Sharon Osbourne Hits Back at Black Sabbath’s First Manager Over ‘Lost Tapes’ Release Dispute

The long-standing tension between Sharon Osbourne and Jim Simpson, Black Sabbath’s first manager, resurfaced after Simpson announced plans to release early recordings from the group’s pre-Sabbath era. These tracks, recorded in 1969 when the band was still known as Earth, were restored and prepared for release as an album titled “Earth: The Legendary Lost Tapes.” Simpson believes he has full rights to publish these recordings, claiming he funded the sessions himself more than five decades ago.

Sharon Osbourne strongly disagreed. In a detailed public statement, she countered Simpson’s claims, emphasizing the band’s legal position and calling attention to what she sees as misleading statements in his press release. She also shared e-mail exchanges with Simpson to argue that her communication was factual rather than threatening. According to Sharon, the legal concerns surrounding the recordings were serious enough that releasing them without proper clearance would be inappropriate.

The disagreement quickly escalated into a public dispute, fueled further by comments made on “The Osbournes” podcast and Simpson’s response the following day. What started as a conflict over old tapes became a broader debate about ownership, integrity, and the legacy of one of heavy metal’s most influential bands.

Sharon’s Public Response and Legal Concerns

Sharon Osbourne’s statement outlined why she believed Simpson’s planned release was on shaky ground. She disputed his assertion that Big Bear Records was the longest-running independent record label in the U.K., pointing instead to the established history of Topic Records, founded in 1939. She argued that Simpson’s claims lacked accuracy and transparency, noting that Big Bear Records is not even a Limited company and does not publish its financial accounts.

She also raised red flags about Trapeze Music & Entertainment Ltd, the company Simpson planned to partner with for distribution. Sharon cited recorded debts and prior bankruptcies associated with the company’s previous entities, questioning whether the artists listed in their catalog were properly authorized for distribution in the United States. She maintained that the situation was much riskier than Simpson portrayed.

Sharon further emphasized that Simpson had never offered royalties to the band nor provided them with copies of the recordings, making the entire process feel suspect. She held firm that Black Sabbath would not endorse any release through Big Bear Records or Trapeze Music under the circumstances presented.

Jim Simpson’s Defense and Ownership Claims

In his own statements, Jim Simpson argued that Sharon’s criticisms were unfair and misrepresented the situation. He insisted that he legally owned the recordings because he paid for the studio time in 1969 while managing the musicians during their Earth era. To him, the issue was straightforward: he funded the sessions, therefore he had every right to release the material.

Simpson also claimed he attempted to give the band a chance to participate in the process. According to him, he reached out to members of Black Sabbath in September 2024 but was told they were not interested. He interpreted this response as a rejection of collaboration, contradicting Sharon’s suggestion that he had obstructed the band’s involvement.

Additionally, Simpson defended the credibility of Big Bear Records and its catalog, calling it the U.K.’s longest-established independent label. He argued that while his company might not be considered “major,” it was not insignificant, and the partnership with Trapeze was part of a legitimate relaunch strategy—not an attempt to undermine the band or sneak the recordings into the market.

The Disputed Release and Questions of Integrity

The album Simpson prepared, “Earth: The Legendary Lost Tapes,” included a mix of blues covers and rare early tracks that he believed held important historical value. He viewed the release as a chance to document the early musicianship of Ozzy Osbourne, Tony Iommi, Geezer Butler, and Bill Ward before they became Black Sabbath. To Simpson, the recordings represented a significant piece of music history that deserved to be shared.

Sharon, however, questioned the integrity and legal foundation of the release. She pointed out that the recordings had allegedly appeared online through a U.S. distributor—despite an agreement requiring 14 days’ notice before any public release. She said the digital uploads were quickly withdrawn once Simpson’s team was informed of the copyright issues, further reinforcing her concerns.

The dispute deepened when Sharon stated that Simpson refused to let the band hear the recordings at all, which raised additional doubts about his intentions. She framed her stance not as an attempt to suppress history but as a matter of legal responsibility and respect for Black Sabbath’s legacy.

What the Conflict Means for the Legacy of Early Sabbath

The conflict between Sharon Osbourne and Jim Simpson highlights a larger issue common in music history—who controls archival material, and who has the right to tell the story of a band’s earliest days. For fans, these early Earth recordings are a fascinating glimpse into the origins of a group that would redefine heavy metal. But for the people involved, ownership, legality, and accuracy matter just as much as musical nostalgia.

Sharon’s strong response shows her dedication to protecting Black Sabbath’s brand, integrity, and legal interests. She sees Simpson’s planned release as potentially misleading and financially questionable, and she wants to ensure that any historical material connected to the band meets proper standards. Her position reflects decades of managing not just Ozzy’s career but the broader legacy of Sabbath.

For Simpson, the recordings are a part of his own history as well. He played a key role in the band’s early development, and he believes the tapes should see the light of day as a document of that period. Whether the album ever gets released will depend on the legal outcomes ahead—but the debate itself underscores just how passionately both sides feel about preserving the roots of one of rock’s most important bands.