BlahBlahCafe - Jean-Michel Jarre forum

Here is the bad news :
http://www.purepeople.com/3437-Jean-Mic ... -air-.html

Peut-on se fier à Jean-Michel Jarre ? Le compositeur d' Oxygène qui s'était engagé à fournir un nouvel enregistrement de son succès planétaire à EMI, se serait contenté de trafiquer l'originall...

En 2007, Jean-Michel Jarre, artiste de la Warner, signe un nouveau et juteux contrat chez EMI - on parle d'une avance sur contrat de 750 000 €. A cette époque, le musicien est en conflit avec les Editions Dreyfus, son éditeur de toujours : il tente de récupérer le master d' Oxygène, l'album qui l'a propulsé au sommet des charts il y a trente ans. En vain. S'en suit donc un procès qu'il perdra...

Jean-Michel Jarre annonce alors qu'il va enregistrer une nouvelle version d'Oxygène, en Belgique. Peu de temps après, il fournit un master à EMI. La maison de disques édite donc un CD de cette oeuvre. Dans le cadre d'une opération promotionnelle liée à cet évènement, EMI encarte dans le Mail on Sunday, à paraître en Angleterre durant le week-end du 20 janvier, 2 700 000 exemplaires du single Oxygène.

Entre temps, les éditions Dreyfus ont fait analyser l' enregistrement fourni par Jean-Michel Jarre. Et c'est là que les choses se gâtent : d'après les premiers résultats, il s'avèrerait que Jean-Michel Jarre, le roi du son électronique, n' a en aucun cas produit un nouveau master d'Oxygène. Il se serait contenté de "bidouiller" l'édition d'origine afin de faire croire à un nouvel enregistrement.

Les Editions Dreyfus, sûres de leur expertise, décident d'attaquer en justice le Mail On Sunday, car sur le CD encarté est portée la mention "Edition originale". Difficilement supportable. Le Mail on Sunday, pour sa part, n'envisage pas de se laisser faire, et intente un procès à EMI, la maison de disques de Jean-Michel Jarre. Laquelle devrait maintenant se retourner contre son artiste et lui demander, dans un premier temps, le remboursement de l'avance sur contrat.

On ne peut se fier à personne.


Just to make a short summary :

In 2007, JMJ has lawsuits with Dreyfus to win the rights of Oxygène, but he didn't win the master, Dreyfus is still the owner.

JMJ recorded Oxygène 3D in Belgium, okay, and some time after, he gives a master to EMI, telling this is what he recorded.

Some time after, the Mail On Sunday releases 2,7 million CDs.

But Dreyfus made an analysis of the CD and found out that JMJ didn't produce at all a new master, he only "reworked" the master from 1976 and lied, telling that was a totally new recording.

Dreyfus attacked with lawsuits Mail On Sunday because on the CD is written "Original Edit". The MOS can't believe it and attacks EMI with lawsuits

Now, EMI is about to ask to JMJ the money they gave him when he entered EMI (750 000€).



That's all the article says, but this is not the end at all, it only begins...
Seeing how it's happening, I guess Dreyfus will do everything to win money on it, let's cross fingers and hope Oxygène Tour II is not going to be cancelled...

Well... Wasn't it known for ages that not all the tracks of Ox3d were new recorded?

Well the Oxygene Tour is 100% new stuff, so at least that shouldn't be in a danger. It's a shame that JMJ cannot get the right to the original Oxygene recordings, so we won't have to hear more about Dreyfus. He's always a damn stick in the wheel.
I suppose Dreyfus is only interested in the "New Master Recording" CD.

Yes, we all knew it, for sure, but that don't make it more legal !
JMJ lied to EMI about the CD only, not the DVD though, but it'll depend on how the press react, if EMI feel fucked up, they will fire JMJ straight away, and he won't be able to perform those concerts anymore...

Well, knowing Dreyfus, I'm almost sure he will be fired from EMI... it makes me sick...

Hmm, I don't think it will go that fast. I mean, JMJ still is a big name, and knowing the French press, I think they'll make a nice scandal of it, which is some kind of free publicity

Very very bad news ...

What a pity ! Things are getting real sad in the Jarre world. I don't know what the ending will be, but I fear Jarre will have trouble with the press and the major companies.

edit

Sux!

Tuh'hell with rights.



Allthough I assume there're more details surrounding this subject.
It use to be hard to judge by the press.

To me now it's just a matter of bending words (technical terms) the right way...

Well, imo, it was a stupid lie. One didn't have to analyze the CD, using the ears was enough. He should've just made the live part, if there wasn't time enough to really make a re-recording. Just like regarding another certain topic, I sometimes feel that Jarre thinks the world won't notice. Read: that we're stupid. As we say in Denmark; "Han sprang over hvor gærdet er lavest". (He jumped over where the fence is lowest).

I think that some differences have to be noticed.

From what I read in Nico's translation - unfortunately I don't speak French - the question is about the "Master".
"The Master" has always been intended as the master tape on which the final mix was recorded, ready to be sent to the replication plants for Vinyl records, cassette tapes and later for CDs. It means a stereo only mixed tape, usually 1/4 inch or 1/2 inch open reel tapes.

A different thing is the "Multitrack" Tape, which -as the name explains- is a tape with several instruments recorded separately on different tracks (e.g. 24 tracks vs 2 tracks of the stereo Master tape). "Multitrack" tapes were usually larger tapes -up to 2 inch tapes- and made possible to "re-mix" alias "mix again" the recorded material, because of the separated recording of the instruments.
Now, for what I know, if someone owns the Master tape rights, he has the rights to that specific master and its future re-prints.
If someone else owns the Multitrack tapes and does a different mix with added instruments edits etc., he can generate a new and different Master tape. Of course the main sounds may be very similar and the captured performance is already recorded on the Multitrack tape.

So my personal point of view is that to generate a new master you don't need to play again every instrument from scratch.
Now I haven't listened to the Mail On Sunday disc yet, but I think that it is early to draw conclusions.

P.

That's bad

Hmm. Has this been a ploy to annoy Dreyfus. It seems ludicrous that JMJ doesn't own the masters after all this time. There is still a valid copyright on the new O2 30th even if he hasn't replayed all of it. The copyright violation is in the mechanical copyright. I:E the recording. Now if he owns the multi-tracks, he is perfectly entitled to make a new copy/re-mix for a new master. What he can't do, is release the original one. Which I'm sure we would all agree is NOT what he has done. He may not have re-played it, but it is certainly a new master!(can you guess I majored in music copyright at college?).
Ok, so now the difficult bit.
If he has just made a transfer from the multi-tracks and not replayed it(very naughty), EMI could sue him and terminate his contract, or demand that he rectify it by releasing it again(unlikely).
A musicoligist will be employed to prove the differences in court.
It could damage his integrity and well, may cause his fans to leave him too.
Either way, we need an official staement from AERO productions.
P.S re-recording or not, the music STILL stands up as art!

When I visited São Paulo I remember a-ha played there for New Year's Eve I believe.

They were very popular at the time. I think there is a VHS or DVD of their concert in Brazil. They would play their music on the radio constantly.

I don't know if Duran Duran is better. It's a subjectie thing. I like Duran Duran as well (have every album) but their latest album Red Carpet Massacre is pretty blaaah. Sounds like a Justin Timberlake album with vocals by Simon Le Bon.

Magne F from a-ha recently joked that they were going to get Timbaland and Justin Timberlake to produce their next album too (They produced Duran Duran's latest which so far is the 2nd worst selling album in Duran Duran's history--the first being Thank You).

Dreyfus, go to your f**king s*it