If you've ever seen the intro to "House" in Australia, you'll notice that the theme song sounds a lot like Teardrop from Massive Attack, but... well... it isn't. However, those of you who've watched the American version (from having been in america or downloading an episode) or have bought the DVDs, you'll notice that the song in the intro actually is Massive Attack's Teardrop. In fact, even the closed captions in Australia erroneously state that "Teardrop - Massive Attack" is playing. Why is it they re-do the theme song in Australia?
I could only think of two reasons for this. The first is that Teardrop, complete with video clip of in-utero baby singing, was a pretty popular song in Australia. Maybe it wasn't so popular in America, so a lot of people in America would've been "introduced" to the song (and the composers) through the show. A lot of shows do this now, using slightly off-beat artists in their intros, and it mutually benefits both parties. In Australia, already being so popular, Teardrop could've made the show look cheap (like it was stealing the whole in-utero idea, maybe). I think specifically noting the difference in release times: Teardrop is a really old song here compared to House, which has only recently started airing.
Anyway, that reason sounds a bit weak, mainly because of the fact that it implies that the guys who make the show care enough about Australia to re-dub the intro, or that the station in Australia cares enough to change it to suit. I don't buy that either of them care for this market. I think the issue is one of copyright and royalties. Basically, I think the show doesn't have the right to play Teardrop in any country but America, so they had to quickly cut it out and replace it with the "slightly different" version you hear in Australia.
That's the miracle of copyright.
I could only think of two reasons for this. The first is that Teardrop, complete with video clip of in-utero baby singing, was a pretty popular song in Australia. Maybe it wasn't so popular in America, so a lot of people in America would've been "introduced" to the song (and the composers) through the show. A lot of shows do this now, using slightly off-beat artists in their intros, and it mutually benefits both parties. In Australia, already being so popular, Teardrop could've made the show look cheap (like it was stealing the whole in-utero idea, maybe). I think specifically noting the difference in release times: Teardrop is a really old song here compared to House, which has only recently started airing.
Anyway, that reason sounds a bit weak, mainly because of the fact that it implies that the guys who make the show care enough about Australia to re-dub the intro, or that the station in Australia cares enough to change it to suit. I don't buy that either of them care for this market. I think the issue is one of copyright and royalties. Basically, I think the show doesn't have the right to play Teardrop in any country but America, so they had to quickly cut it out and replace it with the "slightly different" version you hear in Australia.
That's the miracle of copyright.
See Government Media Release
"Recording television and radio for a later time
Does this mean I can record my favourite television or radio program to enjoy later?
Yes. For the first time you will be able to record most television or radio program at home to enjoy at a later time. This will allow you to watch or listen to a program as it was made available to the public at the time of the original broadcast.
How long can I keep the recording?
The recording must be deleted after one use. It will not be possible to use the recording over and over again.
What can I do with recorded program?
You can watch or listen to the recording with your family or friends. It will not be permitted to sell or hire a recording or to play it at school or work or in any kind of public audience.
Can I give a recording I have made to a friend?
No. A recording is for the personal use of the person who made it. You can invite a friend over to watch or listen to your recording but you can’t lend or give it to a friend to take home with them."
Is it just me, or does this sound like rules from parents; "No, you aren't allowed to lend that tape to your friend, Johnny, but they can come over and watch it here, if they want. Sorry Johnny, you can't watch it with them, you've already watched it once, you'll have to stay in another room."
I know the law was ridiculous to start off with, and they've tried to "reform" it, but why not say something like "reasonable use"? I mean, seriously, an on-the-spot fine for watching something twice? Give me a break!
That implies, however, that the whole record industry way of delegating copyright is abolished, and an artist's right to copyright is non-transferrable.
Add Comment
<< Home