Question How Come Taylor Swift Doesn't Own Her Music Masters?

  • This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies.
#1
What happened earlier on in Taylor Swift's music career now that she is battling to own her music copyright masters with Big Machine record company and Scooter Braun?
 

Attachments

#2
Scott "Scooter" Braun bought Taylor Swift's former record label Big Machine for about $300 million USD which has some of Taylor Swift's biggest hits and that's the reason why.
 
#3
What about songwriting and music publishing? Who owns Taylor Swift's music publishing copyrights?
 
#4
What about songwriting and music publishing? Who owns Taylor Swift's music publishing copyrights?
I am sure she does but I also assume her music publishing might be administered by Universal Music Publishing on her behalf.
 
#5
I am sure she does but I also assume her music publishing might be administered by Universal Music Publishing on her behalf.
How would Taylor Swift get to own her music publishing copyrights without owning her masters? Don't these two things go along hand in hand?
 
#6
How would Taylor Swift get to own her music publishing copyrights without owning her masters? Don't these two things go along hand in hand?
No, music publishing and masters don't always go hand in hand. That's not how it works.

In fact, many songwriters and performing artists in the music business don't even own their masters even though they might have written the songs themselves.

This is because by default a huge majority of record labels will not sign and finance new recording artists without making sure they will get to own the final master recording or what is known as the sound recording copyright!
 
#7
What about that clause which some artists negotiate when signing a record contract about being the first option to buy their masters back after a period of time, e.g. after 15 years.

Wasn't it there in Taylor Swift's record contract with Big Machine?
 
#8
What about that clause which some artists negotiate when signing a record contract about being the first option to buy their masters back after a period of time, e.g. after 15 years.

Wasn't it there in Taylor Swift's record contract with Big Machine?
I doubt it was because she probably will be owning those masters as we speak.
 
#9
So can we say Taylor Swift got ripped off by the music executives?
 
#10
So can we say Taylor Swift got ripped off by the music executives?
You can't say that because she agreed to the terms of the contract by signing a record deal that transferred the sound recording copyrights after she recorded those particular songs for Big Machine.

It's a business choice most artists make. There is nothing new under the sun and she won't be the last musician to do so either.
 
#11
So can we say Taylor Swift got ripped off by the music executives?
That surely ain't the music execs fault.

Anyone with basic common sense would know nobody forced Taylor Swift to sell rights to her early music, she did so willingly and got a big payday for it which also helped her establish a career in the music business.
 

••