Today I got several PM's asking me about any legal consequences. And it got me to think from a logical perspective.
The most famous case we know in the history is "Milli Vanilli" and their record company (Arista) has been sued several times under customer fraud protection act (in USA). They were made to pay from a few dollars to the full purchase price of the album to the customers/fans due to these lawsuits.
Of course we need to check the US state and even international laws for the details and how this laws applies on a location basis but the Milli Vanilli example basically demonstrates to us that they could be sued if they participated in such a fraud and be held financially responsible.
Then the question becomes would they do such thing? First of all, this brings a doubt on not only "Michael" album but any future release that will come from Sony - which means that they must be sabotaging their own deal with the estate that they paid $250M. Secondly with any legal consequences they are risking to refund all or part of the sales revenues.
It simply doesn't make sense that Sony would do something that could potentially hurt them more than $250M in the long run - the same is true for the estate.
(I know some people claim or would claim that "Evil Sony is destroying Michael" but actual evil attempt would require them to destroy Michael without destroying themselves otherwise it's plain stupid)
Also we know that from 3T's tweets it's not all of the songs that there's a doubt against - it's just Cascio tracks. Therefore in my opinion it would be much more easier, less messy and less risky to not include the Cascio tracks in the first place.
Then why did they include and release this song?
Perhaps for the controversy? Who knows? They got everyone talking about the song and the album didn't they? Does this work to their advantage or not? We'll see.
Again from a logical perspective I tend to think that even at a worse case scenario (meaning lawsuit(s)) , Sony has enough to prove that it's Michael's vocals. Of course I'm not saying that the vocals aren't enhanced and that there aren't supplemental vocals added- most probably all of those are done but from a logical and legal perspective Michael's vocals should be on the song.
Again this is a logical perspective without any musical comparisons.
