

I agree with this, it would be an awesome addition but you need to post it in the Hoster New Feature Request.
http://forum.mtu.com/forumdisplay.php?f=66 if it's not already there somewhere. If it is, revive it.

[ddouglass]

Originally Posted by muzicman144

My question is why doesn't a live band (no tracks)have to abide by the same rules that those of us who use tracks do. It apears to be an acceptable practice that a band can play any copyrighted music on the market and the only requirement is the club/loounge etc. pay the royalty fees to BMI/ASCAP. Doesn't seem to be much different to me.

muzicman

When the club pays BMI/ASCAP etc. for a license to have live bands that covers the royalty payments to the writers and producers of those songs. The club has to also pay for a license for you to do a karaoke show in their establishment which does the same thing and this is a separate license. If the club has a jukebox there is a license to use that and if they have a radio and or TV that is another license. So basically the club pays for you or a live band to play.

[Beavis]

and the GREAT DEBATE Continues !