Music Licensing = TV on DVD Suffering (Article)
12-28-05, 06:02 PM
#1
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Music Licensing = TV on DVD Suffering (Article)
Taken from ARStechnica:
How TV shows on DVD suffer from music licensing
12/28/2005 3:33:49 PM, by Anders Bylund
Buoyed by the success of the DVD versions of shows such as Family Guy and The Simpsons, TV shows are repackaged for DVD release in increasing numbers these days, and the phenomenon of having entire seasons of our favorite shows available in a convenient format like a boxed set has been blamed in part for the decline in movie theater ticket sales this year. But it's not just a matter of slapping the masters onto a disc, designing some menus, and shipping out the finished product. The Hollywood Reporter reports, appropriately enough, on the impact that copyright considerations and license fees are having on DVD releases of content, new or old.
Thanks to the limitless generosity fiscal acuity of the record labels, coupled with copyright extention after copyright extention, the good folks who handle DVD releases are often faced with a tough choice in the face of demands from copyright holders on old songs: raise the product price to compensate for licensing fees, rescore parts or all of the release, or don't build a DVD at all. The outcomes, then, are American Dreams: Season 1, Extended Music Edition for US$89, or Crime Story without Del Shannon's Runaway in the intro, or no WKRP in Cincinnati boxed set at all.
While the HR story is a good read, it fails to make a couple of important connections. First of all, the licensing fee won't go away, even if the DVD format does. In yet another example of how the entertainment industry is built on the concept of charging us for the same content over and over again, new fees will be waged and then passed on to consumers for the next-gen DVD version, and again when online delivery obsoletes all those discs. Will the final incarnation of the Around the Beatles show be stripped of all Beatles songs, or will I need to hock my spleen to afford it? And let's remember who really profits from the fees levied. Hint: it's rarely the artists and composers. At least one movie studio has itself to blame if their next DVD release is hampered by licensing issues. Have you noticed how copyright terms seem to get extended by a few years every time Mickey Mouse is close to going public domain?
When the aftermarket for music is enjoying such a drastic increase in value, it affects not only the re-release market. The numbers on the price tag tick up for other uses as well, since the providers now have to consider the possibility that their content might get reused in ways not even thought up yet. A license covering all possible uses will naturally be more expensive than one for a limited-run TV show plus syndication. It's bad enough that our precious entertainment is hamstrung by these issues, but some of the effects are more wide-ranging than that. We have already discussed how licensing problems and copyright are placing restraints on the educational system, public education, and even on the legacy we leave for our descendants to ponder. All in the name of making a buck off (mostly) old songs.
Anyway, since we can rock the Orbiting HQ with Joan Jett's Bad Reputation off the Freaks and Geeks DVD just as hard as if we put on the eponymous CD, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised to get overcharged for the pleasure. The original show's contract probably had stipulations for syndication use and the like, but the full-season-on-DVD concept hasn't been around for that long, and I suppose it's only fair for the music owners to expect a cut of the action. The question is, how much should they ask for? It's not particularly profitable to make the fees so high that the product is never made, and the licensing becomes purely academic. And the record industry is being doubly foolish here: if there's a great song attached to a successful show, and then to a popular DVD release of the same, I'm willing to bet cash money that there will be a spike in the song's sales as well, be it through a freshly released official soundtrack, back catalog titles, or iTunes. A hard-headed nickel-and-dime mentality is edging out an intelligent, respectful attitude to the fair use allowances in the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8. Do we need any more evidence that the entertainment industry could use a smacking with a huge clue bat?
Link:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051228-5859.html
How TV shows on DVD suffer from music licensing
12/28/2005 3:33:49 PM, by Anders Bylund
Buoyed by the success of the DVD versions of shows such as Family Guy and The Simpsons, TV shows are repackaged for DVD release in increasing numbers these days, and the phenomenon of having entire seasons of our favorite shows available in a convenient format like a boxed set has been blamed in part for the decline in movie theater ticket sales this year. But it's not just a matter of slapping the masters onto a disc, designing some menus, and shipping out the finished product. The Hollywood Reporter reports, appropriately enough, on the impact that copyright considerations and license fees are having on DVD releases of content, new or old.
Thanks to the limitless generosity fiscal acuity of the record labels, coupled with copyright extention after copyright extention, the good folks who handle DVD releases are often faced with a tough choice in the face of demands from copyright holders on old songs: raise the product price to compensate for licensing fees, rescore parts or all of the release, or don't build a DVD at all. The outcomes, then, are American Dreams: Season 1, Extended Music Edition for US$89, or Crime Story without Del Shannon's Runaway in the intro, or no WKRP in Cincinnati boxed set at all.
While the HR story is a good read, it fails to make a couple of important connections. First of all, the licensing fee won't go away, even if the DVD format does. In yet another example of how the entertainment industry is built on the concept of charging us for the same content over and over again, new fees will be waged and then passed on to consumers for the next-gen DVD version, and again when online delivery obsoletes all those discs. Will the final incarnation of the Around the Beatles show be stripped of all Beatles songs, or will I need to hock my spleen to afford it? And let's remember who really profits from the fees levied. Hint: it's rarely the artists and composers. At least one movie studio has itself to blame if their next DVD release is hampered by licensing issues. Have you noticed how copyright terms seem to get extended by a few years every time Mickey Mouse is close to going public domain?
When the aftermarket for music is enjoying such a drastic increase in value, it affects not only the re-release market. The numbers on the price tag tick up for other uses as well, since the providers now have to consider the possibility that their content might get reused in ways not even thought up yet. A license covering all possible uses will naturally be more expensive than one for a limited-run TV show plus syndication. It's bad enough that our precious entertainment is hamstrung by these issues, but some of the effects are more wide-ranging than that. We have already discussed how licensing problems and copyright are placing restraints on the educational system, public education, and even on the legacy we leave for our descendants to ponder. All in the name of making a buck off (mostly) old songs.
Anyway, since we can rock the Orbiting HQ with Joan Jett's Bad Reputation off the Freaks and Geeks DVD just as hard as if we put on the eponymous CD, I suppose we shouldn't be surprised to get overcharged for the pleasure. The original show's contract probably had stipulations for syndication use and the like, but the full-season-on-DVD concept hasn't been around for that long, and I suppose it's only fair for the music owners to expect a cut of the action. The question is, how much should they ask for? It's not particularly profitable to make the fees so high that the product is never made, and the licensing becomes purely academic. And the record industry is being doubly foolish here: if there's a great song attached to a successful show, and then to a popular DVD release of the same, I'm willing to bet cash money that there will be a spike in the song's sales as well, be it through a freshly released official soundtrack, back catalog titles, or iTunes. A hard-headed nickel-and-dime mentality is edging out an intelligent, respectful attitude to the fair use allowances in the US Constitution, Article 1, Section 8. Do we need any more evidence that the entertainment industry could use a smacking with a huge clue bat?
Link:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20051228-5859.html
Last edited by Identify; 12-28-05 at 06:05 PM.
