Jump to content

Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

- - - - -

A Theory (Crackpot as it may be)

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
5 replies to this topic

#1 of 6 OFFLINE   Kevin/M



  • 49 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2005

Posted June 20 2005 - 12:44 PM

Yes, We've all heard about the music clearances issued that have plaguedf quite a few DVD's (And in the Case of Space Ghost Coast to Coast, Guest Clearances Posted Image ), but i have a theory that at least a little of the the Music Industry's holding out for some titles might have been caused the ongoing Music Pirascy/P2p Issue, and the prominence of Napster and Kazaa from a few years back). I figure that the Music Industry might have wanted to idsh out a subtle punishment for the piracy of their music by choosing not to clear some titles so the DVD comapnies can release them. Call it Crackpot, call it conspiracy, call it far-fetched if you will, but it can't be ruled out completely

#2 of 6 OFFLINE   TravisR


    Studio Mogul

  • 22,316 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted June 20 2005 - 12:55 PM

Yeah but they are losing a chance to make up some money that they are losing to piracy. What would make them want to 'punish' DVD companies? Especially when some of them are owned by the same parent company.

Like you said, it can't be ruled out completely but almost nothing can be ruled out completelyPosted Image

#3 of 6 OFFLINE   Kyle McKnight

Kyle McKnight


  • 2,515 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 08 2001

Posted June 20 2005 - 01:32 PM

I'd think it's about as close to impossible as you could get.
Kyle McKnight

#4 of 6 OFFLINE   Mike*SC


    Second Unit

  • 260 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 20 2005

Posted June 21 2005 - 01:51 AM

Can't be ruled out completely? Well, proving a negative is generally impossible. I can't rule out completely that there are invisible giraffes living in my underwear, but I can be pretty certain there aren't.

Remember, the music "industry" is in fact many labels, each run by many individuals. They do not act in unison. But they are united in one goal: they want to make money. The notion that each of these labels would act in the same mysterious way -- a way that runs counter to profit -- as an act of vengeance makes no sense at all. Further, they have never been secretive about their fight against piracy. So why would they engage in a secret (er... "subtle") act of revenge when virtually nobody would be aware of why they are doing it?

Also realize that songs can be controlled by a variety of entities. Depending on the contractual sitiuation, a composer or lyricist can put the kybosh on a clearance deal if he wants more money... or simply doesn't want to sell his song.

And finally, music rights clearance issues have been around for years and years... they predate Napster and all the other file sharing programs by decades. These issues have prevented the release of compilation LPs and CDs, VHS releases, and production on scenes in movies. Were these rights denials an act of pre-revenge for possible file sharing if ever an internet were invented? Well, you can't rule it out completely. But really, you can.

#5 of 6 OFFLINE   Kevin/M



  • 49 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 18 2005

Posted June 21 2005 - 02:33 AM

Notice how i said that Music Piracy could play at least a small part in the matter. I didn't say it singlehandedly caused it (and notice how i said it was a theory, not a fact)

True, But the necessity for Clearances skyrocketed to it's current maginutde with the TV-on-DVD boom, which was overlapped with/happened almost immediately after the famous Music Piracy lawsuits. MY Theory is that the Music Labels could have seen this boom (and the studios at the door trying to get clearances) as a way to send everyone the message that Music Piracy could cause a problem .
Also, The Music Labels could've asked more more money to compensate for the money lost from Piracy and attendant lawsuits

#6 of 6 OFFLINE   MatthewA



  • 6,308 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 2000
  • Real Name:Matthew
  • LocationSalinas, CA

Posted June 21 2005 - 08:22 AM

I thought they used lawsuits and prison time to punish music pirates. Posted Image

Anyway, I was wondering that they may be using the same cost models for music licensing of TV shows on DVD that they use for movies; thus if one were to license "Strangers in the Night" for a movie, it would cost $20,000, while an episode of a TV series using the same song would also shell out $20,000 for the song. Ad about 20 or 30 more songs and you've got about half the allotted budget for a release going to pay for music.

Enough is enough, Disney. No more evasions or excuses. We DEMAND the release Song of the South on Blu-ray along with the uncut version of Bedknobs and Broomsticks on Blu-ray. I am going to boycott The Walt Disney Company until then.