The Cost of Music Licensing

[Opie Cunningham]

This article specifically concerns the DVD release of WKRP in Cincinnati, but by reading it, you can get the idea of how much it costs to get the rights to a song.

It's ridiculous, but from the figures, 20 songs at $40,000 each would be $800,000!

http://www.startribune.com/459/story/1131165.html

[Edster2973]

Originally Posted by Opie Cunningham

This article specifically concerns the DVD release of WKRP in Cincinnati, but by reading it, you can get the idea of how much it costs to get the rights to a song.

It's ridiculous, but from the figures, 20 songs at $40,000 each would be $800,000!

http://www.startribune.com/459/story/1131165.html

It is astronomical and out of whack, and I personally don't blame the DVD companies at all. Do some of you have any idea how many sets they'd have to sell in order to just break out even? And we're talking only the costs for the music. How about the rights just to sell the show? What costs are involved in remastering, editing, and packaging?

I say we're damn lucky for what we've been given. I agree it's not as perfect as it should be, but at least it shows that they're trying. I personally would rather have the shows in altered format than not at all. I respect others who feel differently, but at the very least, open your eyes and see that Paramount is not the villain here. They're not the ones to be blamed. They could have just decided to not release anything at all.

At least they made the effort...


Ed

[RootBeerRag]

This is also my feeling on the subject. It does suck, but I don't really feel that the DVD distributors are the ones to blame. Blame greedy record labels and artists.. As some others have pointed out, it would be a way for the artists to get some of these ancient songs promoted again, but they're making the choice to continue to keep their songs in the dark.. It's a situation where no one ultimately wins, and it really doesn't make any sense. DVD distributors aren't going to pay the outrageous licensing fees/royalties; so, the labels/artists sitting on the copyrights(for greed)aren't going to see a dime this way, and we aren't going to get the songs that helped set the tone for so many different televison shows.

In an attempt to be somewhat open to both sides, I do think they could have at least featured "Rock Around The Clock" as the opening theme, and paid for the use of "Jingle Bells" in the Christmas episode. If they were able to use "Rock Around The Clock" on the season one set, I don't see why it couldn't have been here; especially considering it was a rerecording for the series. I know there would still be royalties to pay, but it wouldn't be as expensive as using the original song(at least I wouldn't think).

[Edster2973]

Originally Posted by RootBeerRag

In an attempt to be somewhat open to both sides, I do think they could have at least featured "Rock Around The Clock" as the opening theme, and paid for the use of "Jingle Bells" in the Christmas episode. If they were able to use "Rock Around The Clock" on the season one set, I don't see why it couldn't have been here; especially considering it was a rerecording for the series. I know there would still be royalties to pay, but it wouldn't be as expensive as using the original song(at least I wouldn't think).

Perhaps there's more to the story. From what I hear, Paramount lost big time with the release of Season 1, so perhaps they were pinching pennies as much as they could as to not only guarantee a profit from sales on Season 2, but to also help make back what they lost (which was huge!) on Season 1. I know Married With Children also had to get a new theme song too for its DVD releases.

I'm sure the expense of paying for the theme song isn't worth it the older a series gets on DVD. It's a fact that the earlier seasons typically sell way more than the later seasons, and since Season 1 wasn't that big to begin with, they probably figured they needed to cut whatever corners they could to ensure there's a commercial reason (in other words profits) to continue with the series. Even with the way things are now, Paramount isn't even guaranteed to break out even, let alone make a profit. Odds are still good that they'll be seeing a loss on their investment, yet people still moan and groan. It's a no-win situation for all involved.

I have this notion that Paramount is proud of Happy Days and wants to honor it the best way possible, but they can't be stupid and do it in a way that guarantees mega-losses on their end. I also think they want to please the fans as well. They just have to cut corners to do so. If one of those corners happens to be the theme song, so be it. At least the alternate theme song is actually associated with the show and isn't something entirely new that no one has heard before. Things could be a lot worse for sure...


Ed

[AB]

When the music was used in the originial taping of the show wasn't it paid for then? Why do they have to keep paying for it over & over again? Just curious about it!

[Edster2973]

Originally Posted by annball1957

When the music was used in the originial taping of the show wasn't it paid for then? Why do they have to keep paying for it over & over again? Just curious about it!

Again, I'm not sure, but if it was already bought and paid for, surely they would've used it? I think it's safe to assume that they wouldn't have let their "lease" of the original theme song go to waste.

I don't claim to know the ins and the outs but I do think they're trying their best in a no-win crappy situation. For that they deserve kudos...


Ed

[studd911]

i am so pissed that paramount did a poor job on season 2 i am telling you, nobody is going to buy season 2 especially with all of the scenes an music replace, we have been waiting a long time and this is what they give us, i bet they got a lot of letters with complaints they could spend billions of dollers on networks and not the music rights they should have dealt with the music issues first again it makes no sense to see hd2 in the quailty that it is in, people want to see the show as it was on abc i will be shocked if season 2 does well but not to many people are going to buy it, we have to tell it like it is again paramount has to take a lot of blame for this because they do not commercial advertise there dvd's the brady bunch did well when they commerical advertised it s did andy graffith again there is no excuse i am not buying seaon 2 especailly of years of waiting its not worth and paramount is the blame if season two does not do well because i bet you right now some fans are ruturning the season 2 dvd sets back because of the picture quailty nobody is going to buy that product that incomplete paramount has really let the fans down and let themelves down, and i bet you all garry marshal is pissed but what can he really do about it nothing, if paramount gets lots of letters and complaints do you believe they will be able to re-released season 2 with all of the missing music an scenes or do you think that the damages has been already done

[Zoneboy]

Originally Posted by RootBeerRag

In an attempt to be somewhat open to both sides, I do think they could have at least featured "Rock Around The Clock" as the opening theme, and paid for the use of "Jingle Bells" in the Christmas episode. If they were able to use "Rock Around The Clock" on the season one set, I don't see why it couldn't have been here; especially considering it was a rerecording for the series. I know there would still be royalties to pay, but it wouldn't be as expensive as using the original song(at least I wouldn't think).

Jingle Bells has been in the public domain for years and unless there's something I'm unaware of, No royalties would have been required to use the song.

[Edster2973]

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Jingle Bells has been in the public domain for years and unless there's something I'm unaware of, No royalties would have been required to use the song.

That's not necessarily true. It sometimes depends on who is singing what song and who arranged it (by "arranged" I mean how the song is performed and in what style and so forth). "Jingle Bells", if done by a popular artist or arranged by a popular artist, would most suredly have to have royalties paid.

Again, I don't know all of what went down with Paramount, but it's common sense to think that any music they could've used that didn't require huge amounts of $$, they most suredly would've used. I don't think they picked songs at random to leave out.

For instance, "White Christmas" was left off of Season 1 of The Mary Tyler Moore Show and that was sung by Mary herself. FOX didn't do the first season cheap either. They went all out with the packaging and the extras. But the amount required to pay for "White Christmas" must've been pretty hefty for FOX to pass on.

Songs in the public domain or not exempt. If a show does a country version of "Jingle Bells", then somewhere, someone arranged a country version of it. That person and its company has legal right to be paid royalties for that song. If another show that same year features "Jingle Bells" and does it in a jazz style, then again, someone somewhere arranged that jazz style and has legal right for royalties. This is true even if a show's cast does the singing and not some famous recording artist. It's a sticky situation.

Nowadays, the newer shows work out these rights before the episode even airs because DVD sales are factored into the deals, but this was not the case back in the day of Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley, where the DVD didn't exist yet and some of the public didn't even own a VCR.

Sadly, until the royalty holders realize they stand to gain nothing by charging huge fees for use of their music, the situation will not get better. Part of the problem is that some of the royalty holders do get part of what they charge because some companies do try to include *some* of the original music. Paramount did pay hefty fees for Season 1 of both Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley, only to have marginal sales and no profits whatsoever.

They are trying to please fans of these shows but they're caught between a rock and a hard place. Fans shouldn't expect Paramount to be obligated to pay these huge fees (or even release more seasons) simply because of the show's TV heritage. They do respect their TV past and want to do right by them, but they shouldn't be expected to do it at such a great loss to them. And it was a great loss. Not only did they not make a profit or break out even, their loss wasn't marginal but HUGE. And yet here they are, continuiing to release a Season 2 set of both shows and still people continue to moan and groan that Paramount doesn't care.

I think some fans need to "sit on it"...


Ed

[robyrob]

to say that Paramount/CBS is faultless in this situation is ridiculous.

- they made loyal fans wait 2-1/2 YEARS for this second season release; if acquiring the music rights and fixing sound and video problems weren't being worked on, then WHAT WAS THE HOLD UP?

- they list this set at $38.99 - if they saved themselves HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars by not acquiring the music rights, why are they still shafting us with the high price tag?

- yes it is the greedy holders of the music rights that are holding these DVD sets hostage, but who are we kidding here - ALL OF THESE COMPANIES WORK TOGETHER ALL OF THE TIME. How many of these artists' music licenses are held by Paramount, FOX, Sony and others? They can't cut THEMSELVES a break for one of their own projects? If some other, albeit competing, company holds the rights to a song they need, they can't make a deal for some other song that they DO hold the rights for?

it just seems to me that they really didn't try very hard AT ALL to put any effort into Season Two - its almost as if they are saying "well, sales for the set we put everything into were low, so lets see how bad they get if we don't put ANYTHING into this one..."

...and the better this one sells, the less likely it will be that we see any music in any future Paramount/CBS season sets.

[Zoneboy]

Sorry, Ed. Any song that is in the public domain can be recorded and sold by anyone who chooses to do so. If I wanted to record a country version of Jingle Bells and sell it then I could do so without fear of repercussion. Of course nobody in their right mind would buy it but I'm just making a point.

Even if the arrangement is different and no matter if it's recorded by someone famous or not, Public Domain is still just that. Toby Keith could record a country version of Jingle Bells and his record company could release it and legally sell it but since the song is PD, That also makes it legal for anyone else to use it in any capacity they see fit. He can record the song and receive royalties from any sales but since he nor his record co. own the actual rights to the song then that makes it legal for anyone else to download, sell it etc.....

I'm certainly no expert on these things but I do know someone who is a Law expert and I'm sure he'll be glad to let me know if I'm right or wrong. If by chance I am mistaken then I will apologize to you in advance and while you're at it, Why don't you see if you can find someone or something that backs up what you said. If you can prove that I'm wrong then fine but I doubt I am.

[studd911]

i agree 100 percent with roby about paramount making us waite 2-1 1/2 years for season 2 release i have said a couple of times on this thread that paramount rather invest billions of dollers on other compaines rather then to try to get the music rights. and without the original music we do not get to see the original deleted scenes that was cut in syndication, we all have said occassionally that we wanted to finally get to see and hear all of the original music and plus the deleted scenes, and i have said time and time again, that when season one of happy days came out, they should have commercial advertise it and that way we would have seen the rest of the seasons but to me, all paramount wants to do is putting a product out there without working on it, and i cannot stress this enough, that is why season one did not do as well because they do not commercialized there dvd's as much, happy days laverne an shirley an mork an mindy where classic and again there is no excuse for the lack of work that they did on season 2, and i really feel sorry for them because the fans are not going to pay money for something that is not complete it does not make sense, an people who says that the replacement generic music is not so bad to listen too, to me it is because we have been hearing replacement music on syndication, its said to say it but its true, i thank god for tj an pava for posting up the reviews and if anybody believes that we will see season 3 i got news for you all we won't because i no for a fact season 2 will not sell if it does then i will be shocked, we have to be real her how many loyal fans do you think is sending complaint letters and calls to paramount again no excuess, there are alot of things that they should have addressed but they fail, too but trust me season 2 will not do as we all think that it will

[Edster2973]

Originally Posted by robyrob

to say that Paramount/CBS is faultless in this situation is ridiculous.

- they made loyal fans wait 2-1/2 YEARS for this second season release; if acquiring the music rights and fixing sound and video problems weren't being worked on, then WHAT WAS THE HOLD UP?

There was no hold up. Plans for any future releases were actually CANCELLED since there was such a huge loss. Why would they put the shows back on a release schedule when it was such a financial loss to begin with? There was also a buyout or merger of sorts within the company and that delayed a lot of other projects. Such is life.

What some of you fail to understand is that Paramount doesn't owe you or me a bloody thing. They're not obligated at all to even release more seasons, let alone altered versions. It seems that some argue that, because of a long wait, that somehow makes them liable to spend more $$ on music licensing than they should. How do you figure that?

Leave It to Beaver is a classic show, although it's one I don't have any interest in. Suppose that show was a financial burden for a company to release. Should the company that owns the show be obligated to release season sets when they don't even make a profit? As much as I respect TV heritage, I as a company surely wouldn't care to release more seasons of Leave It to Beaver if it's a guaranteed financial loss. It's just business sense. (By the way, I have no idea the situation surrounding Leave It to Beaver. I'm just using that as an example)

Originally Posted by robyrob

- they list this set at $38.99 - if they saved themselves HUNDREDS of THOUSANDS of dollars by not acquiring the music rights, why are they still shafting us with the high price tag?

That is merely the suggested retail price. Lots of stores sell it for much less. Mine, for instance, sold for $27. But just because some of the music fees were avoided doesn't mean there weren't other expenses. I'm almost done watching my Laverne & Shirley Season 2 set and I have to be honest with you, I've never seen the episodes look better. There surely was some restoration involved as well as acquiring the rights to sell the shows on DVD. There are always other expenses involved, things we're not privvy to, so don't fault them for trying to make some money. Wouldn't you do the same thing?

Originally Posted by robyrob

- yes it is the greedy holders of the music rights that are holding these DVD sets hostage, but who are we kidding here - ALL OF THESE COMPANIES WORK TOGETHER ALL OF THE TIME. How many of these artists' music licenses are held by Paramount, FOX, Sony and others? They can't cut THEMSELVES a break for one of their own projects? If some other, albeit competing, company holds the rights to a song they need, they can't make a deal for some other song that they DO hold the rights for?

You're wrong there. Again, it has to do with the artists who recorded the music, and sometimes (if the song is not in the public domain) who wrote the song as well. Then there's the initial publisher of said music too. It's a very convoluted process and it varies from song to song.

Originally Posted by robyrob

it just seems to me that they really didn't try very hard AT ALL to put any effort into Season Two - its almost as if they are saying "well, sales for the set we put everything into were low, so lets see how bad they get if we don't put ANYTHING into this one..."

...and the better this one sells, the less likely it will be that we see any music in any future Paramount/CBS season sets.

You can have that outlook if you want, but seriously, we're very lucky that we're seeing a Season 2 release. The financial losses were that severe on the first sets, so obviously, with a second attempt at selling the DVDs, they're going to be a bit more cautious and a bit more cheap. If the cost of putting the DVDs together is minimized by doing things cheaper, then they don't have to count on the sets selling as much. What other choice do they have other than not releasing anything at all? Would that make you happier? Or do you think the people who manufacture the DVDs should do it for free or next to nothing simply because it's Happy Days and Laverne & Shirley? Would you if you were in their shoes?

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Sorry, Ed. Any song that is in the public domain can be recorded and sold by anyone who chooses to do so. If I wanted to record a country version of Jingle Bells and sell it then I could do so without fear of repercussion.

Of course you can, because it's YOUR version, but if I or a TV show were to take YOUR version of that song and air it on a show where it was central to the plot, you don't think you'd come knocking on my door expecting a cut of the pie? And legally you'd get it and more, simply because the courts frown on people who get screwed out of musical royalties. Look at how many have been sued by the music industry just for downloading songs illegally.

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

Of course nobody in their right mind would buy it but I'm just making a point.

Even if the arrangement is different and no matter if it's recorded by someone famous or not, Public Domain is still just that. Toby Keith could record a country version of Jingle Bells and his record company could release it and legally sell it but since the song is PD, That also makes it legal for anyone else to use it in any capacity they see fit. He can record the song and receive royalties from any sales but since he nor his record co. own the actual rights to the song then that makes it legal for anyone else to download, sell it etc.....

The Carpenters, as an example, have a Christmas album that has been in the "public domain" since 1978 (or thereabouts). You think that a TV show today could turn around and use their recording of, say "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town" and not be expected to pay royalty fees for it? And this is a situation where the lead singer, Karen Carpenter, is dead, but her estate, as well as her brother, Richard Carpenter, would expect a stipend of sorts. Don't you think it'd be the same with any traditional Christmas songs by Elvis Presley or Bruce Springsteen or The Boston Pops?

Originally Posted by Zoneboy

I'm certainly no expert on these things but I do know someone who is a Law expert and I'm sure he'll be glad to let me know if I'm right or wrong. If by chance I am mistaken then I will apologize to you in advance and while you're at it, Why don't you see if you can find someone or something that backs up what you said. If you can prove that I'm wrong then fine but I doubt I am.

Well, I'm not trying to fight with any of you about this. Really, I'm not. I just think some of you have expressed a lot of disdain for these releases and are a bit out of whack over it. Some of you should be so lucky if this is all you've got to be upset about. Honestly, when I think of the ongoing war in Iraq and the recent Virginia Tech Massacre and how many lives have been lost due to both, I merely shrug off things like classic TV not being treated like royalty. It just isn't that important to me that I'm going to make myself sick over this, and I love both shows.

Don't get me wrong. I'm not happy that the music has been changed. I want the shows in their entirety as much as anyone else, but it isn't going to happen. And I can see that it isn't merely the DVD company's fault. Out of respect to some of you, I was trying to explain the other side of the matter. Some of you have been going over the edge, fuming about Paramount as if they're second in line to the Devil. It's a little over the top, no?

Either way, you can all believe what you want, but if some of you want more insight as to what is involved when it comes to music copyright, go to http://www.copyright.gov/ and it will explain all. I have some insight myself since I am a songwriter and have had almost 40 songs of mine copywritten. There are a lot of factors involved when it comes to who is entitled to royalties and what not.

Other than that, I suggest trying to enjoy the sets. If that's not possible, then sell the thing on Ebay or Amazon.com and try to find a bootleg copy of the entire series. You'll end up with the original music, but then you run the risk of only getting syndicated cuts or crappy quality. Or maybe try recording episodes off of TV LAND or some other syndicate. There's plenty of options besides buying a set you're not going to be happy with.

Peace,

Ed

[Zoneboy]

Originally Posted by edster2973

The Carpenters, as an example, have a Christmas album that has been in the "public domain" since 1978 (or thereabouts). You think that a TV show today could turn around and use their recording of, say "Santa Claus Is Coming to Town" and not be expected to pay royalty fees for it?

Of course because Santa Claus is Coming to Town isn't public domain but several of the songs from that Lp are.

[Ireneparalegal]

Originally Posted by annball1957

When the music was used in the originial taping of the show wasn't it paid for then? Why do they have to keep paying for it over & over again? Just curious about it!

Because at that time there was no such thing as VCR's and DVD's. Had they known of DVD's they (the music writers) would have held out for a helluva lot more than they initially did for just the series and the eventual reruns. Now with DVD's, this is their chance to again, get money.