I’m a little disappointed to see such an outcry over a TV theme song for professional [Facebook link] sports. Sure, it’s something everyone is familiar with, but it’s not like it’s Happy Birthday. (That was a joke, because of course that song too is mired in copyright muck thanks to greedy Disney Time-Warner-AOL [Thank you Stephen for the correction.].) There are a few more important controversies that required broad based public outcry, but since this is a topic that even a 12 year old can get passionate about, it fits into Internet activism much better than Cadscam does.
I’m a little torn. While it’s good that the artist who composed the HNIC Theme Song has been well compensated for her creation, where should her right to capitalize on the song end? After a set number of years, or until she passes from the earth? There are good arguments for either, but for arguments sake I’d say after about 40 years of making money from one creation, perhaps it’s time to create a new golden goose. Not knowing her other work, I won’t call her a one hit wonder, but clearly her name isn’t ingrained into the average Canadian’s pop-consciousness like Oscar Peterson or Avril Lavigne.
So I think after most of a lifetime has passed, that the HNIC theme song should be in the public domain, and neither the CBC nor any one of us reading (or writing my words) should have to pay to publicly sing or broadcast the music.
Is CBC nuts for dropping it? Yes. But I have to agree with them that they were justified in using the distinctive theme in overseas broadcasts. The distinction when the theme is in theory available on the WWW, is outdated anyway. Claman killed, or at least sat on, her golden goose. Both sides should have handled the matter with more grace. CBC should have asked for permission, and Claman should have granted it at no charge.
This story is also a trap for the goons who would see CBC torn down for spending too much taxpayer money. Why should the public broadcaster pay for a theme song when they could save hundreds of dollars every broadcast by going with a different theme provider?
–
You can Digg this post by Nunc Scio. Hockey nut Miss 604 of course writes about this too.
@hotmail.com
![[EFC Blue Ribbon - Free Speech Online]](http://www.efc.ca/images/efcfreet.gif)
Mound of Sound | 06-Jun-08 at 12:09 pm | Permalink
Isn’t this dispute anchored in the CBC’s decision to market the theme as a ring tone and pocket the proceeds? It’s funny how often it’s described as the second national anthem, the one that doesn’t have all those inconvenient words we can never quite recall.
Saskboy | 06-Jun-08 at 12:29 pm | Permalink
I didn’t read that angle of it. I read it as being about broadcasting it overseas when the contract was for Canada. After GM broke a two week agreement and hasn’t taken enough heat, I don’t see why the CBC can’t after 30+ years ;-)
wonderdog | 06-Jun-08 at 12:43 pm | Permalink
“Not knowing her other work, I won’t call her a one hit wonder, but clearly her name isn’t ingrained into the average Canadian’s pop-consciousness like Oscar Peterson or Avril Lavigne.”
But her music is. She also wrote “a place to grow,” the Ontario government’s one-time jingle that will be familiar to all Ontarians of a certain age.
As for the rest of your comments, well, they’re about as well informed as the remark I quoted above.
Saskboy | 06-Jun-08 at 12:45 pm | Permalink
Wonderdog, Ontarians are average Canadians, and I’ve heard that jingle too, but should a woman live off of two jingles for her entire life? And I didn’t say she was a one hit wonder, did I?
stageleft | 06-Jun-08 at 2:02 pm | Permalink
But how will we know when the game is about to start?
Stephen Glauser | 06-Jun-08 at 2:44 pm | Permalink
I hope they don’t lose the HNIC theme song. I read that it only cost them $500 per use. I’m sure they can afford it.
On that note, Happy Birthday’s copyright is owned by a subsidiary of Time Warner, not Disney ;)
Saskboy | 06-Jun-08 at 3:03 pm | Permalink
You mean Time/Warner isn’t owned by Disney yet? ;-)
Thanks for the correction.
Pilot | 06-Jun-08 at 3:35 pm | Permalink
I think the whole world would be a lot happier if there was a shorter expiry on a songs copyright. Some argue 50 years from first performance, currently I think its somewhere between 25 years and 50 years after the song writer dies.
Copyright, Publishing Rights and most other intellectual rights laws are overcomplicated and inhibit their ability to become part of our culture and identity. I think its why Canada and the US have had such difficulty creating their own identities in the world. Everything that most countries use to identify themselves - music, imagery, dance, clothing and any other art is owned by the creator and not the culture.
Adding to this is the difficulty in then taking those works and expanding on them. If I create a song, it’s illegal for a second person to take that song and create their own angle on it without clearing certain legal hurdles. How can a community create an identity if its illegal to be like anyone else. Most if not all of the major musical movements of the past 100 years have been based strongly on the ability to copy and change the work of others - rock, jazz, blues and most visibly rap and hip-hop are rooted firmly in the work of others.
Fortunately artists, thinkers, designers and creators have started to take the reins and have created Open Source, GNU and most importantly Creative Commons licensing to allow works to be used in this cultural manner. While its still in its early days, I know as these ideas are used more and more, a cultural consciousness will begin to gel and those who choose to guard their work will lose their place in the movement.
So while we’re looking to loose a part of our cultural identity, rest assured that the CBC is warming up to using Creative Commons works and is a world-leader in sharing a distributing their works through cutting edge means. As a result, Canada is becoming a more likely place to preserve our cultural identity instead of losing it to financial considerations.
It should also be added that either using the traditional theme or whatever the new one is, the CBC will need to pay pay pay, so I really hope that the CBC and Mrs. Claman take another stab at coming to an agreement, because things aren’t really gonna change much. And hey, within 60 or so years, the CBC is gonna be able to use it all they want once it enters the Public Domain.
Dwight Williams | 06-Jun-08 at 6:12 pm | Permalink
Not sure why we should have to wait six decades to settle this…
Louise | 06-Jun-08 at 9:24 pm | Permalink
What the CBC should do is commission a new theme, pay the musician for his work and be done with it. CBC would then own the theme music and the copyright and there would be no more paying someone else or someone else’s estate. Heck, they could even demand payment from others who want to use the theme music, since they would own the copyright. A little bit of cost recovery wouldn’t hurt the CBC. They probably already do have an income stream from selling the rights to play, run, reproduce a whole host of other things they produce.
Saskboy | 06-Jun-08 at 11:38 pm | Permalink
I don’t think we should have to wait more than a couple decades for songs to enter the public domain. The comment about it stifling our culture is a fair one. The CBC is in between a rock and a hard place. Either they make a sound business decision, or they lose the use of a cultural icon.
Louise’s idea is a good one.
Dwight Williams | 07-Jun-08 at 5:42 am | Permalink
I’m not entirely convinced that the theme ought to be replaced at all at this juncture. And both sides playing hardball with each other is something that didn’t have to happen either.
Pilot | 07-Jun-08 at 10:46 am | Permalink
Mr Williams,
As it currently stands, the copyright on the HNIC theme won’t expire until decades after the author dies. I just chose a conservative number. I could be as little as 25 years
MrPaulDecker | 08-Jun-08 at 7:00 pm | Permalink
Current copyright law states the artist may collect royalties for their entire lifetime, plus 50 years after the date of their death.
Typical socialists, let’s nationalize this artists work and take her revenue from her for the ‘betterment’ of TV and our culture. Vultures!
Dwight Williams | 08-Jun-08 at 7:11 pm | Permalink
Can we refrain from using wannabe-a-debate-killer words like “socialist” for the duration?
Saskboy | 08-Jun-08 at 7:57 pm | Permalink
Yeah, be careful, I wouldn’t want anyone’s head to explode…
Liberal media CBC making a sound business decision to find more affordable intro-music from a lefty-socialist-artist who is trying to use the state’s laws to make more money capitalist style, from her creation and personal toil… KABOOM!