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.

Photo
- - - - -

WKRP In Cincinnati


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
56 replies to this topic

#21 of 57 OFFLINE   Ethan Riley

Ethan Riley

    Producer



  • 3,429 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 12 2005

Posted February 26 2010 - 01:27 PM

Well I have to keep asking--how did FOX manage to get all the original music for all 5 seasons of Ally McBeal? Why can't they do it again?

 

 


#22 of 57 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul



  • 22,825 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted February 26 2010 - 01:29 PM

Originally Posted by Ethan Riley /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Well I have to keep asking--how did FOX manage to get all the original music for all 5 seasons of Ally McBeal? Why can't they do it again?
 

My guess is that Fox had the rights to use alot of the music for later seasons of Ally McBeal but with WKRP, they'd have to start at square one.

#23 of 57 OFFLINE   David Rain

David Rain

    Screenwriter



  • 1,107 posts
  • Join Date: May 07 2005

Posted February 27 2010 - 02:13 AM

On the surface, a complete series set might be nice but there are still problems with that idea.

First, there are some songs that simply cannot be licensed. If the respective owners of certain songs say no then that's that. That alone would immediately result in necessary edits to the series.

Second, even if everything could be cleared the complete set would be insanely expensive and sell very few copies, thus making the entire thing a waste of time, effort and money.

Still Turning the Beat Around at Our Cool New Pad

Retro Remixes

 


#24 of 57 OFFLINE   BobO'Link

BobO'Link

    Screenwriter



  • 1,775 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 2008
  • Real Name:Howie
  • LocationMid-South

Posted February 27 2010 - 07:31 AM

Without knowing *all* the back story it's impossible to say who's truly at fault.  20th for being "too cheap" to license the music or the musicians/management/label unwilling to license a property at a "reasonable" cost, if at all.

I tend to feel most of the blame falls on the musician/management/label faction being the primary hog at the trough with management/label being the biggest hogs.  Historically the music industry charges outrageous fees for licensing.  Almost every time a title is licensed the fee is as if it's the only time anyone will want to use it (ask your local TV/Radio station about "needle drop" fees).  I'm not saying artists don't deserve to be compensated, but it's the label that benefits the most in these deals (just talk to a few musicians about most of these "deals").  20th *knows* they'd have huge sales on a full, no edits, series.  Most people would purchase seasons even with a MSRP of $70-$80 (look at "The Monkees" for comparison).  I know I would.

Unfortunately the people demanding huge licensing fees just can't seem to see the forest for the trees.  By the time licensing deals for this or just about *any* of the major "missing" series finally get worked out there'll be no one left who cares or remembers the shows.

In the end, everyone loses.


#25 of 57 OFFLINE   DeWilson

DeWilson

    Screenwriter



  • 2,108 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 05 2006

Posted February 27 2010 - 08:07 AM

The record lables and publishing companies just haven't adapted to new media, or the use of old media in new media.

I don't know why they don't review each and every WKRP and see which ones can be cleared in it's original form,music and all,and release thoses as a best of set - the appeal, even at a higher price point is the uncut and unedited, 



#26 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted February 27 2010 - 09:32 AM

Don't blame the record labels or the publishing companies, it's not their fault. The problem is that everyone here wants the music companies to cave in to these studios and that is not a solution. These music studios feel that they deserve to get compensated for whatever medium the very music that they have under their label appears on. Since TV on DVD is a very lucrative market, these music studios feel that they deserve to be compensated fairly.

The problem is that everyone is comparing that older music to today's standards. Back then, the music artists whose music appeared on WKRP were new to the industry. However, these days, those artists have majority control over their music. With groups like Supertramp, Led Zeppelin, Bob Seger, Genesis, The Who, Van Halen and many others ... they are now considered the Lord of Rock and Roll, Classic Rock, and that music now comes with a premium.

While I have no doubt that these artists think that their music comes with a premium it's the movie and television studios who want to pay less than nothing for the rights to use that music and don't want to pay those artists. The people that everyone should blame are the writers and directors who decided to saturate every episode with a ton of music ...

I just think that on these forums, there's so much hatred that is uneven and leveled against the music industry when there's not the same unbiased attitude toward the movie studios who refuse to pay the music artists for the work they created which appears in the television shows they want to release. Thing is, the movie studios want that music for free and they don't want to let go any profits they are making from their DVD releases.

The movie studios license music all of the time for movies but when it comes to television shows on DVD, they don't want to do that. I think there's a current attitude of resentment among the movie studios when it comes to music licensing that they've convinced fans of these television shows that music licensing is out of control. While these studios don't want to pay licensing fees for that music they're also on the other foot when it comes to other studios who want to use music that they publish on their TV on DVD releases. Most of these studios are involved in the movie and television business as well as the music business.

#27 of 57 OFFLINE   HenryDuBrow

HenryDuBrow

    Screenwriter



  • 1,355 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 23 2004

Posted February 27 2010 - 09:43 AM

Most fans are fanatical about this show, I don't know of anyone liking it casually or something, that means I'd like to think even at a expensive price they'd all buy it. That's how big the love is for it, in my opinion. Would I pay $150/200+ ? In a second. So why not just skip the huge manufacturing/release process but instead first go on-demand at a price like that, and see what happens... Provided all songs can get cleared, of course.
 /img/vbsmilies/htf/rock.gif">
  
 
Originally Posted by David Rain 

#28 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted February 27 2010 - 01:05 PM

Perhaps I can clear up a few things that may prove some enlighten the issue among the online community.

Point 1: The Movie Studio.
Here we have a studio who wants to release a television series to DVD. Then they discover that the music that was included in the original production of the television series is now considered prime property in the music industry. The studios want to license the music but don't want to impact their profit margin for their own DVD sales.

Point 2: The Music Industry.
Then we have the music artists who created that music back when the television show was being produced. Back then, these music artists were just looking for exposure and that was a time when music licensing wasn't as big an issue as it is today. These days, music licensing costs more than it did back then. Now, that same music is considered "Prime Property" in the world of the music industry. Beachfront Property of the music industry.

Point 3: The Fans.
Between the Movie Industry and the Music Industry, they both have the fans caught in the middle. While we have the music industry who wants to be paid for the work they've created, you also have the movie industry who doesn't want music licensing to cut into their DVD profits and they tend to have the fans on their side who want the original television series uncut and unedited with the original music.

Unfortunately, the movie industry cannot dictate to music artists like Van Halen, Led Zeppelin and Rolling Stones on how much they will pay for the rights to keep their music in that television show that its included in. With WKRP, it's 20th Century Fox who is in a bind. They either pay the licensing fees (which nobody can admit how much they truly are), the movie industry has embarked on a campaign of mistrust against the music industry.

It's just strange how television studios are complaining about music rights when those same studios are paying those self-same licensing fees for big budget theatrical movies that they are producing. Warner Brothers, 20th Century Fox, Universal, Paramount ... they all pay those premium prices for this classic rock music for movies they are producing. Just look at such movies like The Wedding Singer, 50 First Dates, Mr. Deeds, Pretty Woman, My Best Friend's Wedding and The Wedding Planner, which uses music from the 60's through the 80's.

However, when it comes to television shows like WKRP, all of a sudden they have a big problem with paying those same licensing fees. The problem is that studios will not expand the budget for their TV Show DVD releases and that's where the problem lies. If the studios decided to spend more on the budget for producing these TV Shows, they would be paying those music licensing fees.

#29 of 57 OFFLINE   mdnitoil

mdnitoil

    Supporting Actor



  • 783 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 20 2006
  • Real Name:Scott

Posted February 27 2010 - 05:53 PM

Everything made sense except your conclusion.  For a long time now, going back to the late eighties, studios had home video sales included in the music rights contracts for movies.  TV series being sold as home video is a relatively new phenomenon and at no point did studios bother to write it in the contracts.  Quite simply, nobody ever foresaw a time when entire seasons of old TV shows would be a sellable product.  Now they've learned their lesson and are including home video for new television music licenses.  It's got nothing to do with studios expanding the budget and everything to do with the fact that the music rights for movies were already paid for years ago.  In the few cases where a movie does actually need to re-license some music, the studio determines whether the product will still be profitable and acts accordingly.  Plenty of movies out there on DVD without their original music.  Nobody is picking on TV. It's also not all that strange that studios are paying licensing fees for their big budget movie productions.  These movies make hundreds of millions of dollars...each.  A far sight more than any single TV DVD release makes.

#30 of 57 OFFLINE   Theodore J. Mooney

Theodore J. Mooney

    Supporting Actor



  • 538 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2007

Posted February 27 2010 - 06:04 PM

Originally Posted by kemcha /forum/thread/36206/wkrp-in-cincinnati#post_3664794 I wouldn't. I'd just purchase a bootleg copy, remastered, of course ... :P 
 I would too. That's the next best thing.  
Music Video of the Week (Feb. 8th-14th):
 ("Hands To Heaven" sung by Breathe)

"I Love Lucy wasn't just a title" ~ Desi Arnaz
"Desi Arnaz was the love of my life" ~ Lucille Ball

#31 of 57 OFFLINE   Theodore J. Mooney

Theodore J. Mooney

    Supporting Actor



  • 538 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2007

Posted February 27 2010 - 06:07 PM

Originally Posted by derosa /forum/thread/36206/wkrp-in-cincinnati#post_3664784 If i win the lottery this weekend, i'll offer $50 million to fox to get out the dvds within a 30 day period. wish me luck!  
 Well, those are just words my friend. And like the good old saying goes, "actions speak louder than words".  
Music Video of the Week (Feb. 8th-14th):
 ("Hands To Heaven" sung by Breathe)

"I Love Lucy wasn't just a title" ~ Desi Arnaz
"Desi Arnaz was the love of my life" ~ Lucille Ball

#32 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted February 27 2010 - 09:25 PM

Originally Posted by mdnitoil /img/forum/go_quote.gif

Everything made sense except your conclusion.  For a long time now, going back to the late eighties, studios had home video sales included in the music rights contracts for movies.  TV series being sold as home video is a relatively new phenomenon and at no point did studios bother to write it in the contracts.  Quite simply, nobody ever foresaw a time when entire seasons of old TV shows would be a sellable product.  Now they've learned their lesson and are including home video for new television music licenses.  It's got nothing to do with studios expanding the budget and everything to do with the fact that the music rights for movies were already paid for years ago.  In the few cases where a movie does actually need to re-license some music, the studio determines whether the product will still be profitable and acts accordingly.  Plenty of movies out there on DVD without their original music.  Nobody is picking on TV.

It's also not all that strange that studios are paying licensing fees for their big budget movie productions.  These movies make hundreds of millions of dollars...each.  A far sight more than any single TV DVD release makes.
Actually, that is not true. Studios weren't even releasing television shows until the late 80's to early 90's. Not only that, but WKRP was being produced since 1978. Even then, they only licensed music for broadcast rights, not for home video release, which is an altogether different type of licensing fee. Studios didn't start thinking that their television shows would ever be released for the consumer to purchase. Matter of fact, the only way that you could purchase television shows in the 80's was through Columbia House's hoem video program club.

Studios didn't start including music rights in their licensing agreements until the mid-90's. 

#33 of 57 ONLINE   LeoA

LeoA

    Screenwriter



  • 1,261 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2008
  • Real Name:Leo
  • LocationNorth Country

Posted February 28 2010 - 01:14 AM

Did you read what you quoted?

#34 of 57 OFFLINE   derosa

derosa

    Supporting Actor



  • 786 posts
  • Join Date: Feb 04 2009

Posted February 28 2010 - 10:26 AM

Is there a website that lists all the songs used in WKRP?

It makes you wonder how someone places a value on a 10 or 20 second clip of music used in a TV show.
Most if not all of the songs from the show can be purchased from iTunes at .99 a download, and you now own it.  
What price could they charge for a full WRKP set, including downloads of all the songs from iTunes?





#35 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted February 28 2010 - 12:26 PM

Leo, you're still missing the point. When WKRP was being produced, back in the 70's and 80's, the studios only licensed that music for broadcast rights. This meant that they could only use these episodes for broadcasting on television or on network channels. They did not have a license for releasing them on home video or on DVD or Blu-ray. That is something that the studio would need to re-negotiate the rights to the music that appears in those episodes. Problem is that the studios don't feel that they should have to get a new license for distribution on home video and that is what's holding up the release of the series. Despite what many believe, it does not matter how much of a song that they use, they still need a license for it. It doesn't matter how much of a song that they use, they still need a license in order to release it to DVD. It's no different than Universal deciding to take a song from Train's latest album, that was featured in one of Universal's movies, and releasing it to CD without a license. It's also the same if I decided to take a song from Train's new album, created a video of my own creation, embedded the music in my video and uploaded it to YouTube. By Sony's eyes, I would have used that song without permission and without a license. It's the same with these movie studios who want to release their TV shows to DVD. If it contains music that they didn't license for home video release, then they need a license for it. If the studio doesn't want to license that music, then that is a decision that they have decided to make. Don't blame the music industry or the artists that made that music. It all comes down to the movie studio. Since the music industry never lets out how much those licensing fees are, it's inappropriate for anyone to comment one way or the other.

#36 of 57 OFFLINE   BobO'Link

BobO'Link

    Screenwriter



  • 1,775 posts
  • Join Date: May 03 2008
  • Real Name:Howie
  • LocationMid-South

Posted February 28 2010 - 12:54 PM

^^The problem isn't what it'd cost to buy the song on the consumer level.  It's what is wanted/needed to license the song for inclusion in a DVD release.  Depending on the song you can be looking at dealing with several people... The studio, lyricist(s), song writer(s), performer(s), publishing house (for the score), any of which can stop use by refusing to grant a license or by asking an exhorbitant price.  For a song in a TV show (and/or DVD release) you're typically looking at a minimum of 2 licenses before you can use a song.  A Synchronization License and a Master User License.

A Synchronization License allows the reproduction of a musical composition "in connection with" or "in timed relation with" a visual image (Movie, video, TV show, commercial).

For example: You want to use the song, "Pigs on the Wing" in a film, you must first obtain a Synchronization License from the copyright owner of the music.

However, if you want to use the song, "Pigs on the Wing" recorded by Pink Floyd, then you must also obtain a Master Recording License from the copyright owner of the sound recording. This requires two separate negotiations. If you need the master rights, you must always obtain the "Synch" rights as well. You may wish to re-record the song to reduce cost, in which case you will only need the "Synch" rights.

As far as WKRP, there's a very good writeup on tvshowsondvd.com explaining some of the issues they faced bringing this title to DVD.  It's most interesting that Fox wanted to cap the MSRP at $30.  This seems to be the biggest single factor in the majority of the replacements as there was no way to include all that classic music at such a low price point.  Even so, I still place the majority of the blame on the music companies and their archaic way of thinking about music licensing.


#37 of 57 OFFLINE   WillG

WillG

    Producer



  • 5,237 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2003

Posted February 28 2010 - 06:02 PM


Quote:
I wouldn't. I'd just purchase a bootleg copy, remastered, of course ... :P
The reality is that there are many people that will do that. I have many of these shows, including the subject of this thread and a few other mentioned on this thread through "alternate means". Not necessarily proud of it, but if I want to see a show and it's out there and not difficult to obtain then..........

I would rather have official releases.

I'm sure blame in these situations lies with both parties. It's just that it's a pissing match between two parties. The studio does not want to share profits and in many cases the music industry is probably unreasonable on costs. And I'm all for parties wanting to maximize profits, but in the meantime, no one wins. Studio does not get to release and intact product or any product at all. The music people don't get paid and the consumers are left out in the cold. It just seems like the expectations on both sides are unrealistic. You almost wish there was a law mandated some sort of scale for this sort of thing. Normally, I'm not an advocate of government interference of how people run their business (excluding ethics or public safety issues). But when the consumer is just being deprived because of corporate greed you kind of wish someone would step in and just say "hey, figure out some kind of compromise" There are plenty of other industries that are regulated.

And what also bugs me is that pretty much all music artists (outside of Country and like Aryan-Rock genres I guess) are on the political side of the fence that often eschews Capitalism, except when there's money involved (and I know there are plenty of parties that are involved in this things than the artists) but you don't really ever hear them speak up saying "I'd love to let this thing use my music"


STOP HIM! He's supposed to die!

#38 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted February 28 2010 - 07:06 PM

I think Bob hooked the right fish. With Fox wanting to cap the price of their DVD sets, that would mean that they were not willing to pay above a certain price point for the license, whatever their cap for paying for a music license is. Thing is that the license fee covers many aspects for any particular song and the license fee can vary depending on the popularity of the song.

With WKRP, many of the songs that are heard through many of the episodes are now considered "rock and roll" gold. Take for instance songs like David Bowie's "Space Oddity" or Bob Seger's "Turn the Page." With these songs that are very recognizable by music fans, they are, more liekly, going to command a higher licensing fee then, say, OneRepublic's recent hit song "All the Right Moves."

Then, you have movie studios who decide that they want to cap the retail price of their boxed DVD sets and this limits the price that they're willing to pay for a license for a particular song that appears in an episode. Then, you may have several "rock and roll" songs that appear in a single episode and that may drive up the price of licensing for that episode.

However, in any one season, you may be looking at around 20-30 songs that Fox has to license, in order to release a particular season. Then, music licensing becomes a problem for Fox Studios and that's where they're unwilling to budge. Fox just needs to rethink what they want to charge for WKRP season sets. I just think that if Fox thought about raising the price for WKRP, that it would be one of the few shows that fans would pay extra for.

I think even if Fox raised the SRP to $50 or $60, to justify licensing that music, that fans of the series would pay it. But, they need to pay for the music rights if they expect fans to purchase their sets.

#39 of 57 OFFLINE   WillG

WillG

    Producer



  • 5,237 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 30 2003

Posted February 28 2010 - 07:57 PM


Quote:
I just think that if Fox thought about raising the price for WKRP, that it would be one of the few shows that fans would pay extra for.

I think even if Fox raised the SRP to $50 or $60, to justify licensing that music, that fans of the series would pay it. But, they need to pay for the music rights if they expect fans to purchase their sets.
The flaw here is when you say "The Fans". I know WKRP is a very requested title, but in reality, the people who are vocal about it are a very limited portion of the audience. WKRP is not a big league title like "The Simpsons" "Lost" "Family Guy" or "Seinfeld" (shows that never seemed to have licensing issues) etc. So I don't blame Fox for trying to put a SPR cap on it. Fox has to depend on a certain Blind Buy element as well. For example, one of my favorite shows of all time now is "Arrested Development" I did not watch this show when it first came out. I was at Costco once and saw the first season on sale for like 20+ bucks. I said "I heard some good buzz about this show, I'll give it a shot" if the first season cost 50+ bucks I would said "Fuck it"

I think that, as I said before, there has to be some kind of reasonable scale. Fox says to the music people, "here's what we expect we can sell at X of a price point, so here's a fair offer for the music based on that. Hell, you could even put in provisions to the agreement that if sales exceed our estimates, we'll pay out a little more. But as I also said, that seems to seldom happen in cases like this, and then it becomes a pissing match.

It's funny that in my experience. Every company I've ever worked for says, "It's all about the customer" "It's all about the customer" but yet these same entities just can't come to an agreement when it involves money.

STOP HIM! He's supposed to die!

#40 of 57 OFFLINE   kemcha

kemcha

    Second Unit



  • 376 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 31 2009

Posted March 01 2010 - 12:13 AM

WillG, that's what I've been trying to say all along and I believe you have hit upon the problem.

The studios are trying to dictate what they want to pay for the license for "so and so" song. If the agent who manages that piece of music for "said" artist then the studio complains that the cost for licensing is unreasonable. As I have tried to say, the studios don't set the prices for the music, it's the artists who have created and recorded that music.

I seriously doubt that the music industry prices their music licensing fees in an unreasonable. It's just odd that the music studios, at least according to TV Shows on DVD, that the music industry is holding certain TV shows hostage by way of music rights. My best guess is that there are one of two factors that may factor into music licensing.

1. That the music industry is using the same model of licensing costs for movies and applying that to "Television Shows" being issues on DVD, (or)

2. That the music industry is using a music licensing cost dependent on how popular a television series is and adjusting according.

With WKRP, the music industry realizes that fans want that show released and realize that they can charge more for music licensing for WKRP because of the saturation level of a lot of classic rock songs. While this may seem unfair to fans of the television series, music artists are just trying to get a fair value for their music. What it boils down to is that it's the decision of the studio on whether to obtain a license to that music.

But, I do blame these movie and television studios who have played a shell game with fans of these television shows, in particular, WKRP in Cincinnati, and making it seem like music licensing is out of control. I seriously doubt that music licensing is out of control. The reason why is that if music licensing were out of control, then these movie studios would be posting the costs of certain music and adding some kind of real perspective to the costs of this music.

Bear in mind that nobody has announced how much music licensing actually costs and I just find it hard to make a judgment call when neither the music industry nor the movie industry actually admits to how much music licensing costs. I would figure that for any particular season that the costs for licensing music would be a couple of thousand dollars. When you consider that around 30-50 songs could appear in any given season, and you multiple that by a certain period of time (the length of time for the licensing of that music) as well as thousands of copies of that particular season, the studio is bound to make that money back.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users