shadow wrote:Well I have the Images CD here, and that one contained the Paris La Defense Remix of Equinoxe 4 and a remix of LCM 2 (although not the PLD it sounded alot like it), even if it was cut short, and that release was also done by Dreyfus.
Equinoxe 4 on Images is very similar to the La Defense version, but not identical. IOW it is technically different and another recording, which is also why it is legally different, and thus not included in Dreyfus' catalogue of tracks they can release (as far as anyone can know). The fact that Jarre has stopped Dreyfus DVDs of a couple of concerts also point to this.
In the music business corner of music rights, one has to differentiate between rights to compositions, and rights to recordings. Jarre has the sole rights to exploit his own compositions, which is why he can perform them live, remix them, and re-record them without Dreyfus interfering. But he also made deals with Dreyfus and those deals pertain to specific
recordings, i.e. the albums that were released on Dreyfus, and these rights are different from composition rights. This is why Dreyfus can re-release the Oxygene recording that Jarre made a deal for in the 70s, but they cannot release the New Master recording of Oxygene (but Jarre can, because it's not the recording Dreyfus "bought").
In other words, if Jarre didnt make a recording contract for an album for the La Defense music, Dreyfus doesnt own the rights to release Equinoxe 4 from that concert. It then follows that Dreyfus and Jarre
did make a contract for the Images album, but Jarre gave Dreyfus
a different recording of Equinoxe 4 for that album. Why a different recording? I can only guess that JMJ wants to retain 100% rights to live versions that arent coming out on an album.
Another example; it is quite possible that there does not exist an album contract for, say, Oxygene Tour 1997 and that Jarre could in theory release a live album one day from that tour. Actually he more or less did that with Oxygene LIYLR which was a live performance and also a different recording.
Side note: There is also a third type of rights called publishing rights. This pertains to titles/track names, iow. not recordings and not compositions. Notice how on compilations and live albums after Dreyfus and Jarre split, they are both listed as publishers for tracks that originally were released by Dreyfus. That's because JMJ and Dreyfus co-published titles when they worked together. Publishing means basically that the one doing the publishing looks after various rights of the composer. If a Jarre recording was used in a movie or a commercial, the producers would pay a royalty fee and the publisher must collect these and distribute them to the composer. If Ed Starink, the Dutch guy who made so many cover versions, records Calypso and releases it on a compilation, the publisher collects a fee on JMJ's behalf even if it's not JMJ's original recording. (Co-publishing simply means that income share between Dreyfus and JMJ were different than if Dreyfus were sole publisher, probably to JMJ's advantage, as you get more back if you own 50% rights than 0% rights. Publishing income can be substantial and an important portion of a composer's income. Many composers live off publishing income alone. In a small country like Norway, radio airplay income which falls under publishing can be up to 35.000 euros for the most popular artists, imagine then how much in a bigger country, for radio alone.)
Remember how Dreyfus tried to shut down fan videos on YouTube of Oxygene that were either performed by fans or JMJ himself? On one hand they were wrong in doing so because they didnt own the rights to the recordings fans made, or the live versions JMJ made. On the other hand they probably interpreted that they had publishing rights and since they received no royalties from those fan videos, they had the right to take them down. I am not sure which legal button Dreyfus pressed with YouTube, but YT are quick to respond to copyright claims. Jarre responded by saying on video that it was ok for him if fans made cover version or uploaded concert clips. This was not just to be nice or to piss Dreyfus off, but he had legal rights to authorize this because he was co-publisher of his own titles. (Technically, he should have authorized every single fan in writing, but that just wont work out in practice.)
Sorry for this somewhat offtopic post being so long, but in fact it relates to how certain tracks can appear on R&E and how other tracks cant. It follows that Equinoxe 4 12" extended remix could have been included, but not Volcanic Dance (unless new contracts were made up).
Disclaimer; if contracts with Dreyfus has expired or been renewed or changed or renegotiated, things look a bit different, but none of us will know that in detail.
