EMI must now return the tapes to João Gilberto.
Judge André Gustavo Corrêa de Andrade, of the 7th Civil Chamber of the Rio de Janeiro Court of Justice, reversed the decision announced last week and ordered the record label to return to the singer the original tapes of his first three LPs — "Chega de saudade" (1959), "O amor, o sorriso e a flor" (1960) and "João Gilberto" (1961) — and the single "João Gilberto cantando as músicas do filme Orfeu do Carnaval" (1959).
From Conjur - In a new chapter of the legal dispute between musician João Gilberto and EMI, Judge André Gustavo Corrêa de Andrade, of the 7th Civil Chamber of the Rio de Janeiro Court of Justice, reversed his decision announced last week and ruled, this Monday (May 20th), that the record company must return to the singer the original tapes (masters) of his first three LPs — "Chega de saudade" (1959), "O amor, o sorriso e a flor" (1960) and "João Gilberto" (1961) — and the single "João Gilberto cantando as músicas do filme Orfeu do Carnaval" (1959). The information comes from the newspaper O Globo.
The measure was taken after the musician's lawyers proved the hiring of the company Recall to store the material. Last week, the judge granted EMI the right to keep the tapes, arguing that they could be at risk of being damaged if not properly stored. João Gilberto's lawyers believe that the tapes could be delivered as early as this Tuesday.
"The risk of damage to the master tapes due to the transfer of their custody is eliminated because the defendant (João Gilberto) proved to have hired a specialized company (called Recall), of the same quality and specifications as the company hired by the plaintiff" to take care of the material, the judge justified in the new decision. "These precautions minimize or even eliminate the risks to the integrity of the material, which can and should be examined, as determined by the lower court, in the shortest possible time."
The judge states that João Gilberto is the most interested party in preserving the original recordings of his work in good condition. "To grant the appellant company the right to retain custody of the master recordings is to deny the appellee the right, as a performer and holder of related copyright rights, to decide on the use of his work, depriving not only him, but the entire community, of access to interpretations that, as already indicated, are part of the cultural history of this country and the history of music as a whole."