Muppet Show Season 4 coming in 2013

[Drtooth]

Dr. Tooth, music licensing/catalog rights are not that simple. My sister worked in music publishing (the part of the business that owns the rights to sell songs for various uses) for almost 2 years, and not only is it a tangled mess of an industry, it also has to do with different uses of what these songs were originally intended for. Back when the Muppet Show bought the rights to use the songs on the show itself, there was no "crystal ball" that these song rights were going to be needed for use again for home video in the future. Television music licensing rights and home video licensing rights are two separate entities from what I've been told. That is why the Wonder Years still has never been (and probably won't be) officially released on DVD. Because of all the music ownership involved with the classic songs that were used on that show regularly.

Also, music rights are owned by several different people. The songwriters, the song publishers (which is what my sister worked for) the musicians in some cases, etc.So they change ownership hands very frequently and there's a lot of red tape before each change off. Why do you think the Beatles catalog being relased to Itunes took so long? Because Michael Jackson did own the rights to some of those songs at one time, two of the Beatles that have passed, their estates had to sign off on it, their record label, the two surviving Beatles, etc.

It's a long legal process that sometimes gets resolved and sometimes it doesn't.

Ah... but that only really goes to further my point. My opinion still stands, as the ALFer one said "Why must you needlessly complicate things?" "you" in this case is the industry, that is... not YOU you. I've often said red tape is only there because it's there. Nobody likes it, nobody wants it, yet nobody wants to do anything about it Or CAN do anything about it. Someone needs to make a stand. This sort of bureaucratic system seems to only favor lawyers. Now, I'm all for understanding that one company will hold out because they ask for more money than they deserve... but red tape... no one benefits from that. The rights holders don't get a royalty, the people who want to use it can't (or if they have, they have to hide it under a matress and pretend it never happened), and the people who will buy or watch this stuff miss out. And it's worse for home video for some reason... I know. And that reason is Flixxixfrrwoolpxtpt! Just kidding... it's a "Because I said so" thing, right?

Now, I can respect there's problems with multiple song rights... and that's where the copyright system is broken. The majority stake should have a say in what goes on, be it the artists (YAY!) or the music group rights holders (BOO!) I really wish that someone, someone out there could stand up and say "This IS needlessly complicated!" and fix the system. I still support the idea, as I think all artists and even rights holders should, of a single flat forever right that comes down to Home Video... something that says "I own the rights to this performance [if the performance is original and specific to a series... i.e. a cover of the song played on a show by the cast], but a flat rate of royalties shall always go to the rights holders."

That said, I hope that this IS a rumor, and if it isn't they can clear that up. Disney and Jackson have always had a good relationship (Theme park attraction and all, eh what?), and whoever's in charge now should continue that. And rights to songs he owned should be renegotiated, but not altogether refused.

If it is a rumor and they're just waiting for the movie or not, we're big boys (and girls)... we can handle the truth. Speculation will ONLY get us angry at the wrong people.

 

[MelissaY1]

Ah... but that only really goes to further my point. My opinion still stands, as the ALFer one said "Why must you needlessly complicate things?" "you" in this case is the industry, that is... not YOU you. I've often said red tape is only there because it's there. Nobody likes it, nobody wants it, yet nobody wants to do anything about it Or CAN do anything about it. Someone needs to make a stand. This sort of bureaucratic system seems to only favor lawyers. Now, I'm all for understanding that one company will hold out because they ask for more money than they deserve... but red tape... no one benefits from that. The rights holders don't get a royalty, the people who want to use it can't (or if they have, they have to hide it under a matress and pretend it never happened), and the people who will buy or watch this stuff miss out. And it's worse for home video for some reason... I know. And that reason is Flixxixfrrwoolpxtpt! Just kidding... it's a "Because I said so" thing, right?

Now, I can respect there's problems with multiple song rights... and that's where the copyright system is broken. The majority stake should have a say in what goes on, be it the artists (YAY!) or the music group rights holders (BOO!) I really wish that someone, someone out there could stand up and say "This IS needlessly complicated!" and fix the system. I still support the idea, as I think all artists and even rights holders should, of a single flat forever right that comes down to Home Video... something that says "I own the rights to this performance [if the performance is original and specific to a series... i.e. a cover of the song played on a show by the cast], but a flat rate of royalties shall always go to the rights holders."

That said, I hope that this IS a rumor, and if it isn't they can clear that up. Disney and Jackson have always had a good relationship (Theme park attraction and all, eh what?), and whoever's in charge now should continue that. And rights to songs he owned should be renegotiated, but not altogether refused.

If it is a rumor and they're just waiting for the movie or not, we're big boys (and girls)... we can handle the truth. Speculation will ONLY get us angry at the wrong people.

I agree it's a lousy system, but unfortunately we're all at the mercy of this stuff unless like you said there's something that can be done and someone takes a stand, but how they can legally I'm not sure...

 

[David French]

Dr. Tooth, music licensing/catalog rights are not that simple. My sister worked in music publishing (the part of the business that owns the rights to sell songs for various uses) for almost 2 years, and not only is it a tangled mess of an industry, it also has to do with different uses of what these songs were originally intended for. Back when the Muppet Show bought the rights to use the songs on the show itself, there was no "crystal ball" that these song rights were going to be needed for use again for home video in the future. Television music licensing rights and home video licensing rights are two separate entities from what I've been told. That is why the Wonder Years still has never been (and probably won't be) officially released on DVD. Because of all the music ownership involved with the classic songs that were used on that show regularly.

Also, music rights are owned by several different people. The songwriters, the song publishers (which is what my sister worked for) the musicians in some cases, etc.So they change ownership hands very frequently and there's a lot of red tape before each change off. Why do you think the Beatles catalog being relased to Itunes took so long? Because Michael Jackson did own the rights to some of those songs at one time, two of the Beatles that have passed, their estates had to sign off on it, their record label, the two surviving Beatles, etc.

It's a long legal process that sometimes gets resolved and sometimes it doesn't.

One of the other things that people need to understand is that TV was not made with music rights in mind, simply because there was no reason to; the home video market didn't exist and programme makers (understandably) did not have the foresight to think that one day their programmes would be released for consumers to buy on shiny discs.

 

[MelissaY1]

One of the other things that people need to understand is that TV was not made with music rights in mind, simply because there was no reason to; the home video market didn't exist and programme makers (understandably) did not have the foresight to think that one day their programmes would be released for consumers to buy on shiny discs.

Um, yes, David that's what I put in my original post:
"Back when the Muppet Show bought the rights to use the songs on the show itself, there was no "crystal ball" that these song rights were going to be needed for use again for home video in the future. Television music licensing rights and home video licensing rights are two separate entities from what I've been told. That is why the Wonder Years still has never been (and probably won't be) officially released on DVD. Because of all the music ownership involved with the classic songs that were used on that show regularly."

 

[minor muppetz]

Maybe this would be better for a seperate thread, but I wonder why video and TV rights had to be seperate in the first place, especially regarding music rights (and character rights and video clip rights). I rarely hear about any productions having difficulty in renegotiating residuals for cast and crew (though I have heard of some examples; I've read that Sesame Workshop has to renegotiate residuals for everybody involved when releasing videos of it's programs, and heard that You Can't Do That on Television isn't on DVD because the producers haven't been able to locate some of the cast members regarding residuals).

 

[David French]

Um, yes, David that's what I put in my original post:
"Back when the Muppet Show bought the rights to use the songs on the show itself, there was no "crystal ball" that these song rights were going to be needed for use again for home video in the future. Television music licensing rights and home video licensing rights are two separate entities from what I've been told. That is why the Wonder Years still has never been (and probably won't be) officially released on DVD. Because of all the music ownership involved with the classic songs that were used on that show regularly."

I thought you were saying something different in your post, which is why I made my post - sorry about that, chief.

 

[MelissaY1]

Maybe this would be better for a seperate thread, but I wonder why video and TV rights had to be seperate in the first place, especially regarding music rights (and character rights and video clip rights). I rarely hear about any productions having difficulty in renegotiating residuals for cast and crew (though I have heard of some examples; I've read that Sesame Workshop has to renegotiate residuals for everybody involved when releasing videos of it's programs, and heard that You Can't Do That on Television isn't on DVD because the producers haven't been able to locate some of the cast members regarding residuals).

Minor, it's because the physical licensing agreements and legalities are different. Music used to be licensed to T.V. shows as a one time use for whatever the T.V. show was using the music. I'm sure now with newer television shows, agreements are made for music to be used on DVD releases, etc. but again, it also depends on what the contracts are with the individual owners of the music rights (the songwriters, publishers, etc.)

I only know a little bit about this because I work for a photo archive in NYC and certain photos we have are only to be sent for use on DVD or merchandising, while others are for editorial use only (newspapers, magazines, etc.) The legalities for the different usages are very different.

 

[Kimp the Shrimp]

I want my Muppet TV

 

[JEANYLASER]

I want muppet tv too!

 

[zns]

I want my Muppet TV

AMEN.