Karaoke Forums

Did you spend a lot of time in Denali this summer?

If not, then there is no reason for you to have seen anything from us about those shows.

(By the way, our shows were at two different venues in Denali, both owned by the same company. Different start times on different days, plus, because they are very focused on the tourist market, they would occasionally move start times to accommodate other events in the area. I don't expect you to understand that, of course.)

Does your operations manager have a help license?

Now THAT'S hilarious!

We don't use the HELP license for SCE operations, so no. All of our systems have 1:1 correspondence.

That's fairly magical...since SC ran out of discs to sell through distributors long ago... remember? Did you "invent" more with a burner matey? You've already admitted that your "operations manager" is a separate company. So do they have every SC track made? A gem license?.... what?

What are you talking about?



No, of course not.



Our operations manager is a living, breathing human being. He also owns a large multi-system pub entertainment services company that provides karaoke and other services, mostly trivia, in a local area.



Our SCE systems have 1:1 correspondence with original media for all tracks on our systems. The GEM series is a core part of those systems, but we have a huge stock of SC discs and discs from other producers. Generally speaking, these are discs that Slep-Tone or PEP accepted in trade from KJs who have left the business upon being sued, as part of a settlement, but we have also purchased a lot of discs, both new and on the secondary market.

We do not have every SC track ever made. We are actively seeking to add to our libraries, though.

Now this is particularly interesting!
Let me see if I understand this correctly:
#1. You own the sound choice trademark on over 18,000 or so tracks.
#2. You regularly license your trademark to KJ's and venues throughout the nation through your "help license" for a monthly fee.
#3. You reassure KJ's that while the license "may be sufficient, it may not be enough" to avoid them from being sued directly by a publisher for copyright infringement, you don't feel that that is ever going to happen.
#4 You won't operate under the terms and conditions of your own license you sell to other people – when it would cost you nothing, since you own the trademark.

So, I have to wonder how your license is good enough for KJ's and venues, when obviously you're not willing to operate under the same parameters?

If that doesn't put a great big fat question mark on the ethics of your operation, I don't know what will.

And why the secrecy about who your "operations company" is and what city they're in?
Why is that such a secret? Certainly looks like you're hiding something but you like to point your fingers at others and claim that they are. Nothing like the "Harrington double standard."

Oh come on. Secrets and double standards are your jam, Chip.

Still waiting on public proof of your claim.

_________________
-Chris

The SC trademarks are marked on 16,503 karaoke tracks in total.

(By the way, this has been an especially good week for new licenses. I think the word has been getting out that the price is going up.)

I'm not saying that SCE wouldn't ever use a HELP license. (By the way, a HELP license would not be free even to SCE.) I'm just saying that SCE doesn't currently do it.

I think it's also fair to say that SCE stands out among karaoke operators because it is owned by an entity that does business with publishers directly. As a rule, publishers don't know who you are. (Your name came up in a conversation I had recently with a major publisher's rep. The rep's response was, "Who is that, now?") They do know who I am.



I would not recommend a HELP license to any operator who has access to the library we have access to on a 1:1 basis. It would be superfluous. (That means it would be extra and unnecessary.)



You've never failed to make an accusation against us, regardless of whether you have any actual basis for it, so why stop now?



I don't know what you mean by "operations company."

If you're referring to our operations manager, I can tell you that it's not a secret at all.

Neither is it a secret as to where our operations are based.

But I am not a trained monkey at your command. You do no business with us, and we don't want to do any business with you. Why should I care whether you know anything about SCE? Why should it be important for me to tell you personally about our operations? If someone else asks or cares, I'll probably respond. But not you.

Of course they do. They've cashed your infringement suit settlement checks... I'm sure that makes you memorable.

Yet, by your own admission, you sell the license and your "operations company" doesn't have all the tracks - but a help licensee has more than "the company that deals directly with publishers?" Really? I wonder why that is? Perhaps it's the "sufficient, but not enough" problem printed in your contracts --- it's still copyright infringement. And of course you know that, so you don't want to be associated too closely with your own new company. Figgers... (that means "it figures.")

If you wanted to "tell you personally," you would simply send me an email but I can't understand why you wouldn't want to promote your operations? Hiding them, or ashamed of them for some reason? Hmm... Probably respond?" Figgers... again.

And you are my trained monkey or my name wouldn't have come up with any publishers you might be sucking up to... "recently."

Rent free....

In your head....

Ba-da-BOOM!

The least you could do is be honest about it Chris.... You've put "conditions" on the proof I'm willing to have verified for you by a third, unbiased and trustworthy source.... but that's not good enough for you? Too bad.

That's your problem, not mine.

Don't whine about getting the proof if you're not willing to accept it.

Why do you keep putting "operations company" in quotation marks?

SCE does not own copies of every SC track ever made. I'd be surprised if there is any KJ in the country who has a copy of everything we ever made. Maybe there is.

Between the GEM series and the thousands of other discs we have from many different producers, we have plenty of tracks for our patrons to find something to sing. (That would be true if all we had were the GEM series--it's a great set for pretty much anybody.) If there is some obscure SC track that someone wants to sing, we'll see if we can't track down a disc somewhere.

For example, one night in Denali, they decided to have a Disney-themed night. We had a few Disney discs, but nothing from this century, so I popped over to Target and bought one of everything they had in stock. Another time, there were requests for some newer pop stuff, so I bought the most recent few Party Tyme discs. We had a regular who liked to sing the Doors, so we tracked down all the Doors stuff in our library and made sure our systems were loaded with it.

You know, just like any other karaoke company does.

The HELP license is not structured to create the impression that every SC track ever made is needed for a show. That's ridiculous. It covers everything so that we and the KJ don't have to check.



. No, I was out in LA having lunch with the guy, and we were just talking about piracy. He was telling me about how he gets calls from KJs wanting to know whether stuff is licensed or not. Since I know you like to pester music publishers, I said, "Let me guess, was one of them Chip Staley?" And he said, "No, who is that, now?" We had a big laugh.

My point exactly.... you are my trained monkey... and you're now you're asking publishers about me... If it's true at all, it's pretty telling and if not, it's business as usual for you.

You are a LIAR!! You said, MONTHS ago, that you did not get your stock from any of the lawsuits!! It might have been ME that posed the question if you were going to use stuff you got in lawsuits, and you said NO!! SO, you are using music you go for FREE!! How does THAT make you ANY better than your average pirate??

_________________
I am the ONLY SANE 1 HERE

What's really funny is that Baza traded in a bunch of discs for a discount on the gem series.... and now PEP is using his "trade in" to compete with him.

I'll bet he didn't see that coming...


But I still have a few SC8125's still in shrink wrap I'll sell him.....

I don't believe I said that. You're welcome to correct me, as the forum is just as searchable for you as it is me, and if I did say that, I will concede the point.

But I do question your premise. We didn't get these discs for "free." We got them in exchange for reducing the amount the people owe us.

As for not being any better than a pirate... Come on. You know why that's not the case. This stuff is original material. We're not stealing anything.

In what sense are we competing with Bazza?

Pretty interesting that you "sell a help license" to pirates to use the entire SC downloaded library in exchange for a promise not to sue them for trademark infringement... but your company won't do that (piracy) themselves? How can you "steal from yourself?" You can't, but the help license is simply you enabling others to willfully commit copyright infringement. And your license even tells them that third party rights holders can still sue them, but you reassure them that because it hasn't happened, you don't believe it ever will... but technically, it can happen and your contract (again) even indemnifies you in the (unlikely) event that it does. If you're so confident it will never happen, why would you need such an indemnification and/or not use your own entire library? Not enough confidence in the same promises you make to others perhaps? Figgers...
It's pretty easy to deconstruct your activity. You've opened another new enterprise and entered the hosting business haven't you?

At least it appears to be a two-way street: You "trade in" original material for a gem set.... and then get sued for copyright infringement... with the plaintiff using Bazza's own "bragging photos" as an exhibit against you. (I laughed for 2 days over that one.)

And even after your settlement check gets cashed, you don't /won't directly use even that yourself. So you traded Bazza his discs, for a "license" to use material that by your own admission still has legal exposure attached to it even warning him about not being able to "grant permission owned by third party rights holders" and indemnifying yourself even from Bazza suing you.

Looks like my brand-spanking new SC8125's just went back up in value...

Respond publicly to this post with proof that Sound Choice pirated Red Peters tracks.

Done.

How is that a "condition"?

_________________
-Chris

And by the way.....if you want honesty......You started with the conditions. Yours are cumbersome, secret and involve 3rd parties that I imagine don't really want to be involved.

Or....

You could simply reply to this post with the proof.

Done.

_________________
-Chris