Taylor Swift Means Business
The most influential singer of all time?
Taylor Swift is a phenomenal singer and songwriter. We know Taylor Swift for many things: her chart-topping hits and a long list of ex-boyfriends among them. But the crazy part is her reputation as an advocate for artists, songwriters and producers. She could single-handedly taking on tech giant Apple for not paying those professionals during a three month free trial for its new music streaming service. Over the weekend, Apple caved, saying it would be paying royalties during the free trial.
Apple is not the only one. In 2014, Taylor Swift broke up with Spotify, pulled out her entire album catalog, including 1989, one of the best selling album at the time. The decision was hitting the streaming service hard since Taylor Swift was one of its most popular artists, with 25 percent of listeners having streamed her songs. Her decision to withdraw her music was described as brave by some and reckless by others. But, it sent the clear message: Taylor Swift’s influence is inevitable.
Taylor Swift is not just an Artist
It is said that the best stockbrokers have mastered the art of the calculated risk and Scott Kingsley Swift got to put that maxim into practice with the the career of his then early teenage daughter, Taylor Swift.
In 2004, Taylor was just 14, going on 15, her dad decided to uproot the family from their comfortable life in Wyomissing, Pennsylvania, and set about making his first-born child a country-music superstar in Nashville. Taylor Swift then signed a six-album deal with Big Machine records.
You may feel Taylor Swift has been around forever, but Swift is just 31 this year. Despite being an industry veteran, she’s still very much a millennial. Her introduction to the world wasn’t as seismic as that of Britney Spears, but there have been no Britney-like meltdowns in the foll0wing years. This is a pop star who’s tough as nails. It is often manifested time and again in her songs. It is safe to say that Swift’s greatest gift is her willingness to reinvent, to keep her music fresh, to try new things.
And she like to disrupt the disrupters. Today’s artist are more than willing to jump on the streaming bandwagon, But Swift isn’t. She was pulling her albums off Spotify and the rest. She argued that artists receive a pitifully small fee per stream and she invited others to make a similar stand. Few followed her, but she was unwavering and for three years, Swift was the world’s biggest artist not to appear on any of the platforms. She is leading others within the music industry.
Taylor Swift Means Business, A Fight Over the Album Catalogue
Taylor Swift is recently had a fight with her former label to buyback her entire old album. Thus, she releases her old 2008 album, Fearless (Taylor Version), as a new and more mature version of the former.
The new version is a hefty album. It includes 26 tracks — seven songs longer than even the Fearless Platinum Edition in order to, in Taylor’s words, give us the “full story, see the entire vivid picture and let you into the vivid dreamscape that is my fearless album.”
But, why did she do that?
Because she wants her fans to retire the original album, completely out of the market.
In Pursuit of Regaining Rights to Her Own Work
It all started when Swift announced she was leaving Big Machine Records. She then signed with Republic Records and Universal Music Group in November 2018. Swift firmly believes artists should own the work they create. Thus, her new deal with Republic Records and UMG, she will gained not only the ownership of any future masters, but also ensured that any sale of the label’s shares in Spotify “will result in a distribution of money to their artists.”
That is not what happened with Big Machine, especially after the label acquired by Scooter Braun and his company, Ithaca Holdings LLC.
Taylor Swift and Big Machine Records founder Scott Borchetta appeared to be on good terms when she left Big Machine Records. But, when the label is aquired, Swift’s first six albums is now also under Ithaca Holdings LLC, with no chance for Swift to own them back.
She even can’t perform some classics from her discography at American Music Award at November 24th, 2019, since Big Machine Records and Ithaca Holdings did not give any access to it. The labels also blocked any recording of Swift’s song in her 6 first albums to be featured in Netflix documentaries.
Swift then officially announced her plans to rerecord her first five albums in an attempt to regain her master album ownership. Since then, Swift was busy trying to own the work she spent practically 13 years of her life creating. She’s making sure that the rerecordings sound exactly like the original. Why? The more they sound the same, the less likely a company will be inclined to use the original, which means Swift ensures that she gets her profit and credit for her work.
How come Taylor Swift did’t own her Musics?
Well, this is pretty complex since the case is full of legal terms.
Taylor Swift wrote the melody and the lyrics for her music. It makes her the author of the composition and has reserved that right under a publishing deal. But it doesn’t merely mean she own the rights to usage of songs from her first six albums because the songs were recorded under her old label, Big Machine Records. In simpler words, Big Machine Records owns Swift’s masters, and it has lordship over the song’s life after the recording like usage in visual media and live performance.
As U.S. copyright law stipulates,
“Copyright protection gives the owner of copyright in a musical composition the exclusive right to make copies, prepare derivative works, sell or distribute copies, and perform or display the work publicly. The owner of copyright may also authorize others to exercise the exclusive rights.”
This is why Braun and Borchetta were allegedly able to veto Swift’s rights to perform her old songs on the AMAs and in the Netflix documentary.
Another question may come up, why would an artist willingly sign over something they created in the first place?
Well, for an artist just starting out the resources and clout that comes with a major record label can propel their career. But this ownership can last for years and be used as a bargaining chip when record companies are bought out, sometimes by entities an artist may not like.
