As Taylor Swift releases fresh twists on her classic albums, fans everywhere are working together to make sure the past stays dead.
Every artist can benefit from having fans as devoted as those who follow Taylor Swift. Known globally as ‘Swifties,’ the Taylor fan army is one of the most vocal, active, and (generally speaking) positive communities in music today. Taylor has always gone above and beyond to make sure her fans know they are appreciated, so it should come as no surprise to learn her fans are doing everything they can to make her latest release an unprecedented success.
Recently, Swift released Fearless (Taylor’s Version), a remake of her 2008 Sophomore album. The album features new versions of every song from the original Fearless, as well as a few previously unheard tracks. Re-recording the album is Taylor’s way of reclaiming ownership of her catalog, which her previous label (Big Machine) sold without her consent. Swift hopes the new versions can replace the original works, and fans worldwide are banding together to help the singer’s dreams come true.
Currently, there are four versions of Fearless available on most streaming services. Swift cannot legally have the previous versions of the album removed, but her fans are taking steps to help others avoid engaging with material that the singer no longer wishes to promote. The Twitter account @swifferupdates is one of at least several offering advice on how to make Swift’s OG Big Machine tracks (or at least the ones that she has yet released replacements for) disappear from fans’ Spotify recommendations for good.
A thread titled ‘How to Hide Fearless (Original) on Spotify’ offers screenshots and step-by-step instructions for hiding all Big Machine versions of the record from an individual’s Spotify account. The simple, yet time-consuming process involves clicking “hide the song” individually on each track from several different Big Machine editions of the album, plus a live release, plus a number of stand-along bonus tracks or remixes.
— Taylor Swift Updates 🩶 (@swifferupdates) April 8, 2021
The list includes every song on Fearless (Platinum Edition), then each song on Fearless (International Version), then Fearless (Big Machine Radio Release Special), then the individual track “Today Was a Fairytale” (a soundtrack cut never included on Fearless, but a bonus track on the new release), then the collection Live From Clear Channel Stripped 2008 (a release Big Machine uploaded to streaming services after she left the label, to her public displeasure), then “Love Story” (Digital Dog Remix),” then “Love Story (Pop Mix)” and, finally, “You’re Not Sorry (CSI Remix).”
Missing from the initial instructions is the original version of Fearless, but the same rules apply.
Fans hoping to support Taylor-owned releases may also choose to create a playlist consisting only of songs she owns. That would include everything from Fearless (Taylor’s Version), Folklore, Evermore, and 2019’s Lover.
Swift plans to re-record her other four Big Machine releases in the years ahead, which means fans will need to Hide a lot of tracks to prioritize Taylor-owned material.
Music Biz is brought to you by Haulix, the music industry’s leading promotional distribution platform. Start your one-month free trial today and gain instant access to the same promotional tools used by BMG, Concord, Rise Records, Pure Noise Records, and hundreds more. Visit http://haulix.com/signup for details.
The temptation to deliver surprise releases may be great, but most artists need to think twice before sharing unexpected material with fans.
There is something to be said for the element of surprise and its ability to engage your audience. Everyone loves learning that their favorite artists have new creations to share, but not every creator has a career that can leverage surprise releases in a meaningful way.
In 2020, Taylor Swift made global headlines twice with surprise releases. Her two albums, Evermore and Folklore, were immediate hits covered by everyone in music journalism. The short notice given to fans about the impending releases didn’t matter because, to be frank, she’s Taylor Swift. The world already cares about her and her music, so it doesn’t take long to get people excited about something new.
But you’re not Taylor Swift. You’re most likely not Playboy Carti, Bad Bunny, or any of the other arena level talent surprising fans with new music in recent years. You are an up and coming artist doing your best to stand out from the endless sea of competition. You have to work to make people outside your immediate circle care about new music, and even when you get press, it’s unclear if the reach does anything to move the needle for your career.
In the latest Music Biz 101 clip, host James Shotwell discusses the pros and cons of surprise releases. He works through why this release strategy works better for some than others and offers ways to gauge whether dropping music out of nowhere will help your career. Check it out:
Music Biz is brought to you by Haulix, the music industry’s leading promotional distribution platform. Start your one-month free trial today and gain instant access to the same promotional tools used by BMG, Concord, Rise Records, Pure Noise Records, and hundreds more. Visit http://haulix.com/signup for details.
Taylor Swift always focuses on the future, so why is she suddenly so concerned with recreating the past?
The promotional efforts for Lover, the seventh album from Taylor Swift, have been underway throughout 2019. As Rolling Stone pointed out in extensive detail, Swift and her team have been keeping her name on the tip of everyone’s tongue for the better part of the last year. You may not have caught every headline related to the pop superstar’s career, but you saw something, and that is more than can be said for most album rollouts.
But the most surprising news from the world of Taylor Swift came last week, just hours before Lover hit stores. In an interview with Good Morning America, Swift said she is committed to re-recording her first five albums. She even cited November 2020 as a start date for the project.
According to Chart Beat, Taylor Swift’s first six albums (including 2017’s Reputation) have sold a combined total of 30 million records worldwide. That number is nothing short of outstanding, and its the result of numerous top ten hits spanning the last decade of music. There are songs on every album that virtually everyone knows, and many continue to garner airplay or licensing deals to this day.
So why the redo? What value is there in re-recording something already so successful that everyone knows of its existence?
Some may think money is the motivating factor, but in reality, Swift is making this decision based on principle. Swift has long been an advocate for artists being allowed to own their masters. In other words, she believes artists are entitled to own the music they create. However, in the world of major labels, ownership of music often goes to or is at least split with, the company putting out an artist’s music.
In July, Swift’s former label, Big Machine Label Group, sold to superstar manager Scooter Braun for $300 million. Swift wrote on her blog about how this decision left her feeling hurt and betrayed, in part because it meant another person other than herself would own her music and be able to do with it whatever they pleased.
Swift’s decision to re-record her first five albums is the perfect act of revenge. As long as she doesn’t violate the terms of her original deal, re-recording songs would allow Swift to own the masters of her songs. That would enable Swift to have control over the use of her music, as well as help her earn more from sales and streaming related to that material. The new versions would also make the original recordings largely obsolete, which would leave Braun with recordings that have less value than they did at the point of purchase.
The most likely reason Reputation, Swift’s sixth album, is not included in her current plans is likely due to stipulations in her recording contract with Big Machine. Generally speaking, most contracts prevent artists from re-recording their music until two years after their contract expires and five years after the material was released. If the same terms are in Taylor’s deal, Reputation won’t be available for recreation until 2022.
Whether or not Swift sees her plan through remains to be seen. Other stars, including Def Leppard, have taken similar approaches to reclaim control of their music. If Swifts does re-record her records, we may see renewed demand from artists worldwide for ownership of their creative output.
This October will mark three years since Taylor Swift last released an album. 1989 was a massive hit that furthered Swift’s already massive popularity, and it produced enough singles that most people don’t realize the album came out nearly three years ago.
In the time since 1989’s release, Swift has toured the world repeatedly, recorded a song for a Fifty Shades movie, and very publicly battled with Spotify and the world of streaming services over the poor revenue-sharing deals they force upon artists.
This week, TMZ reported that Swift filed documents to trademark a ‘Swifties’, what they described as a streaming service “featuring non-downloadable multi-media content in the nature of audio recordings”. Her camp later denied the story, telling Billboard the star “would not be launching a streaming service,” but instead was planning a project that would be more “like a personalized fan club app complete with exclusive merchandise, audio/video/live performances and the possibility of a mobile game of some sort.”
The reason Taylor’s new project is not a competitor for Spotify or Apple Music is because she’s not concerning herself with anyone’s career other than her own. ‘Swifties’ makes perfect sense. Why should Taylor Swift help another company make money with her brand when she can go directly to her fans and ask them to subscribe to her a site/service that offers exclusive access to all things Taylor for a price well below anything a streaming platform could offer? Her fans already pay for Netflix, Hulu, HBOGo, Spotify, Apple Music, YouTube Red, among others, so why not Taylor Swift?
In the United States alone, 1989 sold 1.27 million copies during its first week of release. If even half of those people signed up for ‘Swifties’ at a cost of $5 each Swift could generate $2.5 million per month. Add to this her countless fans around the world, most of whom would jump at the promise of exclusive access to music, merch, and/or tour pre-sale codes, and Swift could very easily generate millions a month without anyone’s help. She could keep her catalog on streaming services for the sake of the royalties they would generate, but that money would likely be pennies in comparison.
The idea of ‘Swifties’ is the modern day equivalent to Radiohead choosing to sell Hail To The Thief exclusive through their website. The idea seemed crazy at the time, but it became the new normal overnight. For artists as big as Taylor, who have millions of fans, why not create what is essentially a fan club for the digital era? If it works for Taylor it could easily work for Drake, Adele, Beyonce, Pitbull, and a slew of other entertainers.
Mid-level talents and those still on the come up, however, should not be quick to follow T. Swift’s lead. As we learned from the failed self-released record’s the followed Radiohead there is still something to be said for making artists making their music as easy to find as possible while they are still raising awareness for their brand.
Pandora has released a new graphic (above) revealing the most popular artists in every state based on plays through their digital radio service. Unsurprisingly, Billboard champion Drake has laid claim over the majority of the United States. What may surprise some however, is the fact Taylor Swift only claims two states, which is three less than rapper Kevin Gates and two less than Eminem (who hasn’t released a record in over two years).
These artists are not the only ones getting a lot of play in these states. Here’s a full rundown of the top 10 biggest artists in all 50 states:
Alaska
1. Drake 2. Eminem 3. Taylor Swift 4. Fetty Wap 5. Adele 6. G-Eazy 7. The Weeknd 8. Ed Sheeran 9. Beyoncé 10. Maroon 5
Alabama
1. Kevin Gates 2. Fetty Wap 3. Drake 4. Future 5. Beyoncé 6. Lil Wayne 7. Taylor Swift 8. Chris Brown 9. The Weeknd 10. Sam Hunt
Arkansas
1. Kevin Gates 2. Drake 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. The Weeknd 6. Lil Wayne 7. Taylor Swift 8. Eminem 9. Future 10. Adele
Arizona
1. Drake 2. The Weeknd 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. Eminem 6. Taylor Swift 7. J. Cole 8. Bruno Mars 9. Adele 10. Rihanna
California
1. Drake 2. The Weeknd 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. J. Cole 6. Rihanna 7. Adele 8. YG 9. Chris Brown 10. Bruno Mars
Colorado
1. Drake 2. Taylor Swift 3. Eminem 4. The Weeknd 5. Fetty Wap 6. Adele 7. Bruno Mars 8. J. Cole 9. Maroon 5 10. G-Eazy
Connecticut
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Rihanna 5. Chris Brown 6. Eminem 7. Taylor Swift 8. J. Cole 9. Nicki Minaj 10. Adele
Delaware
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Future 5. Chris Brown 6. Nicki Minaj 7. Meek Mill 8. Rihanna 9. Eminem 10. The Weeknd
Florida
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Future 4. Beyoncé 5. Kevin Gates 6. The Weeknd 7. Rihanna 8. Lil Wayne 9. Adele 10. Chris Brown
Georgia
1. Drake 2. Future 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. Rihanna 6. Chris Brown 7. Young Thug 8. Kevin Gates 9. The Weeknd 10. Nicki Minaj
Hawaii
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Bruno Mars 4. Beyoncé 5. Adele 6. Sam Smith 7. The Green 8. Chris Brown 9. Common Kings 10. Taylor Swift
Iowa
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Eminem 4. Taylor Swift 5. Wiz Khalifa 6. Luke Bryan 7. Florida Georgia Line 8. The Weeknd 9. Kevin Gates 10. Adele
Idaho
1. Taylor Swift 2. Eminem 3. G-Eazy 4. Drake 5. Adele 6. Maroon 5 7. Imagine Dragons 8. Luke Bryan 9. Bruno Mars 10. The Weeknd
Illinois
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Future 5. The Weeknd 6. Taylor Swift 7. Eminem 8. Rihanna 9. Nicki Minaj 10. J. Cole
Indiana
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Eminem 4. Kevin Gates 5. Taylor Swift 6. Beyoncé 7. The Weeknd 8. Lil Wayne 9. Nicki Minaj 10. Luke Bryan
Kansas
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Taylor Swift 4. Eminem 5. The Weeknd 6. Wiz Khalifa 7. Adele 8. Kevin Gates 9. Beyoncé 10. Luke Bryan
Kentucky
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Kevin Gates 4. Eminem 5. Beyoncé 6. Taylor Swift 7. Lil Wayne 8. The Weeknd 9. Nicki Minaj 10. Future
Lousiana
1. Kevin Gates 2. Drake 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. Lil Wayne 6. Lil Boosie 7. Future 8. Nicki Minaj 9. Chris Brown 10. Rihanna
Massachussetts
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Taylor Swift 4. Beyoncé 5. Eminem 6. Rihanna 7. Adele 8. J. Cole 9. Chris Brown 10. The Weeknd
Maryland
1. Drake 2. Beyoncé 3. Fetty Wap 4. Future 5. Rihanna 6. Chris Brown 7. Nicki Minaj 8. The Weeknd 9. Taylor Swift 10. Adele
Maine
1. Eminem 2. Drake 3. Fetty Wap 4. Taylor Swift 5. Adele 6. Ed Sheeran 7. Nickelback 8. Luke Bryan 9. Nicki Minaj 10. Rihanna
Michigan
1. Drake 2. Eminem 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. Taylor Swift 6. Future 7. Rihanna 8. Chris Brown 9. Nicki Minaj 10. The Weeknd
Minnesota
1. Drake 2. Taylor Swift 3. Eminem 4. Fetty Wap 5. Adele 6. Beyoncé 7. G-Eazy 8. The Weeknd 9. Rihanna 10. Wiz Khalifa
Missouri
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Eminem 4. Taylor Swift 5. Beyoncé 6. Kevin Gates 7. Future 8. Nicki Minaj 9. Lil Wayne 10. Adele
Mississippi
1. Kevin Gates 2. Fetty Wap 3. Drake 4. Beyoncé 5. Future 6. Lil Boosie 7. Lil Wayne 8. K. Michelle 9. Chris Brown 10. Rich Homie Quan
Montana
1. Eminem 2. Taylor Swift 3. Adele 4. G-Eazy 5. Nickelback 6. Drake 7. Luke Bryan 8. Maroon 5 9. Fetty Wap 10. Ed Sheeran
North Carolina
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Future 5. Chris Brown 6. Taylor Swift 7. Rihanna 8. The Weeknd 9. J. Cole 10. Adele
North Dakota
1. Eminem 2. Drake 3. Taylor Swift 4. Fetty Wap 5. G-Eazy 6. Florida Georgia Line 7. Luke Bryan 8. Wiz Khalifa 9. Nickelback 10. Adele
Nebraska
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Taylor Swift 4. Eminem 5. Kevin Gates 6. The Weeknd 7. Wiz Khalifa 8. Beyoncé 9. G-Eazy 10. Adele
New Hampshire
1. Drake 2. Eminem 3. Taylor Swift 4. Fetty Wap 5. Adele 6. Luke Bryan 7. Zac Brown Band 8. Ed Sheeran 9. Maroon 5 10. Florida Georgia Line
New Jersey
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Rihanna 5. Chris Brown 6. Nicki Minaj 7. Eminem 8. Taylor Swift 9. Future 10. The Weeknd
New Mexico
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. The Weeknd 4. Luke Bryan 5. Eminem 6. J. Cole 7. G-Eazy 8. Bruno Mars 9. Kevin Gates 10. Wiz Khalifa
Nevada
1. Drake 2. The Weeknd 3. Fetty Wap 4. J. Cole 5. Eminem 6. Beyoncé 7. Bruno Mars 8. Chris Brown 9. Taylor Swift 10. Rihanna
New York
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Rihanna 5. Chris Brown 6. Nicki Minaj 7. Eminem 8. The Weeknd 9. Adele 10. Taylor Swift
Ohio
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Eminem 4. Beyoncé 5. Future 6. Taylor Swift 7. Nicki Minaj 8. Chris Brown 9. Rihanna 10. Lil Wayne
Oklahoma
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Kevin Gates 4. The Weeknd 5. Taylor Swift 6. Eminem 7. Beyoncé 8. Adele 9. Lil Wayne 10. Rihanna
Oregon
1. Drake 2. Eminem 3. Taylor Swift 4. Adele 5. The Weeknd 6. Fetty Wap 7. G-Eazy 8. Beyoncé 9. Bruno Mars 10. Rihanna
Pennsylvania
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Eminem 5. Nicki Minaj 6. Taylor Swift 7. Rihanna 8. Chris Brown 9. Future 10. The Weeknd
Rhode Island
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Eminem 5. The Weeknd 6. Rihanna 7. Future 8. Taylor Swift 9. J. Cole 10. Chris Brown
South Carolina
1. Fetty Wap 2. Drake 3. Future 4. Kevin Gates 5. Beyoncé 6. Chris Brown 7. Lil Wayne 8. Taylor Swift 9. Rihanna 10. Nicki Minaj
South Dakota
1. Drake 2. Taylor Swift 3. Eminem 4. Fetty Wap 5. G-Eazy 6. Florida Georgia Line 7. Luke Bryan 8. Wiz Khalifa 9. The Weeknd 10. Adele
Tennessee
1. Kevin Gates 2. Drake 3. Fetty Wap 4. Beyoncé 5. Future 6. The Weeknd 7. Taylor Swift 8. Lil Wayne 9. Chris Brown 10. Adele
Texas
1. Drake 2. The Weeknd 3. Kevin Gates 4. Beyoncé 5. Fetty Wap 6. Future 7. Taylor Swift 8. Luke Bryan 9. J. Cole 10. Rihanna
Utah
1. Taylor Swift 2. Imagine Dragons 3. Eminem 4. Drake 5. Maroon 5 6. Adele 7. G-Eazy 8. Justin Bieber 9. Katy Perry 10. Bruno Mars
Virginia
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Beyoncé 4. Future 5. Chris Brown 6. Taylor Swift 7. Rihanna 8. The Weeknd 9. Nicki Minaj 10. Eminem
Vermont
1. Eminem 2. Fetty Wap 3. Taylor Swift 4. Drake 5. Adele 6. Nickelback 7. Luke Bryan 8. Florida Georgia Line 9. AC/DC 10. Rihanna
Washington
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Taylor Swift 4. The Weeknd 5. Eminem 6. Adele 7. Beyoncé 8. Bruno Mars 9. G-Eazy 10. Rihanna
Wisconsin
1. Drake 2. Fetty Wap 3. Eminem 4. Taylor Swift 5. Beyoncé 6. Adele 7. The Weeknd 8. Nicki Minaj 9. Luke Bryan 10. Wiz Khalifa
West Virginia
1. Fetty Wap 2. Drake 3. Eminem 4. Florida Georgia Line 5. Luke Bryan 6. Lil Wayne 7. Nickelback 8. Nicki Minaj 9. Taylor Swift 10. The Weeknd
Wyoming
1. Eminem 2. Taylor Swift 3. G-Eazy 4. Fetty Wap 5. Drake 6. Nickelback 7. Luke Bryan 8. Adele 9. Maroon 5 10. Five Finger Death Punch
Today is probably the last major day for the music industry in 2015. As the holiday slowdown quick approaches, more and more people are going to be leaving their offices in hopes of taking a week off with those they love. Before that can happen however, we need to talk about the GRAMMYs, and earlier today a complete list of nominees for the 2016 ceremony were revealed.
The first batch of nominees for the 2016 GRAMMYs were announced by Alicia Keyes on CBS This Morning Monday earlier today. The complete list of nominees was then revealed a short time later in a press release, as well as on the official GRAMMYs website. The artist with the most nomination is Kendrick Lamar with 11 nods, while Taylor Swift and The Weeknd share a close second place position with 7 nominations each. You can view the full list of categories and contenders below.
The 58th Annual Grammy Awards will be held at the Staples Center in Los Angeles, California on February 15, 2016, and will be broadcast in high-definition and 5.1 surround sound on CBS from 8–11:30 p.m. ET. No host has been announced. Performers for the event have also yet to be revealed, but it seems safe to assume a few of the names mentioned in the categories below will make an appearance.
Album of the Year
Alabama Shakes, Sound and Color
Kendrick Lamar, To Pimp a Butterfly
Chris Stapleton, Traveller
Taylor Swift, 1989
The Weeknd, Beauty Behind the Madness
Song of the Year
Kendrick Lamar, “Alright”
Taylor Swift, “Blank Space”
Little Big Town, “Girl Crush”
Wiz Kahifa feat. Charlie Puth, “See You Again”
Ed Sheeran, “Thinking Out Loud”
Record of the Year
D’Angelo and the Vanguard, “Really Love”
Mark Ronson feat. Bruno Mars, “Uptown Funk”
Ed Sheeran, “Thinking Out Loud”
Taylor Swift, “Blank Space”
The Weeknd, “Can’t Feel my Face”
Best New Artist
Courtney Barnett
James Bay
Sam Hunt
Tori Kelly
Meghan Trainor
Best Pop Duo/Group Performance
Florence + The Machine, “ Ship to Wreck”
Maroon 5, “Sugar”
Mark Ronson feat. Bruno Mars, “Uptown Funk”
Taylor Swift feat. Kendrick Lamar, “Bad Blood”
Wiz Khalifa feat. Charlie Puth, “See You Again”
Best Traditional Pop Vocal Album
Tony Bennett & Bill Charlap, The Silver Lining: The Songs of Jerome Kern
Bob Dylan, Shadows in the Night
Josh Groban, Stages
Seth MacFarlane, No One Ever Tells You
Barry Manilow (& Various Artists), My Dream Duets
Best Pop Vocal Album
Kelly Clarkson, Piece by Piece
Florence + The Machine, How Big, How Blue, How Beautiful
Mark Ronson, Uptown Special
Taylor Swift, 1989
James Taylor, Before This World
Best Dance Recording
Above & Beyond feat. Zoë Johnston, :We’re All We Need"
Taylor Swift may be the queen of modern pop music, but her latest tour has ruffled more than a few feathers with its aggressive approach to controlling media distribution. The first to complain were photographers, many of whom believed the ‘1989’ creator’s photo release form to be outright ridiculous. As photographer Jason Sheldon explained in his open letter to Swift, the photo waivers for the pop star’s concerts stipulate that a photographer can use the images from the show only once and only within the published report on that performance. That means they can’t sell it to other editorial outlets, nor can they sell prints of the image in any way.
While this is not an entirely uncommon set of guidelines for a photo release, it is only the tip of the iceberg on for Swift. As COS points out, “the real kicker is not the rights it takes from the photogs, but what it gives Swift and her team. The contract states that Swift and Firefly Entertainment have the ability to use any concert photographer’s images themselves for any publicity or “non-commercial purpose” in perpetuity. In other words, they can use a photographer’s work in marketing material and not pay them a penny.”
None of these restrictions have applied to photos taken by fans, of course, but only because fans are rarely in a position to snap a high quality photo of Swift during her performance. The photos fans take are often zoomed in shot of the pop star taken from a great distance. They’re the kind of thing people share on their Snapchat story, or in a thread with friends who could not attend, which is a long way of saying the pictures fans captures are intended for non-commercial use. Apparently, this is still not good enough for Taylor Swift and/or her team because a new story circulating online points to even more aggressive restrictions being placed on media captured during Swift’s latest tour.
As TorrentFreak first broke late last week, Taylor Swift in her team have reportedly been issuing dozens of takedown notices to fans and media who use Periscope to capture her performances. The videos, often shared by some of the most passionate fans, are seen as apparently being viewed as copyright infringement. Swift has surrounded herself with a dedicated enforcement team called TAS Rights Management who swiftly take them offline. An example of one a takedown notice currently being distributed can be viewed below:
As far as we know, Taylor Swift is the only artist who has assembled an entire takedown task force to protect what she perceives a copyrighted material. She is not, however, the only person to issue takedown notices for Periscope broadcasts. Many brands, including sports organizations like the NFL, NBA, WWE and Premier League, also have teams working to make sure their broadcasts are not replicated or shown without their consent.
While we understand Swift’s desire to keep the best parts of her show a secret for those who pay to see her, we can’t help but feel her secret task force may eventually do more harm than good. A big part of why we enjoy social media as a culture is the way it allows us to share experiences instantaneously. Swift is essentially trying to prevent that type of interaction from happening whenever the media being shared involves her, and in a way its only serving to mute her most dedicated fans. Call us crazy, but we don’t really see the benefit in that. Do you?
Let us just say, Anthony Fantano is one of our favorite music critics today. He’s a smart guy with a unique way of seeing and hearing the world around him. This commentary is spot on. Dig in.
Whether you’re an artists working in pop, country, rock, rap, hip-hop, black metal, doom, grindcore, folk instrumentalism, post-modern opera, or some obscure combination of everything in between, everyone in music owes Taylor Swift a bit of thanks for speaking up against Apple’s new royalty plan for the launch of Apple Music over the weekend. Her open letter, which called the plan to not pay artists during the company’s three-month trial launch ‘disappointing,’ went viral just jours before senior vice president of internet services and software Eddy Cue tweeted that Apple would, in fact, pay artists during the 90-day period.
In an interview with Billboard, Cue elaborated that it was Swift’s letter that turned him around on the issue. “When I woke up this morning and saw what Taylor had written, it really solidified that we needed a change. And so that’s why we decide we will now pay artists during the trial period.”
Everyone expected the tech giant to respond to Swift’s letter, but the seemingly immediate change of policy came as a surprise to many, including Swift herself. “I am elated and relieved,” she tweeted after the new broke. “Thank you for your words of support today. They listened to us.”
Some in the music community, while happy about the news, were concerned that it took an artist as big as Swift to complain before action was taken. As you may recall, we ran a story early last week that shared the concerns from numerous people in the indie music community. Those same concerns were shared on countless blogs and news outlets, but it seems Apple didn’t think to respond until Taylor Swift made it a point to get involved. To his credit, Cue told Billboard he had heard “concern from a lot of artists” before hearing from Swift. You can draw your own conclusions as to whether or not that had the same impact.
Apple will be eating the cost of the royalty payout, as the company intends to not charge any consumer for using the service during its first 90-days of existence. That will no doubt be a big bill to pay, but considering the company is expected to be valued at $1 trillion by 2016 it seems like a tab they will be able to cover.
Apple Music is set to launch on June 30, and we are planning to run an editorial with our initial impressions not long after. For now, spread the word of the new royalty plan so artists make a it a point to claim their Apple Music Connect profile as soon as possible.
James Shotwell is the Marketing Coordinator for Haulix. He is also a professional entertainment critic, covering both film and music, as well as the co-founder of Antique Records. Feel free to tell him you love or hate the article above by connecting with him on Twitter. Bonus points if you introduce yourself by sharing your favorite Simpsons character.
Music industry queen Taylor Swift shared a letter to Apple with fans via Tumblr over the weekend. We loved her insight and couldn’t resist sharing here thoughts here. Enjoy.
I write this to explain why I’ll be holding back my album, 1989, from the new streaming service, Apple Music. I feel this deserves an explanation because Apple has been and will continue to be one of my best partners in selling music and creating ways for me to connect with my fans. I respect the company and the truly ingenious minds that have created a legacy based on innovation and pushing the right boundaries.
I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months. I find it to be shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company.
This is not about me. Thankfully I am on my fifth album and can support myself, my band, crew, and entire management team by playing live shows. This is about the new artist or band that has just released their first single and will not be paid for its success. This is about the young songwriter who just got his or her first cut and thought that the royalties from that would get them out of debt. This is about the producer who works tirelessly to innovate and create, just like the innovators and creators at Apple are pioneering in their field…but will not get paid for a quarter of a year’s worth of plays on his or her songs.
These are not the complaints of a spoiled, petulant child. These are the echoed sentiments of every artist, writer and producer in my social circles who are afraid to speak up publicly because we admire and respect Apple so much. We simply do not respect this particular call.
I realize that Apple is working towards a goal of paid streaming. I think that is beautiful progress. We know how astronomically successful Apple has been and we know that this incredible company has the money to pay artists, writers and producers for the 3 month trial period… even if it is free for the fans trying it out.
Three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing. I say this with love, reverence, and admiration for everything else Apple has done. I hope that soon I can join them in the progression towards a streaming model that seems fair to those who create this music. I think this could be the platform that gets it right.
But I say to Apple with all due respect, it’s not too late to change this policy and change the minds of those in the music industry who will be deeply and gravely affected by this. We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.
