Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 12:31     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:what exactly does this mean? Does she have to pay him to play her old songs?


No, she'll still receive royalties off the music they own. It means that Scooter has control over what happens to her songs, like, where and if they get played.


Her music sucks, so hopefully he’ll throw it in a vault never to be played.


I’m guessing the 350 odd million dollars that people paid to see her beg to differ.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 12:10     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:what exactly does this mean? Does she have to pay him to play her old songs?


No, she'll still receive royalties off the music they own. It means that Scooter has control over what happens to her songs, like, where and if they get played.


Her music sucks, so hopefully he’ll throw it in a vault never to be played.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 12:01     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.

Because either you agree or don’t agree that artists should be able to own their own, or at least part of their own, music /artistry.

Because she was never actually given the opportunity to own her own music.

Because nothing changes if nothing changes.

Because someone like Scooter Braun looks specifically for young, unknowns? Yep, that’s business, but I don’t think it’s exactly fate and chance that’s who his clients are. Part of his philanthropy work could be ensuring these artists get a fair shake, but it isn’t.

Taylor had the opportunity to own her own music. She needs to ask her guardians why they signed away those rights in her contracts when she was under 18.


Yes, she does.

Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 12:00     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:what exactly does this mean? Does she have to pay him to play her old songs?


No, she'll still receive royalties off the music they own. It means that Scooter has control over what happens to her songs, like, where and if they get played.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 11:58     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I like what she did. She's calling out the industry.

If this was on the Jobs & Career board, everyone would applaud her for speaking out.

Example, if someone posted: I'm thinking of taking a job with Beta Corp. Has anyone heard anything about them?

And a poster replied: I used to work for them. I did 90% of the work on every project for my team and my boss took the credit. He told me he'd recommend me for a promotion to be his equal if I did the same for the next 6 projects. That would have meant years more work with him without credit and dealing with his other bad habits like bullying. Instead, I decided to apply for another job at Acme Agency and now have more freedom to do what I want. Beta Corp was terrible. Avoid!

You wouldn't say that the person replying was being immature.

I'm not a fan of her music and honestly, I can find her annoying, but I don't see/have an issue with her calling out BGM and Scooter.

People are only being sh!tty toward her because she's a) Taylor Swift, someone people love to hate and b) a woman.

If a male artist had posted the same thing, people would applaud him for handing his business and on his smart business skills.





Yeah, “calling out the industry” on Tumblr that made her a multimillionaire at 30? Poor Taylor. All because she doesn’t like the guy who bought her former label. Stupid and childish. And yes, I would say exactly the same thing if she were a man.


It is more than just "not liking the man who bought the label."

Segway Brown now has control over what to do with her life's work. He can decide who gets to license those songs, how they are used, and will earn money off of those songs. Wouldn't you be upset if someone who was terrible to you and wanted to see you fail for years now not only owned what you'd created, but also earned money from it and got to decide what to do with it?

If he wanted to be a huge a-hole, he could refuse all licensing inquiries for her songs and remove them from all streaming services. Of course, since Taylor Swift's music catalog makes up 80% of this companies revenue, he'd be crazy to do that. He could do other petty things, though, like allow Kanye West to sample her songs or grant licensing rights to hate groups or groups Swift is against.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 11:44     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.

Because either you agree or don’t agree that artists should be able to own their own, or at least part of their own, music /artistry.

Because she was never actually given the opportunity to own her own music.

Because nothing changes if nothing changes.

Because someone like Scooter Braun looks specifically for young, unknowns? Yep, that’s business, but I don’t think it’s exactly fate and chance that’s who his clients are. Part of his philanthropy work could be ensuring these artists get a fair shake, but it isn’t.

Taylor had the opportunity to own her own music. She needs to ask her guardians why they signed away those rights in her contracts when she was under 18.


With insane strings. Why does no one understand that? Did anyone commenting here even read the contract that was offered to her that included the option to buy her masters?

It was a contract for 10 years. There was also wording within that contract that stated that the right for TS to own the masters was not happening.

Swift proposed that upon the execution of the new contract with BMLG, they'd assign all recordings, artwork, photos, and other materials to TS that BMLG owned or controlled. TS wanted all rights BMLG had to those items severed and to know if they'd sold the rights to any third party people that would prohibit her ownership.

BMLG's response was: Agreed, provided that the TS Materials would be subject to the terms and conditions of any license or other contract BMLG has entered into to-date with regard to them, including, without limitation, ... master licenses... .

They weren't giving her the masters, which is what she wanted. Even in this new contract that gave her the audio recordings, artwork, etc., she was not getting the masters because her previous contract with them did not include them.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 11:23     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:Kinda curious if owning the masters was so important to her and she knew the company was going to be sold why did she make an attempt to buy the company.


She couldn't afford to buy the company. She's rich but not rich enough.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 11:13     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Kinda curious if owning the masters was so important to her and she knew the company was going to be sold why did she make an attempt to buy the company.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 11:12     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
what exactly does this mean? Does she have to pay him to play her old songs?
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:56     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.

Because either you agree or don’t agree that artists should be able to own their own, or at least part of their own, music /artistry.

Because she was never actually given the opportunity to own her own music.

Because nothing changes if nothing changes.

Because someone like Scooter Braun looks specifically for young, unknowns? Yep, that’s business, but I don’t think it’s exactly fate and chance that’s who his clients are. Part of his philanthropy work could be ensuring these artists get a fair shake, but it isn’t.

Really? So late 30s Kanye was a young unknown? Late 20s Demi Lavato is still unknown? Usher is older than Scooter. And I wouldn’t call the Zac Brown Band young. What about Taylor’s BFF, Karlie Kloss. She wasn’t unknown when she signed with Scooter.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:51     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.

Because either you agree or don’t agree that artists should be able to own their own, or at least part of their own, music /artistry.

Because she was never actually given the opportunity to own her own music.

Because nothing changes if nothing changes.

Because someone like Scooter Braun looks specifically for young, unknowns? Yep, that’s business, but I don’t think it’s exactly fate and chance that’s who his clients are. Part of his philanthropy work could be ensuring these artists get a fair shake, but it isn’t.

Taylor had the opportunity to own her own music. She needs to ask her guardians why they signed away those rights in her contracts when she was under 18.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:48     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.


Because either you agree or don’t agree that artists should be able to own their own, or at least part of their own, music /artistry.

Because she was never actually given the opportunity to own her own music.

Because nothing changes if nothing changes.

Because someone like Scooter Braun looks specifically for young, unknowns? Yep, that’s business, but I don’t think it’s exactly fate and chance that’s who his clients are. Part of his philanthropy work could be ensuring these artists get a fair shake, but it isn’t.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:41     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:What's her specific beef with Braun? He's Bieber's guy right?

He's not like Dr. Luke, I hadn't heard any awful stories about him.



Scooter Braun is a great guy and an amazingly generous philanthropist. He discovered Bieber and reps Kanye.

Yeah, add me to the growing list of former fans tired of her faux victim whining.


Yet he orchestrated a phone call with Kanye and Taylor, recorded it and posted it.

great guy... sure he and weinstein.

You are lying and you know you are lying. Pretty pathetic, PP. First, the call was between Taylor and Kanye - it was Taylor and Kim and Scooter had nothing to do with it.

No. Scooter McScumbag set up the call, that is why Taylor talk on the phone with Kanye, you think they talk all the time like BFFs. He's a douche, she probably wouldn't sleep with him and now he is pulling a Weinstein.

Why would Scooter set up a call for two entertainers he wasn’t working with? He didn’t have business dealings with Taylor or Kanye at the time.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:34     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
It's a business transaction. Why is she dredging up old crap?

Not enough drama in her life, I guess. Plus she has a new album coming out.
Anonymous
Post 07/02/2019 10:25     Subject: Taylor Swift acts like a child at nearly 30!
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:No grown man should go by the name Scooter.


If I had Scooter Braun’s talent, brains and discipline (the guy was 100% self-made and a multimillionaire by 30), I would happily go by “Scooter”.


Yep, because he gets to sit back and work of the industry of others. His golden child (Bieber) seems to be crashing more by the minute, even though still successful.

Swift has been successful in her own right. She’s a singer, songwriter, performer. Like it or not, whether you think she can sing and dance, her success speaks for itself. She has changed genres, which not a lot of artists successfully do. She fought and won a successful sexual harassment lawsuit.

Here’s the thing, for me. She has a voice, and she uses it. So many women just shut the hell up and put up. It makes her “sound” like a victim, but the reality is that many women (and men) are victimized every day and never have a voice or a choice. I’ve been victimized in the workplace in countless ways, but I always had to shut up and put up to keep my job. She has a luxury most of us don’t. I’ve been physically assaulted, both sexually and violently, paid less, ignored for promotions despite better performance, etc. I actually applaud her for speaking up, because she has the body parts and will to do so, and I think it’s amazing. This is what the music and entertainment industries do to people, especially young people. Would you be happy that all your work at 20 went with no benefit to you?



You need to separate yourself from Taylor Swift. She isn’t fighting for you. She is whining bc she didn’t get her way. She is almost 30 and still relying on her innocent and sweet girl next door looks to garner sympathy. She plays naive even though she is almost 30. She lies and manipulates her fans to garner sympathy than plays dumb when she is called out. She is almost 30 and still pandering to children and teens. She is not some warrior out here trying to take down a system. She is a silly woman still stuck in her teens.


It's the same thing. Whether she's silly or smart/aggressive, she's calling out the fact that the label that made her, is also the label that she made. And she is unable to buy back her rights. Because the system is designed that way. If she were smart, aggressive, hard-edged, she would be a victim. If she is silly and immature and always-the-victim, she is still the victim of the system here.

Or is Paul McCartney a silly manipulative whiner?


She could’ve purchased her songs, she didn’t. She chose to go to another label. A man she doesn’t like took over the label and therefore her songs. She called him creepy bc she doesn’t like him. You are defending her whining behavior why? Bc she’s a woman? Newsflash, she isn’t fighting for you. She isn’t fighting anything. She’s whining bc she didn’t get her way. She’s spinning it so she appears like some sort of victim. She isn’t a victim. She just doesn’t own her music.


When Michael Jackson purchased the rights to the Beatles catalog, that ended his friendship with Paul McCartney. McCartney was such a baby about it, amirite?


NP. Well, yeah, he was. They were available to purchase and MJ bought them. Paul decided to be mad about that because he wanted them. Well, he should have bought them like MJ did. Taylor was perfectly fine not having those masters until Scooter bought them and now she's mad. It looks and sounds silly.