Married with Children S3 Won't Have "Love & Marriage" Theme Song! (Rights Issues) (1 Viewer)

[Mark Lx]

Irregardless, the prospect of this show being released in full, which would have taken awhile anyway, now looks very bleak. Let's at least get through the Steve Rhodes years.

 

[Andrew Radke]

Well if we don't accept it and boycot the set, all us die hard MWC fans (myself included) can kiss all future sets goodbye. My hope is to one day own all 11 seasons on DVD, and if that means a different theme song, then so be it..........so long as the episodes are uncut and intact. Myself, as well as many others here skip the opening 99.9% of the time anyway. Sure, when people hear "Love & Marriage", the first thing that pops into most of their heads is "Married...With Children." But to me, this is a special case. Unlike the syndicated "Alf" episodes....where to this day, Lion's Gate hasn't given a legitimate reason, we have Columbia/Tri-Star, who have let us know about this decision PLUS the reason behind it. They haven't always been my favorite studio in regards to TV/DVD sets, but my hat's off to them this time. They explained point blank what the situation was, and yet they're still willing to provide us with season 3, despite the setback.

I know some people think that this is the start of something terrible, how other studios will follow suit and eventually all copyrighted music will be obliterated because we "simply" accept it. Fact is, that's nothing more than speculation. I wish other studios were as up-front about things such as this beforehand. *cough*LION'S GATE*cough*. lol.

The only time I'll dig out the torch and pitchfork is when Columbia/Tri-Star starts putting syndicated episodes on the sets. Until then, I can live with a different theme.

Also, I was curious. Following each episode, during the end credits we have an "instrumental" version of "Love & Marriage". I don't know all the ins & outs of music rights, but are Columbia/Tri-Star forbidden to use that as well? Or perhaps a re-working of the instrumental that the rights holders can't touch?

 

[Gord Lacey]

Good question Andrew, and I'm not sure of the answer. I have a call in to them asking what music will be used for the opening. It's possible they could use the instrumental version, I have no idea.

Gord

 

[MatthewA]

The "instrumental" is just a bridge on the Sinatra recording.

 

[Will_B]

Get Joe Piscopoe out of retirement to do his Sinatra impression.

 

[BernieV]

I've been following this discussion from the sidelines because I'm interested in the issue of how copyright holders can impact DVD releases. I'm in the opposite corner of those who say "it doesn't matter to me because I never listen to the opening theme". They'll buy it with or without. I won't buy it either way, but I do consider it an important question.

Opening themes are a hook that catches my attention and encourages me to watch (or not watch) a show. It's part of the emotional appeal for a series I love. Without it, something is missing. I'm disinclined to buy DVDs that alter such an important element. Let me cite an example from another series for which I do have a strong attachment.

There's an episode in the original Star Trek called City on the Edge of Forever. It's acknowledged by many to be one of the best written and produced stories in that series. One of the key compositions used in this drama is the 30's standard, Goodnight, Sweetheart. It helps set the mood for the plot and setting. It's forever associated with the story and its characters in the minds of fans. Because of a copyright dispute, Paramount was forced to replace that song in the VHS and LD releases. I've forgetten what they used in its place, and that's my point. It wasn't the original. When you heard it you knew something was missing or out of place. Because of incessant demands from fans over the years, it was finally restored in the DVD release. Hearing it once more, you get the feeling that things are again as they should be - which coincidentally is the theme of this episode.

My feeling about copyright holders who charge an unfair premium and take advantage of fans is that they are greedy opportunists. They are like the squatters who register domain names on the Internet in hopes of scamming unearned profits from legitimate brand owners. Unlike true investors they add nothing to the value of a property, they only seek to exploit. They're like black market operators who charge exorbitant prices during times of need. They deserve nothing but scorn and loss of their ill-gotten gain. I wish the courts ruled against their claims in favor of the original licensees. It's unfortunate that it doesn't work that way.

All this leaves fans in a difficult position. If they withhold purchase, they deny themselves enjoyment of their favorites. If they accept abridged releases, that's all they'll get. The only way out of the dilemma is for casual fans to buy the limited edition and for ardent collectors to hold out for a full edition. Stonewalling the scalpers gets them to reduce their demands for future releases. Letting the studios know that people are willing to pay more for an all-inclusive collectors' edition encourages them to pursue that business. Dual editions may be the only long term solution.

 

[John McM]

I don't understand how so many people can just accept this.

so you're saying fans should suffer with no MWC at all instead of MWC-Love And Marriage but +Uncut episodes?

 

[BernieV]

I'm saying that CT was right to say no to extortion, but that people who are concerned about the quality of MWC should push CT to do a special uncut edition and pass this one up. I'm not passing judgment on those who take either side.

 

[Ian_H]

It was obvious to me that the rights holders for Love and Marriage were gonna pull something like this. When I saw the Frank Sinatra ads on one of the single releases and on the packaging of the season set. It always reeked to me of being forced to include that stuff since last time I knew Capitol Records had nothing to do with Sony or Columbia Tri-Star. If I am mistaken let me know but when I last worked for the music biz the five majors were SONY / WEA / UNI / BMG and CEMA (which included Capitol).


--Ian

 

[Casey Trowbridg]

This is problematic because if the collector's push Sony or Columbia if you will, to pay for the rights for the song to produce the collector's edition then why not just ask columbia to pay the high fees in the first place?

It doesn't matter how many versions of the uncut set or the cut version are released, Columbia will be paying the same rights fees as if they had just purchased the song to begin with.

They'll still be opporating at a loss because the collector's set will sell at a higher cost and fewer people will buy it because of that reason and because of the fact that they can get a cheaper version of the same show.

I mean when people look at the shelf and they see 2 versions of Married with Children...with say a 10 dollar difference in price, and they see that all their extra 10 bucks gets them is the theme song...well, its not likely that they'll purchase the set.

If the collectors can talk columbia in to springing for the song for a special release then why should they then release another set without the theme? You're basically asking them to pay the fee anyway and then just use it more restrictively than before, because they're going to be marketing the collectors set to a smaller body of the overall MWC fan base.

To do what you're suggesting would result in Columbia getting even less bang for its buck than if it had just shelled out the price for the theme song to begin with.

If the fee were configured based on the number of sets produced then I might see how it could work, but the fee would be the same whether columbia produced 100,000 sets or 1,000,000 sets at least as far as I've understood it.

 

[PatH]

I've already put my 2 cents in on this, but now I'll ask a question. Since music rights and DVDs for earlier shows are so obviously a problem, has this continued withe newer shows. In other words, are TV shows being produced now forestalling this problem before it becomes a problem for their DVD releases?

PatH

 

[Gord Lacey]

Pat, many new shows are licensing music for home video as well, but not all of them. It's a problem because the money comes from two divisions; the Television division and the Home Video division. People from both divisions have to get together and work things out, and that doesn't happen in every company. I believe Fox is good about that, at least that was the sense I had when I spoke with Shawn Ryan in Oct. He sounded surprised that anyone was having problems licensing the songs for DVDs because it's such a seamless task for them on "The Shield."

I was surprised that "The Apprentice" had a different theme for the DVD release of season 1 since it's a very new show. It's possible that they didn't think the show would be released on DVD and didn't want to kick in the extra money needed to secure a home video license. I'll be interested in seeing what they do for season 2 since a DVD release should have been planned from the start.

Gord

 

[BernieV]

That's why the series would be available in two editions. It gives consumers a choice of features and flexible pricing. The second edition usually follows a few months later to stimulate interest. The song pirates either surrender or walk the plank.