Somebody online said that she probably got a discount on the originals thanks to her rerecordings devaluating the value of the first records - and, you know, that’s a galaxy brain move
OH THANK GOD THAT A BILLIONARE GETS TO MAKE MORE MONEY! Anyway, I got to preform in front of 20 people because the company I work for decided to work with Ticketmaster.
At least she owns her work. It is her work to profit from.
I don’t like billionaires anymore than the next person but Taylor owning her own work is a win for her and the record company tried to do her dirty to begin with.
Did they do her dirty? Or did they give her money, fame, prestige in return for her recording music using their resources, marketing, etc?
Seems like everyone got something
Especially considering all her co-writers and ghost writers back then.
Good for her.
We choose to give money to her. It’s our collective decision that she deserves this money because we like the music.
This is where any Marxist argumentation falls over a lot of the times because it cannot convincingly explain what happens when you willingly want to reward certain talented person more than the other people
The famous Wilt Chamberlain argument
She has that money because she was given a platform none of us will ever have access to.
Assume, he says, that the distribution of holdings in a given society is just according to some theory based on patterns or historical circumstances—e.g., the egalitarian theory, according to which only a strictly equal distribution of holdings is just.
Okay well this is immediately a false premise because nobody seriously makes this argument. This is a strawman of the notion of egalitarianism.
Also, we don’t need Wilt Chamberlain to create an unequal society, we just need money. It’s easy enough to show that simply keeping an account of wealth and then randomly shuffling money around creates the unequal distribution that we see in the real world:
https://charlie-xiao.github.io/assets/pdf/projects/inequality-process-simulation.pdf
And every actor there began with the impossible strictly eqalitarian beginning. No actor was privileged in any way nor had any merit whatsoever, but some wound up on top of an extremely unequal system.
So Noszick just needs to look a little deeper at his own economic system to see the problem. There is no reason why we need to have a strict numerical accounting of wealth.
ngl that whole ‘taylors version’ thing was pretty smart
The music labels have responded by trying to make artists wait much longer before they can try something similar:
It’s significant, Greenstein said, that the first Taylor’s Version wasn’t released until she’d been off Big Machine for three years. Until then, she was legally bound not to re-record any of the material, and this time frame was typical of record deals in the past. But this is the part of the equation that Swift likely changed for good.
“For decades, major labels were somewhat rational when it came to the prohibition of re-recordings,” Greenstein said. “But now they’re going to be asking, ‘What’s the risk of a Taylor’s Version?’”
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.”
Making a few billion dollars on a sold out global tour was pretty smart too.
Also she’s pretty.
She can’t keep getting away with it
Where are those meddling kids when we need em
In a fetal alcohol syndrome kind of way, yes.
It’s also great leverage. Sell me the rights, or I’ll destroy the value of your asset.
It’s always smart to own your work. Look at what happened to so many artists who made a small percentage of the value of their albums, while music execs took the lion’s share.
Or some artists were dropped by their label for no good reason and years later the artist has to pay the label royalties for playing their own songs.
Her popularity could conceivably tank.
Yeah, no. Lol.
People don’t want admit her fan base is very cult like. It happens with any celebrity but hers are next level
Not necessarily. Look at things like America’s got talent. You sell your act to get world wide recognition. You can only become valuable by promising that value to a corporation with means to market your talent.
I feel like music is becoming corrupt. A tool to pander, an advert, measured by the ability to reach the largest audience. It’s supposed to be about sending a message, but it feels like we’re being sold one.
The internet exists and now more than ever people have the tools and resources to create, so it’s wild that only big brands have such an iron monopoly on creativity. It’s super disappointing.
Original albums re-released as “Justice Editions” with one extra track at the end of Taylor thanking her fans and no other changes in 5…
Are you suggesting cult-like behaviour from cult members?
In 10 different colour variants!
She was never quiet about this.
