MUSIC LICENSING - BBC Cannabis doc

[truth and beauty]

Calling anyone who knows the rules on music licensing ..

I could have put this on the Argo or Dior threads in the news section - but it's a question in itself : does anyone here understand the rules on music licensing? I know I should, I'm a bit ashamed that I don't ( though I always rely on double checking with copyright lawyers ) .

I'm asking because I've just seen the opening to a BBC documentary : This World, America's Stoned Kids ( in fact it's on as I write this and the rest of the soundtrack is also GREAT) .

It began by sampling the opening of Levee Breaks - against some fabulous shots of a Colorado landscape. So, a great opening. It's all about Colorado's experiment to legalise marijuana. And I doubt anyone was asked for specific permission, or allowed to rule on what the shot should depict ...

So can anyone define why that's different from Argo or Dior ( as discussed in the News forum ) ?

I THINK the case is that on radio, you have a needletime agreement which all record companies sign up to and which allows free use of music in return for a stipend paid to the musicians. On television , you have a version of that unless it's detrimental in some way ..

And film and advertising are a completely different ball game..

What I've written doesn't much sound like a legally precise definition though ! SO - anyone care to improve on that ?

[GeorgeC]

Hi T & B,

I think you've got an interesting topic there, believe it or not. I'm no expert myself, but I suspect the use of Zeppelin songs in commercials and other soundtracks is something we should get used to. My speculation is based on these points:

The songs are forty years old and the ongoing sales of the original music (in whatever format) probably isn't very lucrative anymore. Not that the songwriters / musicians of Zep need the money, but selling the temporary rights can make for a quick infusion of revenue. Plus, they've been heard so many times they may not be as untouchably uncommercial as they once were.

Most pop songs used in ads and soundtracks are only heard in fragmentary form - this is the "needle drop" stipulation - that affects the licensing fee for their use. The more of the song, the more money it costs to copy it. Thus a short commercial or brief movie scene is more economically affordable from the producers' standpoint, and from the point of view of Zeppelin's public image, than an entire infomercial accompanied by "Stairway to Heaven"...I sure hope so.

Some Zeppelin songs (WTLB, WLL, BIGLY, and others) now have credited songwriters / publishers besides just the Zep members. It's possible that the lawyers for those writers (or their estates) get to negotiate with the producers on their behalf, and JP, RP, and JPJ just rubber-stamp the deal. This is only a guess, though.

The people who approach the music publishers usually have to explain exactly what they want to use the song for, and how big a viewership they expect to reach. I'd guess that the makers of a Hollywood epic starring Tom Cruise would have to shell out more for a Zeppelin song than the makers of a regional TV documentary. When I used some T-Rex lyrics in one of my books I had to specify the expected print run and retail price of the title, which affected the fee I was charged.

Another factor in licensing may be the specified audience. I think an English rock band will more likely allow use of their songs in non-English-speaking markets, the same way US movie stars will appear in Japanese commercials, if they feel the use won't impact their sales with their major demographic.

Again, I'm not a legal expert in these matters, but I think licensing and copyright issues play a bigger role in the soundtrack of our daily entertainment than we usually think.

[hecube]

So can anyone define why that's different from Argo or Dior ( as discussed in the News forum ) ?

I work as a publisher.

First of all, you have to understand that music played on radio is covered by what is called a blanket license. This is so the radio networks don't have to do the tedious work of asking each songwriters the right to play the thousands of songs heard on radio. The blanket license is granted by each country's public performance society (in the UK: PRS; in the US: ASCAP and BMI; each country has its own society).

Songwriters and publishers have granted these societies the right to manage these uses. Songwriters and publishers however retain the right to manage the use of their music in movies, documentaries, TV spots and other type of video production.

Songwriters and publishers are under no obligation to grant a license to a movie/documentary producer. You can be sure there were protracted discussions in both cases (Argo and Dior). The only difference being that the content of discussions were made public by the Argo camp.

[hecube]

To continue, it is customary (where I work at any rate) to ask what will be seen during the use of our music. This is so that our music is not perverted by unfortunate association (it can be anything). If Led Zep's publisher had the Argo team make the change, you can be sure they also reviewed the Dior commercial and documentary and found the use of the music in those contexts satisfactory.

My feeling is, only Jimmy Page could be so anal as to require the change in the Argo movie.

[hecube]

What's funny though, going from memory, is that Tom Cruise's recent movie, "Oblivion", also feature LZ music and you also actually see a needle being deposited on a vinyl and it is obviously the wrong track. I have the feeling that the change in Argo might have been prompted by the error in Oblivion. Tom's character plays "Ramble on" by depositing the needle on the first track but in real life, "Ramble on" is on a third track...

[pottedplant]

Now who is being anal Just kidding. Thanks for the information, Hecube. It is probably a lot of legal crap and what's in the original publishing/licensing contract, right? Most of the time it will all depend on what's in the contract.

[hecube]

Don't mix up the publishing agreement (which binds the songwriter to the publisher) and the license (which binds the producer to the publisher). As far as negotiations go between publisher and producer, it's basically an arm-wrestling match with the advantage to the publisher.