Ameeps Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 (edited) 36 minutes ago, a6l6e6x said: First I've heard of this Scott and Scooter thing. So did they buy copyright to her early music? If so which albums? Can you ban an artist from performing a song live when bands cover stuff all the time? Could she just say it was a cover of a Taylor Swift song as a work around (as ridiculous as it sounds) American copyright law is very complicated. There's a distinction between the recorded works, live performances, and broadcasting rights. Taylor's old record label Big Red Machine sold the recorded rights (the masters) of all of her music up through and including Reputation (everything except her new album Lover). The new owner of Taylor's music is a group of rich people/investors spearheaded by Scooter Braun, the manager of Justin Bieber and Ariana Grande, among other big acts. Side-note, but very important context, is that Taylor has long claimed that Scooter Braun has persistently bullied her over the course of many years. Google Taylor Swift Scooter Braun to learn more. But back to copyright. Anyone can PERFORM any song at a concert without permission. However, broadcasting falls into a whole separate category of US rights law. So if Taylor told Glastonbury to shut off the broadcast feed during her set, she would be in the clear. Clearly, however, that is not ideal. Taylor is furious that her arch nemesis now owns her music. It's her worst dreams come true. Remember how I said that Scooter Braun owns the masters to her old music? A master is a literal recording. It's a static, non-changing audio file, for lack of a better description. One way that Taylor could get some power back in this situation, and something that she's been rumored to be planning to do, is re-record her old songs. She would then own the rights to the re-recorded songs, and she could sell them, broadcast them, etc. She is legally allowed to do this. It would create a fascinating scenario where Spotify, iTunes, etc. would have 2 versions of all of Taylor Swift's old songs. Scooter Braun does not want this to happen, because Taylor would tell all of her fans to only purchase and stream the new version, not the old versions. Scooter Braun bought Taylor Swift's old masters because he wants to make money, and Taylor Swift re-recording her old music is a threat to that. (Quick side note. The law that governs re-recording old music is complicated. I also don't know what Taylor's contracts with her old record label say. It might or might not be the case that if Taylor re-recorded her old music, she would have to make it different enough such that a court decides it is it's own piece of work, rather than derivative of the original.) As Taylor notes in her open letter, she wants to use some of her old music in an upcoming Netflix documentary, and she also wants to be able to broadcast some of her old songs on TV such as at the upcoming American Music Awards, and perhaps Glastonbury. Scooter Braun is saying he will let her do so if she agrees not to re-record her old songs, at least for another year, and she also has to stop publicly criticizing Scooter Braun. Sure, sounds like a quid pro quo to me. #ImpeachScooterBraun. With this public letter she just put out, she's essentially declaring war. She's hoping that public sentiment turns so strongly against Scooter Braun, and her fans just don't stop annoying/probably harassing him, that he relents. She's also asking other artists that Scooter Braun represents (Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, etc.) to put pressure on him to reverse his decision. I think Taylor is likely to lose this battle. I think this letter will just serve to piss the guy off even more. Anyways, will be fascinating to see how this shakes out. I don't think this has any real bearing on whether she plays Glastonbury. If she has to cut the broadcast feed during her set, then they'll do that. That's assuming she's even playing (which is likely, but not confirmed). We shall see what happens! Edited November 15, 2019 by Ameeps 18 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
a6l6e6x Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 Have an upvote for the informative post. Completely unaware of all of that. I think Taylor would put off playing glasto until she was allowed to broadcast a live performance of those songs again though. Crazy how through now fault of her own (that I can see) she's restricted to playing music she wrote! The industry is messed up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Porridge Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 I'm a huge Chili Peppers fan & only once have I left their gig disappointed. IOW '14, Reading '16 & Benicassim '17, I loved. It was only at the O2 in '16 they fell flat for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smeble Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 She’s definitely playing the ‘men telling a woman what she can do’ angle. Whilst I sympathise with her, they do own the rights so unless something financially happens she is stuffed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaledonianGonzo Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 Cool take, dipshit. 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
morph100 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 So the third headliner they are still working on could be Taylor or she’s booked and will only televise the new tracks or she not playing due to this and will play BST instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jparx Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 I don't think if changes the situation much tbh. BBC could just broadcast a one hour highlights deal of the Lover tracks. The Stones didn't have their full set broadcast did they? Doing that would also give Taylor more ammo and a huge forum to further say how ridiculous the situation is as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amy Lawn Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 this just popped up on my timeline and I thought you'd all enjoy it 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mcshed Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 20 minutes ago, morph100 said: So the third headliner they are still working on could be Taylor or she’s booked and will only televise the new tracks or she not playing due to this and will play BST instead. Do we reckon Emily's sprogs are Swift-fans? Would make sense that they where pestering for confirmation of Taylor. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
circus92 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 7 hours ago, Ameeps said: American copyright law is very complicated. There's a distinction between the recorded works, live performances, and broadcasting rights. Taylor's old record label Big Red Machine sold the recorded rights (the masters) of all of her music up through and including Reputation (everything except her new album Lover). The new owner of Taylor's music is a group of rich people/investors spearheaded by Scooter Braun, the manager of Justin Bieber and Ariana Grande, among other big acts. Side-note, but very important context, is that Taylor has long claimed that Scooter Braun has persistently bullied her over the course of many years. Google Taylor Swift Scooter Braun to learn more. But back to copyright. Anyone can PERFORM any song at a concert without permission. However, broadcasting falls into a whole separate category of US rights law. So if Taylor told Glastonbury to shut off the broadcast feed during her set, she would be in the clear. Clearly, however, that is not ideal. Taylor is furious that her arch nemesis now owns her music. It's her worst dreams come true. Remember how I said that Scooter Braun owns the masters to her old music? A master is a literal recording. It's a static, non-changing audio file, for lack of a better description. One way that Taylor could get some power back in this situation, and something that she's been rumored to be planning to do, is re-record her old songs. She would then own the rights to the re-recorded songs, and she could sell them, broadcast them, etc. She is legally allowed to do this. It would create a fascinating scenario where Spotify, iTunes, etc. would have 2 versions of all of Taylor Swift's old songs. Scooter Braun does not want this to happen, because Taylor would tell all of her fans to only purchase and stream the new version, not the old versions. Scooter Braun bought Taylor Swift's old masters because he wants to make money, and Taylor Swift re-recording her old music is a threat to that. (Quick side note. The law that governs re-recording old music is complicated. I also don't know what Taylor's contracts with her old record label say. It might or might not be the case that if Taylor re-recorded her old music, she would have to make it different enough such that a court decides it is it's own piece of work, rather than derivative of the original.) As Taylor notes in her open letter, she wants to use some of her old music in an upcoming Netflix documentary, and she also wants to be able to broadcast some of her old songs on TV such as at the upcoming American Music Awards, and perhaps Glastonbury. Scooter Braun is saying he will let her do so if she agrees not to re-record her old songs, at least for another year, and she also has to stop publicly criticizing Scooter Braun. Sure, sounds like a quid pro quo to me. #ImpeachScooterBraun. With this public letter she just put out, she's essentially declaring war. She's hoping that public sentiment turns so strongly against Scooter Braun, and her fans just don't stop annoying/probably harassing him, that he relents. She's also asking other artists that Scooter Braun represents (Justin Bieber, Ariana Grande, etc.) to put pressure on him to reverse his decision. I think Taylor is likely to lose this battle. I think this letter will just serve to piss the guy off even more. Anyways, will be fascinating to see how this shakes out. I don't think this has any real bearing on whether she plays Glastonbury. If she has to cut the broadcast feed during her set, then they'll do that. That's assuming she's even playing (which is likely, but not confirmed). We shall see what happens! Excellent post - very well explained. Made my brief explanation look a bit lame ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
balti-pie Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 Don’t really know why I’m in here, I just like gossip I guess - pyramid headliners are not something I watch and I have less than zero interest in Taylor Swift beyond that nice goat remix of Trouble (Trouble? I think it’s called that) but the idea of someone not having the rights to their own music is absolutely batshit mental. And Scooter Braun is a colossally weird name, it appears he is a twat. right, back to poop stories and rock slots, sorry 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eFestivals Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 8 hours ago, circus92 said: Doesn’t sound good at all - with Glastonbury being broadcast on BBC this sounds like a major issue to me not an issue at all. If an act doesn't want to make a deal with the beeb, they don't make a deal with the beeb. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry bear Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 I suppose though it is an issue if the main reason big artists play Glastonbury for a much lower than standard fee is the exposure. That said, a lot can happen between now and then; a deal could be done, or pressure mounts on Borchetta and Braun to allow her to perform what she wants in front of cameras, or, worst case scenario the BBC only shows the newer stuff Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s30foster Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 Stormzy announcement dropped this day last year...just saying! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phimill Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 hour ago, eFestivals said: not an issue at all. If an act doesn't want to make a deal with the beeb, they don't make a deal with the beeb. Are these two negotiations kept separate then? Make a deal to play Glastonbury, then go to the beeb to see what coverage they can give? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt42 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 18 minutes ago, henry bear said: I suppose though it is an issue if the main reason big artists play Glastonbury for a much lower than standard fee is the exposure. That said, a lot can happen between now and then; a deal could be done, or pressure mounts on Borchetta and Braun to allow her to perform what she wants in front of cameras, or, worst case scenario the BBC only shows the newer stuff Yup. I also remember the stones refusing to be shown and now the full set is up. Things can change. Seems to me like there will be a litigation and a settlement. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jyoung Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 6 hours ago, Smeble said: She’s definitely playing the ‘men telling a woman what she can do’ angle. Don't think it's a game mate. And certainly not one she wanted to be playing. Not cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostdancer1 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 9 hours ago, strummer77 said: We've been talking about RHCP for so many pages now I forget... is there anything actually linking them? headlining festivals in Europe, and every time they do festivals in Europe, it's headlining the same festivals that your Coldplays, Foo Fighters etc. headline, yet apparently people think they couldn't possibly headline Glastonbury these days. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CaledonianGonzo Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 The full Stones set is a bootleg. It wasn't broadcast, only a section of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ghostdancer1 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 as for the Taylor thing, not really an issue for Glastonbury. just have a delayed broadcast of the Lover tracks from her set. there's no issue not broadcasting sets, Portishead (or was it Massive Attack?) didn't allow theirs broadcast before. I don't really think the AMAs thing is even remotely true TBH, I can't see any court ruling that performing a medley of tracks live would constitute "re-recording" them. And if Taylor was arsed, she would just do it and then fight them in court on it. I'm a big fan of her music, but as a person I think she's incredibly manipulative, and this open letter just seems like the latest in a long history of her trying to twist the narrative to suit her. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Jass Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 13 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said: The full Stones set is a bootleg. It wasn't broadcast, only a section of it. Surprised the Stones haven’t released it yet given they seem to release a live album every few weeks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingcrawler Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 Justin Timberlake is apparently headlining Pinkpop the week before Glastonbury. I reckon he's a much better fit for BST and I don't think they'd book him and Taylor Swift to headline in the same year but another name to consider. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eFestivals Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 1 hour ago, phimill said: Are these two negotiations kept separate then? Make a deal to play Glastonbury, then go to the beeb to see what coverage they can give? yep. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Matt42 Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 29 minutes ago, kingcrawler said: Justin Timberlake is apparently headlining Pinkpop the week before Glastonbury. I reckon he's a much better fit for BST and I don't think they'd book him and Taylor Swift to headline in the same year but another name to consider. Yeah JT sounds like a BST booking. Its a shame because when he first came back he was making really exciting music but now he’s just fizzled for me. His old stuff still bangs though! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grilladelphia Posted November 15, 2019 Report Share Posted November 15, 2019 7 minutes ago, Matt42 said: Yeah JT sounds like a BST booking. Its a shame because when he first came back he was making really exciting music but now he’s just fizzled for me. His old stuff still bangs though! would happily deal with an hour of his old stuff sunday afternoon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.