Whenever we’re talking about the music industry we hear a lot of stories. We hear about artists who’ve made it big, one hit wonders such as Sisqo’s Thong Song and stories of contract hell. Where the the artist is stuck in a hellacious situation that they can’t get out of, don’t own their content and more. We don’t even have to go that far back to find these stories. And as the business of music changes because of technology and knowledge, I thought it would be interesting to talk about Taylor Swift’s long fought win to re-record her content and own her masters.
In order for me to support my blogging activities, I may receive monetary compensation or other types of remuneration for my endorsement, recommendation, testimonial and/or link to any products or services from this blog. Please read my disclosure here.
You’re probably asking yourself…what in the hell does Taylor Swift have to do with Michelle’s-Michelle is Money Hungry season “Vixens, Virgins and Vigilantes: The Impact of Policy on American Women’s Money” Because one could argue that there is unspoken policy in creative spaces that are harmful to creative women and I thought I would explore it more. Artists such as TLC, Kesha, Toni Braxton, and more have alleged that they were in harmful contracts. With some artists having to purchase access to their art, retract statements that alleged harm and more. I wonder if there’s an unspoken policy in the music industry hyper focused on the long game. Because if the music is good, the payout should be too. And at the end of the day Taylor Swift’s story has made her way onto the show because it’s compelling.
Also, I’m a Swiftie.
Listen to the Episode
Your American Money
How You Can Support this Podcast Season
Your faith in me and this project is humbling and I hope that this project reflects the thoughtfulness and care I would like to bring to this season and this conversation. If you’re interested in supporting this project I’ve included the donation link which is: https://michelleismoneyhungry.com/support
Thank you to Amy O. for your kind support towards this project.
Taylor Swift is a Billionaire
It’s wild to think about in a music industry that seems to be decreasing in financial returns for the artist. I have a friend who had the dream to become a country music artist. This friend was and is a phenomenal singer. We met when she was leading a team that I was a Brand Ambassador on. This friend would share the behind the scenes of what it was like to build a music business.
It’s fucking hard.
There was the touring, the cumulative impact of streams and then there were the times when things happened in her life-that affected her ability to tour, etc. What I was struck by was how much she hated the payouts per stream. It was clear that there was no way artists could make a sustainable living 100% reliant on streams. It’s not lost on me that so many larger musicians are diversifying the way they’re making money. I would like to share some examples below.
- Rihanna-Fenty, tennis shoes, lingerie, music and brand partnerships, Prime Collaboration
- Mariah Carey-Brand partnerships, liquor production, streams of “All I Want for Christmas” acting
- Beyonce-Music (downloads/touring) Tidal, brand partnerships, acting, apparel, Netflix Collaboration
Taylor Swift Re-Recorded Her Masters
Do you remember when Kelly Clarkson and Taylor Swift were on Kelly’s show and she casually asked “Why don’t you re-record your masters?” Well, as luck would have it-Taylor did decide to re-record her creative works and she and her audience were the beneficiaries of all of that hard work. My favorite songs out of her newest recordings are Lavender Haze and Karma.
What Are Your Favorite New Songs By Taylor?
But as time went by I started to wonder…how would this win impact future music industry contracts? Would the long-term unintended impact cause harm to future musicians? Because the question I kept asking myself was “How would music industry contracts change to keep musicians from re-recording their works. Remember, the money for those works now go to Taylor instead of Scooter Braun who had acquired ownership of her intellectual property when he took over ownership of the label she used to be represented by. There are numerous stories of former and current musicians who lost access to the rights of their creative work. As well as any current or future earnings related to that creative work.
- TLC
- Megan the Stallion
I wanted to speak with a musician currently working to make it big in the industry. But, as I thought about reaching out to artists in different musical genres I worried that this type of conversation-even off record, would harm their future career. What if the wrong ears heard their legitimate concerns and this conversation bit them in the a$$.
When I think about unspoken policy in the music industry the following things come to mind.
- Long-term control over intellectual property
- Fame as an opportunity dangled in front of people who are likely unfamiliar with the ins and outs of contracts.
- The historic power of patrons who influence the work that artists create.
Because it seems pretty clear that behind the scenes it’s a dog eat dog world for musicians. So, instead I ended up speaking a music producer to gain his insight into the impact of Taylor’s victory on other creatives’ careers.
Is this a Pyrrich Victory
A victory that has a greater cost? It’s hard to tell and only time will tell. But, creatives are fighting back. Technology, of all things, may help give musicians more power over their intellectual property and their earnings. Resources such as Disctopia, Bandcamp, Patreon or Gumroad.
Latest posts by Michelle (see all)
- How Work Policies Against Black Women Birthed a Love of the Soft Life - 20 March, 2024
- How Taylor Swift’s IP Victory Could Change the Business of Music - 28 February, 2024
- Why Don’t More Personal Finance Content Creators Talk About Policy - 16 January, 2024