Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who's the psycho who always rails about TS re-recording her masters? I'm a fan but I've never bought one item of merch - I just have Spotify and listen to her there. No one has to buy any of her things. It's so bizarre that the wacko PP thinks women have no agency and are being forced to consume merchandise. Nope! Sorry to disappoint.

You have to have room temperature IQ to think any part of that "Taylor's version" and boogeyman Scooter crap was real. And just like a fairy tale, she ended up with her masters in the end. Fake, fake, fake.

So you don't really think Big Machine sold their assets to Braun and that Swift eventually bought back her masters? She uses hyperbole when she acts like it was a big conspiracy against her, but it very much happened and she handled it pretty brilliantly.

I think literally none of it was real. It was all theater cooked up to scam each of her superfans for, what, $100+ each plus all the extra digital play revenue. Scooter wasn't actually ruined, he's now a billionaire and dating the most famous actress in the world. It was all nonsense. I can't believe her fans are still in such denial. It's like MAGA voters who can't admit to themselves Trump scammed them.

The most famous actress in the world? You really are delusional.

"Sydney Sweeney was the most Googled actress in the United States and globally in 2025."

Because people were like "Who?" when the jeans/genes controversy started. Nobody knew who she was because she's not known for acting.

She’s a phenomenal actress and hot, too

Are you a teen aged boy?

A teenage boy? You don’t think your husband thinks Sydney is hot?? Don’t kid yourself

So are you a husband or a teen boy?

Husband

I doubt that. Taylor Swift's fans aren't interest in her sex appeal. You fundamentally misunderstand her demographic.

What? I was talking about Sydney Sweeney and don’t ask a question if you don’t want the answer.
Btw, you’re so delusional if you think Taylor’s fans are only teenagers. My wife has many friends that went to her tour without kids.

Are you high? Your "wife's" friends aren't going to Taylor's shows because they think she's smoking hot. Not sure why you're even bringing Sydney Sweeney into this discussion. Can't think of anything more of a turn off than a guy hanging out online to whine about Taylor Swift. Bur you're really doubling down on being someone's husband. I feel sorry for your wife.

+1
I would be beyond grossed out if my husband was the above dude. 🤮

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who's the psycho who always rails about TS re-recording her masters? I'm a fan but I've never bought one item of merch - I just have Spotify and listen to her there. No one has to buy any of her things. It's so bizarre that the wacko PP thinks women have no agency and are being forced to consume merchandise. Nope! Sorry to disappoint.

You have to have room temperature IQ to think any part of that "Taylor's version" and boogeyman Scooter crap was real. And just like a fairy tale, she ended up with her masters in the end. Fake, fake, fake.

So you don't really think Big Machine sold their assets to Braun and that Swift eventually bought back her masters? She uses hyperbole when she acts like it was a big conspiracy against her, but it very much happened and she handled it pretty brilliantly.

I think literally none of it was real. It was all theater cooked up to scam each of her superfans for, what, $100+ each plus all the extra digital play revenue. Scooter wasn't actually ruined, he's now a billionaire and dating the most famous actress in the world. It was all nonsense. I can't believe her fans are still in such denial. It's like MAGA voters who can't admit to themselves Trump scammed them.

The most famous actress in the world? You really are delusional.

"Sydney Sweeney was the most Googled actress in the United States and globally in 2025."

Because people were like "Who?" when the jeans/genes controversy started. Nobody knew who she was because she's not known for acting.

She’s a phenomenal actress and hot, too

Are you a teen aged boy?

A teenage boy? You don’t think your husband thinks Sydney is hot?? Don’t kid yourself

So are you a husband or a teen boy?

Husband

I doubt that. Taylor Swift's fans aren't interest in her sex appeal. You fundamentally misunderstand her demographic.

What? I was talking about Sydney Sweeney and don’t ask a question if you don’t want the answer.
Btw, you’re so delusional if you think Taylor’s fans are only teenagers. My wife has many friends that went to her tour without kids.

Are you high? Your "wife's" friends aren't going to Taylor's shows because they think she's smoking hot. Not sure why you're even bringing Sydney Sweeney into this discussion. Can't think of anything more of a turn off than a guy hanging out online to whine about Taylor Swift. Bur you're really doubling down on being someone's husband. I feel sorry for your wife.

+1
I would be beyond grossed out if my husband was the above dude. 🤮

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Record execs duped her fans into rebuying all of her old albums under the guise of the masters being stolen and she tricked the big bad execs by re-recording everything. Y’all are hopeless saps.

Do your research first before responding. You’re wrong on why she recorded them

NP. She recorded them to devalue her old masters. Duped her fans into buying them with the sob story that they were bought out from under her. Gotta hand it to the petty b****.

Are the feminists still here with us? Or are we just giving up the ruse that they were ever for women?

Wait a minute- are you saying you can only be a feminist if you support Taylor? Or only if you support all women regardless of principle?

Or are you saying you bought into her grift that by buying her albums again again you were support women against big bad men?

I don’t need to support all women when I disagree with them principle nor do I have to support Taylor swift to be a feminist. Why (other than you bought her crap) would you ever think you have to support all women even if you disagree with them?

NP. No one is forcing you to buy her music so I don’t get where the animosity is coming from. I’ve never purchased a single item but still like her music. It’s possible. But to your other point, yeah kind of. If no one is getting hurt and it’s all just a business model that hurts no one but you just happen to disagree with, yeah I still think women should support women who are changing the status quo. And she has and did. They literally teach business law classes based on her approach. I think any feminist would support that success, as well as her advice and help she gives to upcoming artists. But whatever.

I have read she has actually hurt up coming artists with the way her handled the business. Here is a law school talking about how contracts have changed for the worse for artists because of how Taylor’s team handled the situation. She just made the system more capitalist.

https://uclawreview.org/2024/03/27/look-what-you-made-them-do-the-impact-of-taylor-swifts-re-recording-project-on-record-labels/

And Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/

In response, record companies are now trying to prohibit re-recordings for 20 or 30 years, not just two or three. And this has become a key part of contract negotiations. “Will they get 30 years? Probably not, if the lawyer is competent. But they want to make sure that the artist’s vocal cords are not in good shape by the time they get around to re-recording.”
This, he noted, begged the question of why an artist would even want to sign a record contract in the age of TikTok and Spotify. “Number one, there is the pride involved. If you were The Who in the ’60s, you could trash a hotel room and the label would clean up the mess. Of course it would come out of future royalties, but they would do it. But what you have to ask yourself is, is it worth it?”
This may not be an issue for most artists who sign to record labels — but it likely will be for a select few.
“Very few people have the power of a Taylor Swift, but nobody knows who the next Taylor Swift will be,” Greenstein said. “So, if you are a lawyer, you will represent your client zealously.”

Not that many artists have a stock broker/ financial analyst as a Dad who is backing their career. Taylor was able to have her career because of her Dad’s money. Apparently he even helped negotiate Taylor out of the Blake Lively court case. I don’t see that as particularly feminist.

What’s 100% anti feminist is continuing to give her father credit for her career, over and over and over.

Amen to that! She has her own team of lawyers, accountants, etc - who work for HER. So funny that the PP actually thinks she's a little girl whose daddy needs to come to her rescue.

Strange that he is still fighting her battles, rescuing her and trying to keep her out of trouble.

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/taylor-swift-insider-who-leaked-blake-livelys-alleged-threat-to-release-pop-stars-private-texts-revealed/news-story/de51dbf30db4c913da9ec6da133141da

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Record execs duped her fans into rebuying all of her old albums under the guise of the masters being stolen and she tricked the big bad execs by re-recording everything. Y’all are hopeless saps.

Do your research first before responding. You’re wrong on why she recorded them

NP. She recorded them to devalue her old masters. Duped her fans into buying them with the sob story that they were bought out from under her. Gotta hand it to the petty b****.

Are the feminists still here with us? Or are we just giving up the ruse that they were ever for women?

Wait a minute- are you saying you can only be a feminist if you support Taylor? Or only if you support all women regardless of principle?

Or are you saying you bought into her grift that by buying her albums again again you were support women against big bad men?

I don’t need to support all women when I disagree with them principle nor do I have to support Taylor swift to be a feminist. Why (other than you bought her crap) would you ever think you have to support all women even if you disagree with them?

NP. No one is forcing you to buy her music so I don’t get where the animosity is coming from. I’ve never purchased a single item but still like her music. It’s possible. But to your other point, yeah kind of. If no one is getting hurt and it’s all just a business model that hurts no one but you just happen to disagree with, yeah I still think women should support women who are changing the status quo. And she has and did. They literally teach business law classes based on her approach. I think any feminist would support that success, as well as her advice and help she gives to upcoming artists. But whatever.

I have read she has actually hurt up coming artists with the way her handled the business. Here is a law school talking about how contracts have changed for the worse for artists because of how Taylor’s team handled the situation. She just made the system more capitalist.

https://uclawreview.org/2024/03/27/look-what-you-made-them-do-the-impact-of-taylor-swifts-re-recording-project-on-record-labels/

And Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/

In response, record companies are now trying to prohibit re-recordings for 20 or 30 years, not just two or three. And this has become a key part of contract negotiations. “Will they get 30 years? Probably not, if the lawyer is competent. But they want to make sure that the artist’s vocal cords are not in good shape by the time they get around to re-recording.”
This, he noted, begged the question of why an artist would even want to sign a record contract in the age of TikTok and Spotify. “Number one, there is the pride involved. If you were The Who in the ’60s, you could trash a hotel room and the label would clean up the mess. Of course it would come out of future royalties, but they would do it. But what you have to ask yourself is, is it worth it?”
This may not be an issue for most artists who sign to record labels — but it likely will be for a select few.
“Very few people have the power of a Taylor Swift, but nobody knows who the next Taylor Swift will be,” Greenstein said. “So, if you are a lawyer, you will represent your client zealously.”

Not that many artists have a stock broker/ financial analyst as a Dad who is backing their career. Taylor was able to have her career because of her Dad’s money. Apparently he even helped negotiate Taylor out of the Blake Lively court case. I don’t see that as particularly feminist.

What’s 100% anti feminist is continuing to give her father credit for her career, over and over and over.

Amen to that! She has her own team of lawyers, accountants, etc - who work for HER. So funny that the PP actually thinks she's a little girl whose daddy needs to come to her rescue.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Record execs duped her fans into rebuying all of her old albums under the guise of the masters being stolen and she tricked the big bad execs by re-recording everything. Y’all are hopeless saps.

Do your research first before responding. You’re wrong on why she recorded them

NP. She recorded them to devalue her old masters. Duped her fans into buying them with the sob story that they were bought out from under her. Gotta hand it to the petty b****.

Are the feminists still here with us? Or are we just giving up the ruse that they were ever for women?

Wait a minute- are you saying you can only be a feminist if you support Taylor? Or only if you support all women regardless of principle?

Or are you saying you bought into her grift that by buying her albums again again you were support women against big bad men?

I don’t need to support all women when I disagree with them principle nor do I have to support Taylor swift to be a feminist. Why (other than you bought her crap) would you ever think you have to support all women even if you disagree with them?

NP. No one is forcing you to buy her music so I don’t get where the animosity is coming from. I’ve never purchased a single item but still like her music. It’s possible. But to your other point, yeah kind of. If no one is getting hurt and it’s all just a business model that hurts no one but you just happen to disagree with, yeah I still think women should support women who are changing the status quo. And she has and did. They literally teach business law classes based on her approach. I think any feminist would support that success, as well as her advice and help she gives to upcoming artists. But whatever.

I have read she has actually hurt up coming artists with the way her handled the business. Here is a law school talking about how contracts have changed for the worse for artists because of how Taylor’s team handled the situation. She just made the system more capitalist.

https://uclawreview.org/2024/03/27/look-what-you-made-them-do-the-impact-of-taylor-swifts-re-recording-project-on-record-labels/

And Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/

In response, record companies are now trying to prohibit re-recordings for 20 or 30 years, not just two or three. And this has become a key part of contract negotiations. “Will they get 30 years? Probably not, if the lawyer is competent. But they want to make sure that the artist’s vocal cords are not in good shape by the time they get around to re-recording.”
This, he noted, begged the question of why an artist would even want to sign a record contract in the age of TikTok and Spotify. “Number one, there is the pride involved. If you were The Who in the ’60s, you could trash a hotel room and the label would clean up the mess. Of course it would come out of future royalties, but they would do it. But what you have to ask yourself is, is it worth it?”
This may not be an issue for most artists who sign to record labels — but it likely will be for a select few.
“Very few people have the power of a Taylor Swift, but nobody knows who the next Taylor Swift will be,” Greenstein said. “So, if you are a lawyer, you will represent your client zealously.”

Not that many artists have a stock broker/ financial analyst as a Dad who is backing their career. Taylor was able to have her career because of her Dad’s money. Apparently he even helped negotiate Taylor out of the Blake Lively court case. I don’t see that as particularly feminist.

What’s 100% anti feminist is continuing to give her father credit for her career, over and over and over.

Well, he took credit for it in that letter when he also talked about his private parts not working.

He ran a bizas a stockbroker. TS did not come from the womb understanding how to become a pop star.

Her daddy paid her way ($1m or more he wrote) and even bought a lot of her early albums.

It is not anti-woman to point out the work that he himself says he did. She would be nothing without her dad.

Her parents have controlled her for a long time.

Are you a Beyonce fan by chance?

Not the person you are arguing with, but at least maintain consistency with the argument you are presenting (That “Taylor is a feminist and pro all women and all women should stand up for each other”) and not bring up other women to compare her too in the middle of that argument.

Make it make a little bit of sense.

DP. You have totally missed the point, as expected.

Anonymous wrote:Exec Scooter is filthy rich and famous. And Taylor now conveniently owns her masters right after milking her fans to re-buy literally all of her old albums. It totally wasn't a scam though. Fight the power, kids! lol

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who's the psycho who always rails about TS re-recording her masters? I'm a fan but I've never bought one item of merch - I just have Spotify and listen to her there. No one has to buy any of her things. It's so bizarre that the wacko PP thinks women have no agency and are being forced to consume merchandise. Nope! Sorry to disappoint.

You have to have room temperature IQ to think any part of that "Taylor's version" and boogeyman Scooter crap was real. And just like a fairy tale, she ended up with her masters in the end. Fake, fake, fake.

So you don't really think Big Machine sold their assets to Braun and that Swift eventually bought back her masters? She uses hyperbole when she acts like it was a big conspiracy against her, but it very much happened and she handled it pretty brilliantly.

I think literally none of it was real. It was all theater cooked up to scam each of her superfans for, what, $100+ each plus all the extra digital play revenue. Scooter wasn't actually ruined, he's now a billionaire and dating the most famous actress in the world. It was all nonsense. I can't believe her fans are still in such denial. It's like MAGA voters who can't admit to themselves Trump scammed them.

The most famous actress in the world? You really are delusional.

"Sydney Sweeney was the most Googled actress in the United States and globally in 2025."

Because people were like "Who?" when the jeans/genes controversy started. Nobody knew who she was because she's not known for acting.

She’s a phenomenal actress and hot, too

Are you a teen aged boy?

A teenage boy? You don’t think your husband thinks Sydney is hot?? Don’t kid yourself

So are you a husband or a teen boy?

Husband

I doubt that. Taylor Swift's fans aren't interest in her sex appeal. You fundamentally misunderstand her demographic.

What? I was talking about Sydney Sweeney and don’t ask a question if you don’t want the answer.
Btw, you’re so delusional if you think Taylor’s fans are only teenagers. My wife has many friends that went to her tour without kids.

Are you high? Your "wife's" friends aren't going to Taylor's shows because they think she's smoking hot. Not sure why you're even bringing Sydney Sweeney into this discussion. Can't think of anything more of a turn off than a guy hanging out online to whine about Taylor Swift. Bur you're really doubling down on being someone's husband. I feel sorry for your wife.

Anonymous wrote:New poster.

I don’t understand her fame or why anyone thinks her music is good, but I also don’t think Sweeney is talented or that SVU is an “important” show regardless of Hargitay’s foundation. It all gets clumped into “garbage adored by white people.”

Anonymous wrote:Watching a Taylor Swift conspiracy theorist crash out online is so damn hilarious. Keep at it PP!! Tell us more!!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Who's the psycho who always rails about TS re-recording her masters? I'm a fan but I've never bought one item of merch - I just have Spotify and listen to her there. No one has to buy any of her things. It's so bizarre that the wacko PP thinks women have no agency and are being forced to consume merchandise. Nope! Sorry to disappoint.

You have to have room temperature IQ to think any part of that "Taylor's version" and boogeyman Scooter crap was real. And just like a fairy tale, she ended up with her masters in the end. Fake, fake, fake.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Record execs duped her fans into rebuying all of her old albums under the guise of the masters being stolen and she tricked the big bad execs by re-recording everything. Y’all are hopeless saps.

Do your research first before responding. You’re wrong on why she recorded them

NP. She recorded them to devalue her old masters. Duped her fans into buying them with the sob story that they were bought out from under her. Gotta hand it to the petty b****.

Are the feminists still here with us? Or are we just giving up the ruse that they were ever for women?

Wait a minute- are you saying you can only be a feminist if you support Taylor? Or only if you support all women regardless of principle?

Or are you saying you bought into her grift that by buying her albums again again you were support women against big bad men?

I don’t need to support all women when I disagree with them principle nor do I have to support Taylor swift to be a feminist. Why (other than you bought her crap) would you ever think you have to support all women even if you disagree with them?

NP. No one is forcing you to buy her music so I don’t get where the animosity is coming from. I’ve never purchased a single item but still like her music. It’s possible. But to your other point, yeah kind of. If no one is getting hurt and it’s all just a business model that hurts no one but you just happen to disagree with, yeah I still think women should support women who are changing the status quo. And she has and did. They literally teach business law classes based on her approach. I think any feminist would support that success, as well as her advice and help she gives to upcoming artists. But whatever.

I have read she has actually hurt up coming artists with the way her handled the business. Here is a law school talking about how contracts have changed for the worse for artists because of how Taylor’s team handled the situation. She just made the system more capitalist.

https://uclawreview.org/2024/03/27/look-what-you-made-them-do-the-impact-of-taylor-swifts-re-recording-project-on-record-labels/

And Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/

In response, record companies are now trying to prohibit re-recordings for 20 or 30 years, not just two or three. And this has become a key part of contract negotiations. “Will they get 30 years? Probably not, if the lawyer is competent. But they want to make sure that the artist’s vocal cords are not in good shape by the time they get around to re-recording.”
This, he noted, begged the question of why an artist would even want to sign a record contract in the age of TikTok and Spotify. “Number one, there is the pride involved. If you were The Who in the ’60s, you could trash a hotel room and the label would clean up the mess. Of course it would come out of future royalties, but they would do it. But what you have to ask yourself is, is it worth it?”
This may not be an issue for most artists who sign to record labels — but it likely will be for a select few.
“Very few people have the power of a Taylor Swift, but nobody knows who the next Taylor Swift will be,” Greenstein said. “So, if you are a lawyer, you will represent your client zealously.”

Not that many artists have a stock broker/ financial analyst as a Dad who is backing their career. Taylor was able to have her career because of her Dad’s money. Apparently he even helped negotiate Taylor out of the Blake Lively court case. I don’t see that as particularly feminist.

What’s 100% anti feminist is continuing to give her father credit for her career, over and over and over.

Well, he took credit for it in that letter when he also talked about his private parts not working.

He ran a bizas a stockbroker. TS did not come from the womb understanding how to become a pop star.

Her daddy paid her way ($1m or more he wrote) and even bought a lot of her early albums.

It is not anti-woman to point out the work that he himself says he did. She would be nothing without her dad.

Her parents have controlled her for a long time.

Are you a Beyonce fan by chance?

Not the person you are arguing with, but at least maintain consistency with the argument you are presenting (That “Taylor is a feminist and pro all women and all women should stand up for each other”) and not bring up other women to compare her too in the middle of that argument.

Make it make a little bit of sense.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Record execs duped her fans into rebuying all of her old albums under the guise of the masters being stolen and she tricked the big bad execs by re-recording everything. Y’all are hopeless saps.

Do your research first before responding. You’re wrong on why she recorded them

NP. She recorded them to devalue her old masters. Duped her fans into buying them with the sob story that they were bought out from under her. Gotta hand it to the petty b****.

Are the feminists still here with us? Or are we just giving up the ruse that they were ever for women?

Wait a minute- are you saying you can only be a feminist if you support Taylor? Or only if you support all women regardless of principle?

Or are you saying you bought into her grift that by buying her albums again again you were support women against big bad men?

I don’t need to support all women when I disagree with them principle nor do I have to support Taylor swift to be a feminist. Why (other than you bought her crap) would you ever think you have to support all women even if you disagree with them?

NP. No one is forcing you to buy her music so I don’t get where the animosity is coming from. I’ve never purchased a single item but still like her music. It’s possible. But to your other point, yeah kind of. If no one is getting hurt and it’s all just a business model that hurts no one but you just happen to disagree with, yeah I still think women should support women who are changing the status quo. And she has and did. They literally teach business law classes based on her approach. I think any feminist would support that success, as well as her advice and help she gives to upcoming artists. But whatever.

I have read she has actually hurt up coming artists with the way her handled the business. Here is a law school talking about how contracts have changed for the worse for artists because of how Taylor’s team handled the situation. She just made the system more capitalist.

https://uclawreview.org/2024/03/27/look-what-you-made-them-do-the-impact-of-taylor-swifts-re-recording-project-on-record-labels/

And Harvard: https://hls.harvard.edu/today/how-taylor-swift-changed-the-copyright-game-by-remaking-her-own-music/

In response, record companies are now trying to prohibit re-recordings for 20 or 30 years, not just two or three. And this has become a key part of contract negotiations. “Will they get 30 years? Probably not, if the lawyer is competent. But they want to make sure that the artist’s vocal cords are not in good shape by the time they get around to re-recording.”
This, he noted, begged the question of why an artist would even want to sign a record contract in the age of TikTok and Spotify. “Number one, there is the pride involved. If you were The Who in the ’60s, you could trash a hotel room and the label would clean up the mess. Of course it would come out of future royalties, but they would do it. But what you have to ask yourself is, is it worth it?”
This may not be an issue for most artists who sign to record labels — but it likely will be for a select few.
“Very few people have the power of a Taylor Swift, but nobody knows who the next Taylor Swift will be,” Greenstein said. “So, if you are a lawyer, you will represent your client zealously.”

Not that many artists have a stock broker/ financial analyst as a Dad who is backing their career. Taylor was able to have her career because of her Dad’s money. Apparently he even helped negotiate Taylor out of the Blake Lively court case. I don’t see that as particularly feminist.

What’s 100% anti feminist is continuing to give her father credit for her career, over and over and over.