Article: Facing the music: Legal hurdles can keep TV shows from coming out on DVD
12-01-03, 12:48 AM
#1
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
Article: Facing the music: Legal hurdles can keep TV shows from coming out on DVD
Just thought you guys might be interested in reading this: http://www.startribune.com/stories/389/4230496.html
12-01-03, 02:14 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 795
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RIAA is run by lunatics
Let's say a studio offers $1,000,000 for music rights. RIAA, greedy monopolists that they are, says "$2,000,000 and not a penny less". That's too much, so the DVD doesn't get done.
Let's look at the RIAA's results. Remember, they weren't offered the choice between $1,000,000 or $2,000,000. They were offered $1,000,000 or nothing. Apparently, RIAA thinks that their copyright owners would be better served by $0 than by $1,000,000. That is mysterious, to say the least; RIAA's cut of $0 is $0, so you'd think they have some incentive to make a deal even if it's only to profit themselves.
The other weird thing is that the rights being talked about are for (typically) 15-20 year old songs that have long since used up their commercial potential. As such, playing hardline is foolish, since any money you make is likely a big improvement over what you're making now.
Let's look at the RIAA's results. Remember, they weren't offered the choice between $1,000,000 or $2,000,000. They were offered $1,000,000 or nothing. Apparently, RIAA thinks that their copyright owners would be better served by $0 than by $1,000,000. That is mysterious, to say the least; RIAA's cut of $0 is $0, so you'd think they have some incentive to make a deal even if it's only to profit themselves.
The other weird thing is that the rights being talked about are for (typically) 15-20 year old songs that have long since used up their commercial potential. As such, playing hardline is foolish, since any money you make is likely a big improvement over what you're making now.
12-01-03, 07:23 AM
#5
DVD Talk Hero
Thread Starter
And, in a related article: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969483191630
Looks like the Rolling Stones are going to let the Farrelly Brothers use their tune "Wild Horses" in the upcoming movie "Stuck on You," but they won't let them include the song on the DVD.
They're "concerned" about DVDs?
How it will be done in fifteen years? Christ, they're going to be eighty in fifteen years.
Do you know why the music industry has had to deal with piracy on P2P networks these past few years?
Because they deserve it
Looks like the Rolling Stones are going to let the Farrelly Brothers use their tune "Wild Horses" in the upcoming movie "Stuck on You," but they won't let them include the song on the DVD.
"The Rolling Stones agreed to let us use it, but their concern was with the use of the song in perpetuity," Farrelly said. "Because they don't know what's to become of movies in five or 10 years. They're very concerned with DVDs now. They don't really know how it will be done in 15 years. So they were reluctant to sign off on the rights to that song in perpetuity.
"So we get to use that song in the movie, but when it comes out on video, we have to put a new song in there ... that's the best deal we could get."
"So we get to use that song in the movie, but when it comes out on video, we have to put a new song in there ... that's the best deal we could get."
How it will be done in fifteen years? Christ, they're going to be eighty in fifteen years.
Do you know why the music industry has had to deal with piracy on P2P networks these past few years?
Because they deserve it
12-01-03, 07:35 AM
#6
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: The War Room
Posts: 1,442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Josh-da-man
Because they deserve it
Because they deserve it
The Stones are notoriously snarky about letting anyone use their songs, for anything. Cover versions, samples...they make you pay out the nose. I'm more than a little surprised that they are going to do this much.
12-01-03, 07:48 AM
#7
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In most cases, it's not the RIAA that's the problem with clearing music rights for DVDs. It's ASCAP.
Music publishers--faceless companies that buy and sell the rights to songs like real estate--are largely the cuplrits, not the CD companies. The latter are typically involved only when the performance of an artist has to be cleared as well as the song itself, such as for a variety show.
As an example from the article about the use of the song Nights in White Satin in Wiseguy: It wasn't the record company that held it up, nor the songwriter, the musical group or even the music publisher that had the rights to print songbooks with the tune. It was a music publisher called The Richmond Organization, which owns everything but the actual songbook rights. How many of you have ever heard of that entity?
Repeating what I said in the Home Theater Forum:
To give you an idea of how some of these companies operate, producer Paul Brownstein told me of a Sonny & Cher Show episode that he couldn't air on TV Land because a music publisher wouldn't grant the rights to one song. Sonny Bono wrote the song, owned half of it and personally OK'd its use on the re-aired show. The music publisher that owned the other half (an interest originally owned by producer Phil Spector, who did not write the song) refused to grant permission. So Sonny Bono couldn't air his own song on his own show because of a music publisher that owned half of it!
It's a highly complex issue, and one that few companies want to talk about.
Music publishers--faceless companies that buy and sell the rights to songs like real estate--are largely the cuplrits, not the CD companies. The latter are typically involved only when the performance of an artist has to be cleared as well as the song itself, such as for a variety show.
As an example from the article about the use of the song Nights in White Satin in Wiseguy: It wasn't the record company that held it up, nor the songwriter, the musical group or even the music publisher that had the rights to print songbooks with the tune. It was a music publisher called The Richmond Organization, which owns everything but the actual songbook rights. How many of you have ever heard of that entity?
Repeating what I said in the Home Theater Forum:
To give you an idea of how some of these companies operate, producer Paul Brownstein told me of a Sonny & Cher Show episode that he couldn't air on TV Land because a music publisher wouldn't grant the rights to one song. Sonny Bono wrote the song, owned half of it and personally OK'd its use on the re-aired show. The music publisher that owned the other half (an interest originally owned by producer Phil Spector, who did not write the song) refused to grant permission. So Sonny Bono couldn't air his own song on his own show because of a music publisher that owned half of it!
It's a highly complex issue, and one that few companies want to talk about.
12-01-03, 08:03 AM
#8
My Generosity Is Legendary
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Home of the Golden Snowball
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wiseguy is really a bad example for this article. If you're going to write about a show being unable to get the rights for DVD, they should have picked a show that still had the original rights period. Wiseguy lost them a number of years ago, as anyone who saw the last 2 runs on Court TV can attest to.
12-01-03, 09:29 AM
#10
Suspended
Originally posted by Buck Turgidson
Pretty much my feeling, also.
The Stones are notoriously snarky about letting anyone use their songs, for anything. Cover versions, samples...they make you pay out the nose. I'm more than a little surprised that they are going to do this much.
Pretty much my feeling, also.
The Stones are notoriously snarky about letting anyone use their songs, for anything. Cover versions, samples...they make you pay out the nose. I'm more than a little surprised that they are going to do this much.
Maybe it's different under European law, and since everyone wants to release their songs worldwide, the Stones can use the stricter European law to demand exorbitant sums.
12-01-03, 09:31 AM
#11
DVD Talk Hero
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Hail to the Redskins!
Posts: 25,295
Likes: 0
Received 49 Likes
on
38 Posts
I'm surprised that Family Guy was able to be released on DVD with all of the pop culture references (especially the Disney ones). But then again, there is no gestapo network like ASCAP for TV.
In regards to the comment about "rights for one venue rights for all", that's been argued in front of no less legal authority than the Supreme Court has said that's not the case. And it makes sense. If a copyrighted work is only to air over broadcast, you charge alot less. Posterity costs more.
In regards to the comment about "rights for one venue rights for all", that's been argued in front of no less legal authority than the Supreme Court has said that's not the case. And it makes sense. If a copyrighted work is only to air over broadcast, you charge alot less. Posterity costs more.
12-01-03, 10:20 AM
#12
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: NJ
Posts: 3,337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by wfujosh
I'm surprised that Family Guy was able to be released on DVD with all of the pop culture references (especially the Disney ones). But then again, there is no gestapo network like ASCAP for TV.
I'm surprised that Family Guy was able to be released on DVD with all of the pop culture references (especially the Disney ones). But then again, there is no gestapo network like ASCAP for TV.
That was an interesting article, nothing new really said in it though. I am really torn on the whole thing, some shows rely very heavily on the soundtrack to help convey part fo the story and to take that out might ruin the show somewhat. But OTOH to not have something released on DVD at all would suck too.
I think the studios are doing the right thing (seemingly) by doing this on a case by case basis, not that I agree with some of their decisions.
12-01-03, 11:40 AM
#13
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 1,701
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's been a while since I studied copyright law, but don't songwriters have to let you do covers? If I'm recalling correctly, they can determine who records the first version, but thereafter, anyone else can get a compulsory license.
But I'm hardly an expert, so I could be wildly off base on this.
12-01-03, 11:54 AM
#14
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Posts: 18,295
Received 372 Likes
on
266 Posts
Speaking of The Stones and covers, a few years back there was a network TV special for the release of Mick Jagger's new album, and Britney Spears had just done her cover of "Satisfaction." A little girl asked Mick what he thought of the cover and he said "Anyone can cover a song, they just have to pay for it."
He made it sound like artists can't stop a cover as long as royalties are paid.
Of course, with something like "Bittersweet Symphony," things are a little different.
He made it sound like artists can't stop a cover as long as royalties are paid.
Of course, with something like "Bittersweet Symphony," things are a little different.
12-01-03, 12:07 PM
#16
DVD Talk Legend
rasalas is dead-on. The RIAA has nothing to do with it.
Often young bands make their most money by selling off their publishing rights to their songs. That is where the real money is: music publishing, not in recordings.
One of the reasons that David Bowie is one of the richest rock stars is that he has retained all his publishing.
For example, Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to the Beatles catalog, so he can approve the use of their songs, not Paul McCartney or Yoko Ono.
Often young bands make their most money by selling off their publishing rights to their songs. That is where the real money is: music publishing, not in recordings.
One of the reasons that David Bowie is one of the richest rock stars is that he has retained all his publishing.
For example, Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to the Beatles catalog, so he can approve the use of their songs, not Paul McCartney or Yoko Ono.
12-01-03, 12:14 PM
#17
DVD Talk Platinum Edition
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Chicago
Posts: 3,688
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Jadzia
For example, Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to the Beatles catalog, so he can approve the use of their songs, not Paul McCartney or Yoko Ono.
For example, Michael Jackson owns the publishing rights to the Beatles catalog, so he can approve the use of their songs, not Paul McCartney or Yoko Ono.
12-01-03, 12:19 PM
#18
DVD Talk Limited Edition
The Stones song I am Waiting is in the movie Rushmore but not on the soundtrack. I believe it was the only song in the movie but not included. Probably due to their stinginess.
You would think people would want the music re-circulated. I've tracked down numbers of songs over the years that I heard in movies or tv shows.
You would think people would want the music re-circulated. I've tracked down numbers of songs over the years that I heard in movies or tv shows.
12-01-03, 03:32 PM
#19
Senior Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Lexington, Ky USA
Posts: 720
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Josh-da-man
And, in a related article: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969483191630
Looks like the Rolling Stones are going to let the Farrelly Brothers use their tune "Wild Horses" in the upcoming movie "Stuck on You," but they won't let them include the song on the DVD.
They're "concerned" about DVDs?
How it will be done in fifteen years? Christ, they're going to be eighty in fifteen years.
Do you know why the music industry has had to deal with piracy on P2P networks these past few years?
Because they deserve it
And, in a related article: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969483191630
Looks like the Rolling Stones are going to let the Farrelly Brothers use their tune "Wild Horses" in the upcoming movie "Stuck on You," but they won't let them include the song on the DVD.
They're "concerned" about DVDs?
How it will be done in fifteen years? Christ, they're going to be eighty in fifteen years.
Do you know why the music industry has had to deal with piracy on P2P networks these past few years?
Because they deserve it
12-01-03, 03:51 PM
#20
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Right Behind You
Posts: 4,986
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ruby Tuesday is in The Royal Tenenbaums and on the DVD. The music industry is quite possibly the worst industry in America its a shame that music rights is what holds up these releases when it matters almost nothing. I guess this is why I'll never see That 70s Show on DVD.
12-01-03, 04:20 PM
#21
ASCAP collects royalties on behalf of songwriters and publishers who choose to be members of ASCAP. ASCAP does not negotiate the rights to use music in TV shows or anywhere else.
The right to use music is controlled the holders of the rights to the music whether it be the original songwriter and publisher or whoever currently owns the song.
ASCAP does not collect royalties on songs that are played in a private home whether it is a CD or in a TV show on DVD.
If the TV show appears on TV on a local station or cable, if the show contains ASCAP music, then the local station or cable network pays ASCAP, not the DVD producer.
Again ASCAP collects royalties on the public performance of music by its members
The right to use music is controlled the holders of the rights to the music whether it be the original songwriter and publisher or whoever currently owns the song.
ASCAP does not collect royalties on songs that are played in a private home whether it is a CD or in a TV show on DVD.
If the TV show appears on TV on a local station or cable, if the show contains ASCAP music, then the local station or cable network pays ASCAP, not the DVD producer.
Again ASCAP collects royalties on the public performance of music by its members
12-01-03, 04:36 PM
#22
DVD Talk Legend
Originally posted by EPKJ
I actually think the studios should sue, and argue that rights are granted for the production and showing of an episode in all venues. They might win.
I actually think the studios should sue, and argue that rights are granted for the production and showing of an episode in all venues. They might win.
That's one of the major problems... in many cases, the contracts SPECIFICALLY state where rights are granted. And, for many of these shows, it was simply for TV airings as the article mentions.
12-01-03, 08:45 PM
#23
Senior Member
Originally posted by Upper pylon 3
If I were the Farrelly Bros. I wouldn't use the song at all then. If I had to upset the fans who bought the dvd by changing the song or pay out the ass to include it, I wouldn't put it in the movie in the first place.
If I were the Farrelly Bros. I wouldn't use the song at all then. If I had to upset the fans who bought the dvd by changing the song or pay out the ass to include it, I wouldn't put it in the movie in the first place.
It's just like Happy Birthday in Wallace and Gromit, it turns a funny moment into a mad one for me.
12-01-03, 09:35 PM
#24
DVD Talk Special Edition
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Minneapolis, MN
Posts: 1,277
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Classic Films is correct. ASCAP is more the organization that governs most of the music publishers. You can go to ASCAP's web site (www.ascap.org) and look up just about any song to see who owns the rights. In most cases, that is the entity that is demanding a certain fee to use the song on DVDs of TV shows.
