A note on professional posion pills on my blog
There is a Karaoke DJ pair whose name I will not mention but they have been leaving posts on their competition...all negative at this point. In the author's view this is an attempt to improve their business by poisoning other people's reputations. While I am liberal on comments I do NOT approve comments from competition designed to hurt other people's business nor will negative comments from such Karaoke DJs be taken seriously. (Obviously there is a conflict of interest). I have removed one such comment (and everyone can have a bad night) and will show another to illustrate the point:
-- comment begins --
For hosts, until legislation is finalized on the rights and wrongs of laptops, the "legal" way is to have original discs. Everything else is a grey area until a licensing mechanism is approved for copying discs (see both the Copyright Act and the Trademark Act).
Even the use of laptops is gray, although hosts believe that if they have all the music as originals on disc, it is OK to copy this on to a laptop and use it at shows. The Copyright legislation states a personalized copy can be made -- it disallows a copy for the purpose of business, e.g., hosts who get paid).
We have reached a time when technology is ahead of legislation, and the use of laptops and copied discs is not policed in Toronto because there is just too many of them; however, there have been occasions where police have visited the bar and the equipment has been taken away, and fines delivered to both the host and the bar.
Food for thought.
-- comment ends--
Now this person wants to hurt the business of CAVS and anyone using electronic media or at least scare them. (Basically anyone who has potentially a technical advantage over them). I've been called at my very home by people playing these games and I'm sick of this nonsense so I'm putting this to bed right now. Here is a quote from an article on this subject:
"[I]t is not an infringement for the owner of a copy of a computer program to make or authorize the making of another copy or adaptation of that computer program provided ... that such new copy or adaptation is for archival purposes only and that all archival copies are destroyed in the event that continued possession of the computer program should cease to be rightful."
"That is, the owner of the Karaoke CDG, whether a professional who performs or hosts public shows or a private individual, is not trying to profit from copying and reselling the CDG. They are either backing up the content of the CDG, or simply moving the content from the CDG format to a Hard Drive format (for example) for ease and efficiency of use."
you can download the FULL article here in PDF format:
Karaoke Legal Info
The professionals are well aware of what is needed to be compliant so to people trying to cripple their competition with legal scare tactics: bugger off! Something else to people who are trying to poison use of laptops by the karaoke community: CDG's are NOT the primary method of selling Karaoke media: The primary method is now MP3+G and you can buy professional karaoke licenses for those for the purposes of use in karaoke pubs which are more expensive than the standard price. So the above comment by this karaoke KJ company is not only as out of date as it claims the laws are in relation to technology, it is not even accurate. What I am told over and over when I ask what is actually required is proof of licensing. "License" is the key word (as well as purpose of conversion according to letter and spirit of the law). I must stress this comment is not a legal opinion, and these Karaoke DJs are NOT lawyers. I am familiar with the few police raids and these were cases of blatant piracy: Someone had been buying CDGs and make multiple copies and selling (distributing) them to multiple business. I trust we are all clear on the subject now.
To any professional Karaoke DJ's (and we are only talking about one or two bad apples so far) trying to use my blog to scare or hurt their colleagues a strong warning (note I am not a lawyer): If you give ANY legal opinion and you are not a lawyer you can be charged and convicted for giving legal advice. (Paralegals have had a FUN time with this recently) So let me make this CLEAR: Anyone submitting legal information to me who is not a lawyer can have that comment removed. If they are Karaoke DJ's this goes double. I may feel like consulting my own lawyers on whether legal action is warranted. If any of you think you have a legal case against a colleague, call the RCMP. I'll be furthering my own research through lawyers on any potential issues. However, this is NOT a blog to be used for legal references. I always recommend consulting a lawyer, and preferably a specialist in the subject.
On a separate note lawyers should be consulted even with "simple" full time jobs contracts. Believe me...I'm glad I've consulted lawyers on employment agreements as recent contracts have slimy and sneaky clauses which I've had removed (and job offers not withdrawn). Legally (I am not a lawyer but I've been told be several lawyers directly), you have the right to take reasonable time for a lawyer to review any contract.