Karaoke Scene's Karaoke Forums https://www.karaokescene.com/forums/ |
|
The Validity Of SCDG's? https://www.karaokescene.com/forums/viewtopic.php?f=26&t=28587 |
Page 1 of 2 |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Thu Sep 05, 2013 3:35 am ] |
Post subject: | The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | mightywiz [ Fri Sep 06, 2013 6:44 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
look at your barcodes on the boxes, on your legit sets the barcodes are all different on the pirated sets some of the barcodes are the same. |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Fri Sep 06, 2013 8:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 11:31 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | chrisavis [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 1:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
The Lone Ranger wrote: 8) Just had an update on the PR/WWD/DTE/CB audits they will cost 175.00 for three a three hour audit. If the audit takes more than three hours you have to pay for the audit. The KJ pays for the audit regardless. first 3 hours are $175 and the $75/hr afterwards. The Lone Ranger wrote: The audit is good for one day, the day of the audit, that will be great for the host that plans a one day career. Not entirely accurate. The audit will state something to the effect of "as of xx/xx/xxxx we confirm this library to be accurate and in 1-1 compliance". Since their audit program will not have any ongoing updates like what SC does with reporting a 2% variance, they have no way of measuring your continued adherence to policy. I have no issue with this. My SC audit isn't perpetual either. I has an audit date and then I have paperwork asking me to submit updates for 2% variance. SC could send an investigator to my current shows even though I am audited and I provide updates. Doesn't mean I couldn't still be pirating. DTE/PR simply foregoes the additional administrative headache of dealing with KJ updates. The Lone Ranger wrote: To really be safe it is recommended that you purchase one of DTE's subscriber's products, so you can be placed on their vetted list. Safe from what? If you are going to claim people will be "safe" from something, back it up. Define The vetted list is actually no different from the GEM owners list. It is exclusive to people that own a particular product. Or in this case, lease/subscribe. The Lone Ranger wrote: PR will also allow audits for SCDG's provided you have proof of purchase before January of 2007. It is still beyond me how one company can certify the product of another company, especially when that company is still in business. I would think CAVS would have something to say about that. To date you have proven that your thinking is actually the imaginative conjuring's of a seemingly bitter KJ with a bone to pick with any entity looking to control the piracy of their product. Why not offer up some spectacular reason for this? Don't think.....know. Call CAVS, ask them what they have to say. The content of the SCDG's is Chartbuster IP. You REALLY should be able to figure it out from here, but I am very interested in hearing more. It's bee a long, tiresome week. I need a good chuckle. -Chris |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 4:02 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | chrisavis [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 6:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
The Lone Ranger wrote: Maybe you can explain Chris how PR can certify a product they don't own namely CAVS SCDG's? Sigh......PR has the right to enforce Chartbuster IP. I don't know if the "own" the IP, but every indication is that they can enforce it. Doesn't matter who distributes it. The Lone Ranger wrote: The SCDG's are product of CAVS protected under their trade mark. The only company that should be policing CAVS product is CAVS's. I have some SCDG's at home. I will read the fine print later tonight. I will also give CAVS a call tomorrow to see if they have an opinion on this. I encourage you to call them as well. The Lone Ranger wrote: What I meant by safe is if PR gets it's payoff, and the host signs up for Cloud, they will not require you to have an audit, it is the end of the story. Also you will avoid being listed in a suit, by PR. Neither PR or DT requires an audit. The audit is voluntary. End of the real story. -Chris |
Author: | Smoothedge69 [ Sun Sep 08, 2013 8:55 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
And I spoke to Gretchen and she told me, in no uncertain terms, that there was nothing to worry about if you use DTE single song downloads. Nobody is going to sue you for buying and using them. |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 2:41 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
chrisavis wrote: The Lone Ranger wrote: Maybe you can explain Chris how PR can certify a product they don't own namely CAVS SCDG's? Sigh......PR has the right to enforce Chartbuster IP. I don't know if the "own" the IP, but every indication is that they can enforce it. Doesn't matter who distributes it. The Lone Ranger wrote: The SCDG's are product of CAVS protected under their trade mark. The only company that should be policing CAVS product is CAVS's. I have some SCDG's at home. I will read the fine print later tonight. I will also give CAVS a call tomorrow to see if they have an opinion on this. I encourage you to call them as well. The Lone Ranger wrote: What I meant by safe is if PR gets it's payoff, and the host signs up for Cloud, they will not require you to have an audit, it is the end of the story. Also you will avoid being listed in a suit, by PR. Neither PR or DT requires an audit. The audit is voluntary. End of the real story. -Chris ![]() |
Author: | BruceFan4Life [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 4:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
Sound Choice barely made a dent in piracy and after being called a bunch of settlement trollers by a judge, they are barely relevant any longer. No one seems to be afraid of the Big Bad Wolf any more. Why does anyone think that the latest bully on the block will fare any better? The same program that removes Sound Choice logos can just as easily remove Chartbusters logos. Look how easy it was for Karaoke Cloud to remove the Chartbuster logos and replace them with Karaoke Cloud logos. I can't wait to read about their attempts at squeezing their customers for more cash while 90% of the KJs are getting their tracks for free. |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | BruceFan4Life [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:05 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
These audit costs are like paying for an extended warranty on an item that costs 20 bucks. It's a waste of money. Why would anyone allow someone else, who wants to sell you something, to tell you that the product you already paid for is iillegal to use? Everybody should get their Sweet Georgia Brown Certificates before it's too late. ![]() |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 5:41 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
chrisavis wrote: I have some SCDG's at home. I will read the fine print later tonight. I will also give CAVS a call tomorrow to see if they have an opinion on this. I encourage you to call them as well. -Chris ![]() |
Author: | gretchen [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 6:56 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
The KJ pays for the audit regardless. first 3 hours are $175 and the $75/hr afterwards. Hey Chris, I just wanted to let you know that the hourly cost is not $75, it's $25 after the first three hours. -Gretchen |
Author: | chrisavis [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:17 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
gretchen wrote: The KJ pays for the audit regardless. first 3 hours are $175 and the $75/hr afterwards. Hey Chris, I just wanted to let you know that the hourly cost is not $75, it's $25 after the first three hours. -Gretchen Thank you for the correction, Gretchen. -Chris |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 7:53 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | Lone Wolf [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:00 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
The Lone Ranger wrote: chrisavis wrote: I have some SCDG's at home. I will read the fine print later tonight. I will also give CAVS a call tomorrow to see if they have an opinion on this. I encourage you to call them as well. -Chris ![]() That ought to go over well as isn't it CAVS that sued CB and drove them out of business? |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 9:37 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() |
Author: | The Lone Ranger [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 10:50 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
![]() What CAVS told me Chris was quite an ear full that is why I want you to hear the story to. There has been a recent court decision of a case I have never heard discussed on this or any forum. Slep Tone U.S. v.s. Light Year Music. This decision establishes the basis for trade mark infringement claimed by both SC and CB. Two parts have to be present to have infringement. l. You must copy the trade mark in question. 2. You must be trying to create confusion, such as trying to sell the material as original SC or CB product. At least this is the way it was explained to me. I recommend hosts call the number above to confirm this decision, it is only two weeks old. According to CAVS only the original holder's of the copyright material the publishers can sue for the content of the tracks period. When you pay off the manus you are only paying for the right to display their logo, the publisher's can still sue for content. CAVS is very interested in any host that has hard printed material from PR/WWD/DTE/CB claiming they have the right to audit and verify CAVS product. They want to turn such material over to their own lawyers. From the way I understand things explained to me any host that has been paying money over and beyond what they originally paid for their discs are just wasting it. Right Jim? |
Author: | BruceFan4Life [ Mon Sep 09, 2013 1:00 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: The Validity Of SCDG's? |
Seems like the only people that have been trying to mislead anyone, are the people that are trying to make other people think that they are breaking some law when media shifting their own property. It seems to clear up why all of those cases in Las Vegas sort of disappeared as soon as some lawyers got involved. Looks like Sound Choice knows that they don't have a leg to stand on once it gets in to a court room. The way it looks to me is you're only violating their copy right if you attach their logo to some karaoke tracks that are not Sound Choice tracks to begin with.... but then who would try to add the Sound Choice logo to another companies karaoke tracks? So much for trade dress. ![]() |
Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 8 hours |
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |