Please note that this article discusses American copyright law which may differ slightly in structure and application to the English legal system.
If you have scrolled through Instagram, Twitter, or TikTok in the past week, you may have noticed a certain spike in the interest surrounding popstar Taylor Swift. Perhaps you’ve read the news, and observed a buzz around her album ‘Red’. However, this isn’t a new album. In fact, the original was released in October 2012. What Taylor has done is release re-recorded versions of her original work, and has added ‘(Taylor’s Version)’ to the end of each song title. This is not the first time she has done this; so far, she has re-recorded her album ‘Fearless’, as well as ‘1989’. She is working her way through her first five albums, and is intending to re-record every album she has released. This article is going to discuss her rationale for making this move, and why, in fact, it renders her one of the smartest musicians alive, legally speaking.
Copyright law for the music industry in America
There are two types of copyright concerning music producers in the States, and that is the ‘composition’ copyright, and the ‘master recording’ copyright. The ‘composition’ copyright is essentially the bare bones of the song. This includes the chord sequence, the lyrics, the sheet music, the melody, the structure etc. The ‘master recording’ copyright concerns that one perfect version which is recorded in the studio; the recording which is then released to Spotify, to the radio, and can be used in movies. Taylor, being the primary songwriter for the vast majority of her songs, automatically keeps the composition copyright to her songs: these are hers, and nobody can take them away from her. However, upon signing her first record deal with Big Machine Records in 2005, she agreed that the label would own the master recording copyright. She might own the brains behind the song, but if anyone uses that particular recording that they recorded, that record label is getting a large percentage of the profit.
Why is this an issue?
You might argue that when Taylor signed the contract in 2005, she knew full well that Big Machine Records were going to own the master recording copyright, so why is she re-recording all of her work? The issue arose when Big Machine sold to private-equity group Ithaca Holdings, an entity owned by the infamous music manager Scooter Braun. Braun then proceeded to sell the master recordings to Shamrock Holdings in 2019, reportedly for $300 million. This was a smart move from Braun: he will now be entitled to an even bigger profit when Taylor’s music is streamed. However, delving deeper into Taylor’s personal history, this was in fact a sly move. Braun also manages celebrities in the music industry such as Kanye West and Justin Bieber, who have made Taylor’s life a living hell on repeated occasions, bullying her publically. If anyone now streams the music which Taylor hasn’t re-recorded, they are paying directly into the pocket of this manager, who Taylor did not agree to owning her master recordings, but was subjected to nonetheless.
Taylor's Response
Rather than sit back and allow Braun to economically benefit from the songs she wrote, Taylor elected upon a very smart, and very legal move. It seems a lot of effort for artists to re-record every song they’ve ever written, but Taylor is no ordinary artist. She treats her songs as a way to journal her life and experiences, and with extra time over lockdown, she was able to take the time to
undertake this project to reclaim her work. Now, if you see a song written by Taylor Swift with ‘(Taylor’s Version)’ written next to it, you can be sure that the profits go towards her, as both types of copyright are entirely owned by Taylor herself.
What’s different about Taylor’s new work?
There isn’t a huge difference in her new work - she has tried to keep as authentic to the original song as possible. Taylor has added a couple of new songs here and there, including the 10 minute version of ‘All Too Well’. However, in terms of her old songs, aside from an extra beat or greater emphasis on ‘you were Romeo’ in ‘Love Story’, you really are listening to almost exactly the same song. The difference, however, lies in the intention behind the songs. Every musician can be considered a startup business, with limited means and equity to divide out to stakeholders such as labels and publishers. As Taylor grew, she was actually entitled to less and less of her own work: re-recording her music was a way to reclaim what she rightfully owned. After building an empire of fans writing deeply personal songs relating to her life, should selling her story really come so cheap? Taylor, through taking the time to re-record her work, has successfully managed to sidestep exploitation. What’s more, with her loyal fanbase and social media outreach, she has managed to convince fans to stream only her new recordings, and leave the recordings owned by Braun to collect dust rather than profits.
Comments