A blog post by pop signer Taylor Swift criticizing Apple Music royalties was preceded by talks with Apple by her record label, Big Machine Records — but the singer wrote the post independently, according to an executive with the label.
Conversations began several days before Swift's open letter, which ultimately led to Apple agreeing to pay rights holders for music streamed during Apple Music's three-month trial period, Big Machine's Scott Borchetta told the Fortune Brainstorm Tech conference on Monday. Borchetta said that he insisted on Swift and Big Machine being paid "from the first stream."
The executive claimed that he hadn't spoken with Swift earlier in the week, and was actually taken by surprise when she texted him a link to the post and the comment "Don't be mad."
"She was in Europe. I responded and said, 'You don't have any idea how good your timing is right now,'" Borchetta explained to the conference.
Apple capitulated on the same day as Swift's post. During a conference call with two Apple executives, Jimmy Iovine and Eddy Cue, Borchetta reportedly said that the company could "do the right thing," and have musicians around the world look at it as "the good guys."
SB Projects founder and Justin Bieber manager Scooter Braun was also involved in the call, and told Brainstorm Tech that many more musicians and industry executives were protesting Apple's zero-royalty policy.
"Taylor pushed it over the edge. She made them aware it wasn't just the executives. Sometimes it's good to hear the artists saying it," he said.
Apple Music launched on June 30. Had Apple not agreed to change its policies, artists, publishers, and songwriters would not have received any payments for streaming traffic until October, after the expiry of the first trial subscriptions on Sept. 30.
22 Comments
I always had a feeling it would be something like this. It seemed too unlikely that they would have changed their policy in just a few hours and only because of her. There were talks going on for a few days, and she was just one part of ... well, a Big Machine, I guess.
I always had a feeling it would be something like this. It seemed too unlikely that they would have changed their policy in just a few hours and only because of her.
You underestimate how popular she is. Besides, her argument was completely sound.
I do not believe she sent that independently of the negotiations. How did she know what the elements of the negotiations were unless someone told her. They probably told her knowing she would go to social networks and voice her feelings. Her record company used her to help their negotiations. The fact they came out now and makeing this statement backs this up, they doing damage control with apple and possibly her. There is no reason to make this public.
I always had a feeling it would be something like this. It seemed too unlikely that they would have changed their policy in just a few hours and only because of her. There were talks going on for a few days, and she was just one part of ... well, a Big Machine, I guess.
Taylor Swift is a co-owner of Big Machine. Her voice is the same as the labels.
Hey, this issue is resolved and now in rear view mirror for Apple streaming music. We need to talk about TV streaming coming in near future!!!!