Alec;3254358 said:
I do realize we're, sadly, the only ones left discussing the songs. Actually, I am surprised the media did not pick up on this. They're always the first to report anything on Jackson, but it seems the vocal authenticity did not interest them at all. Which I find really, really weird. It was the hottest MJ story since the trial and his death, imo.
they did report the controversy , what people said from each side etc. Accusing of fake would be a criminal accusation which main stream media would stay clear of. They reported the "alleged" stuff by the Jacksons.
BUMPER SNIPPET;3254813 said:
Contrary to what Ivy had said, Michael did NOT go back to SONY.
Dorian;3254815 said:
Didn't Michael colaborate with Sony for Thriller 25?
BUMPER SNIPPET;3254820 said:
Not entirely.
Michael owed SONY by contract a few more songs. As he was trying to get away from SONY he failed to do so. His contract ceased in 2006 (after which he signed with 2SEAS RECORD). As he failed to deliver the songs to SONY, this latter owned in compensation Michael's back catalogue. For the release of Thriller 25 no contract was required.
Some true , some are mistaken.
Michael wanted out from Sony in 2001 and he though it would happened quite soon. However it took some time. Ultimate collection which included "8" previously unreleased songs satisfied Michael's contract with Sony and his contract was over sometime 2005-2006. As a free agent he signed with 2SEAS records , then got out that contract as well. By the time of his death he was unsigned - a free agent.
Michael also had a separate agreement with Sony that allowed them to distribute / release his back catalog / already released songs till 2012 (the new $250M deal made it till 2017). This allowed Sony to release any number / any variation of "Best of Albums" that consisted of previously released materials (King of Pop , Number Ones , Essential etc all falls under this category). Again Sony could have packaged any previously released songs any way they wanted - without Michael's approval.
Thriller 25 is different because it has "new versions" of the songs and it needed a separate agreement / deal between Michael and Sony. If you search the late "Peter Lopez" biography you will see that it will list that "Lopez helped to negotiate Michael Jackson’s Thriller album special 25th anniversary edition". If you read Raymone Bain's lawsuit you'll see that she states "she initiated negotiations for several projects on Jackson’s behalf in early 2007, including:
(1) a project with SONY Music to promote the 25 anniversary of the Jackson’s Thriller album release (“Thriller deal”
". So as you can see Thriller 25 was a separate and new deal between Michael and Sony that consisted producing / releasing new songs and promoting the album.
In short Michael was working with Sony in some capacity. If you say he didn't have a long term album contract with Sony you'll be right. But he was making individual deals and giving them new versions of the songs / new vocals etc so we can not say that he was "totally" against working with Sony.
ps: rumor is Michael was also in talks with Sony for "off the wall 30" to be released in 2009.
Don't be surprised when Branca sells it to SONY.
sell what? They already have a multi year multi project deal which means that the estate will give / allow them release previously unreleased songs.
To sell assets (such as the catalogs) they need a "legit" reason such as the estate needing the money to pay debts or the catalog becoming "unprofitable". Not really likely to happen.
BUMPER SNIPPET;3255152 said:
SONY kept the copyright to his previous albums.
Michael has his own copyrights. He just had and still has a deal that allows Sony to sell his back catalog. In other words Sony doesn't own Michael's songs, they are just licensed to package them and sell them any way they want till 2017.
On the other hand, Michael firmly refused to leave a single (new) unreleased song to SONY.
New songs are released under album contracts. He didn't have a contract with Sony any more. So Sony wouldn't be in a place to release new songs from him.
That explains why SONY does not possess Michael Jackson's unreleased songs. There must be hundreds!
Even if they might have masters in their vaults etc, they wouldn't own them and need estate's approval to release them.
So, SONY is desperate to make money out of anything they can from Michael with the ultimate goal to acquire the whole catalogue (not only the Beatles one, but Michael's one -with hundreds of unreleased stuff). And that would be a jackpot for them!
publishing and owning songs are really two different things. Michael and Sony/ATV owns "publishing rights" of Beatles songs which allows them to collect royalties/ licences for the artist and get a fee for that. In the case of Beatles EMI has mechanical rights, Michael / Sony has publishing rights, McCarthy / Lennon has copyright rights and gets a share from all other rights. In short a lot of different people "own" different things and get money from the profits.
love is magical;3255169 said:
^^Who has the genuine Michael Jackson's unreleased songs now?
MJultimatemusiclegen;3255176 said:
But they did this in partnership with the estate, so if they don't have them either, who does?
The estate is the "owner" under MIJAC. Sony just has the right to "sell" the albums.
BUMPER SNIPPET;3255185 said:
I assume that Estate has Michael's complete catalogue, including the unreleased songs.
True
BUMPER SNIPPET;3255191 said:
SONY's aim is to get it. Don't be surprised if Branca sells it.
Again sell what exactly?
