I just now realized part of this casualty includes Transformers animated / GI Joe / anything owned by Hasbro because they only work with Sony Music to put out anything - so nevermind CDs, not even Enjoy the Ride Records will be able to put out a GI Joe animated LP release now.
After giving us ON THE WATERFRONT and THE CAINE MUTINY , I was hoping that Intrada would do Hugo Friedhofer's score to Columbia Pictures THE HARDER THEY FALL but it was not to be. A great score from Bogie's last film that would not be affected by Sony's recent proclamation.
Why would THE HARDER THEY FALL not be on a future CD? No music exist anymore? Or?
Not sure what is not clear here, but people keep muddying the waters - Sony the movie studio is a completely different entity to Sony the record label.
The point is Sony Music owns the record label Columbia Pictures USED to own (Arista), which means they own a sizable chunk of their catalog anyway. Of course this also means you wont see complete remasters of The Sound of Music from LLL because they also own RCA.
OK, dumb question of the day. Let's take Hook as an example.
Let's say LLL wanted to still revisit the title (assuming better sources were indeed found for the cues that were taken from film stems on the previous LLL set). Obviously they would not be able to include anything that was on the old Epic OST. But if they wanted to, could they only licence the film tracks from Sony Pictures (so anything that was not on the OST) and release those under the moniker of "Hook: Additional Music and Alternates" or "Hook: Revisited" or "Hook: Volume 2" or "Back to Hook" something like that?
Also, would something like The Never-Feast with the film insert now be impossible as the short version appeared on the OST, or would the longer film version be considered a completely different cue (and therefore under the control of Sony Pictures rather than Sony Music)?
I only buy vinyl soundtracks and I know Music On Vinyl has licensed quite a lot from Sony. Does this have some kind of impact to MOV's future soundtrack releases or vinyl soundtrack market in general?
Well, as others have commented, thank goodness that TRL got through under the wire. That release is already miraculous and this news almost immediately afterwards just makes it more so.
So, any albums (& not just soundtracks) that came out on: Arista-Ava-Bell-BMG-Buddah-CBS-Colgems-Columbia-Epic-Harmony-Kama Sutra-Mainstream-Monument-RCA, & have never had a CD release, will now never get one. Why? Is it that Sony can't be bothered to trowel through their vaults looking for album tapes & their legal department can't be bothered to draw up contracts. They might as well junk the tapes & free up some vault space. Remember those far off days when record companies were owned & run by music lovers.
So, any albums (& not just soundtracks) that came out on: Arista-Ava-Bell-BMG-Buddah-CBS-Colgems-Columbia-Epic-Harmony-Kama Sutra-Mainstream-Monument-RCA, & have never had a CD release, will now never get one. Why? Is it that Sony can't be bothered to trowel through their vaults looking for album tapes & their legal department can't be bothered to draw up contracts. They might as well junk the tapes & free up some vault space. Remember those far off days when record companies were owned & run by music lovers.
That's a bit extreme. Sony has a highly regarded reissue label (Legacy) that they stll publish catalog under.
What I never understand about these licensing problems:
- those who own the rights hold on to them in order not to use them for any releases.
Why is that more money for them instead of actually releasing them to a market, as small as it might be, which actually will bring them money?
Sounds like Sony is aging wine that they forgot was even there. Maybe they're holding on for that sweet, sweet licensing fee that no pragmatic label can afford. And for them, it might better apply to the works of these guys and gals...
No more "Now That's What I Call Rockblocking!" for these people.
Only thing we can realistically do is keep inquiring about certain titles and brace ourselves for the answer from Roger, MV, or other labels to be "Nope. Not happening. Sony."
"Mom, can I ride my bike down the street?" "Nope. Not happening. Sony."
"Will US politics ever be united from division?" "Nope. Not happening. Sony."
"Is there an afterlife?" "Nope. Not happening. Sony."
"You just won the Superbowl! What are you going to do next?" "Nope. Not happening. Disney."
What I never understand about these licensing problems:
- those who own the rights hold on to them in order not to use them for any releases.
Why is that more money for them instead of actually releasing them to a market, as small as it might be, which actually will bring them money?
The thing is, we don't know why they did it, or what their plans are. I don't think it's productive to just assume they're morons who don't want money, or have unrealistically high expectations of what they can make off their assets.
Years ago, I produced a television episode for which we licensed a song (I can no longer remember from whom). I think it cost us about $2,000 at the time (this was the '90s). Our music guy told me afterward that the exec he was dealing with – whom he liked – said that by the time he'd paid the artists involved, and spent the time on the paperwork, and delivering whatever materials he had to deliver, they'd lost money on the deal.
So it's not as simple as "Why don't they just take some money?!"
They also may just not have the staff. Maybe someone's job got eliminated, who had been dealing with these sub-licenses. Or maybe someone who was handling them suddenly had to take on a lot of extra other duties and literally no longer has the time to devote. It could be anything. But with the advent of downloads and, even worse, streaming, I suspect there have been a lot of cutbacks at various music labels because of the decreased revenue.
Years ago, I produced a television episode for which we licensed a song (I can no longer remember from whom). I think it cost us about $2,000 at the time (this was the '90s). Our music guy told me afterward that the exec he was dealing with – whom he liked – said that by the time he'd paid the artists involved, and spent the time on the paperwork, and delivering whatever materials he had to deliver, they'd lost money on the deal. So it's not as simple as "Why don't they just take some money?!"
I'm fine if our specialty labels increased the price to compensate and explained the need for it. Beats doing it ourselves. So please, take my money!
