Slashdot Mirror
Taylor Swift: Apple's Disdain For Royalties Is 'Shocking, Disappointing'
Mark Wilson writes to note that Apple Music, yet unlaunched, already faces resistance on several fronts. From the BetaNews article:
It's not just smaller, independent labels that are complaining about Apple's refusal to pay artists any royalties during the initial three month free trial period. Taylor Swift has added her voice to the growing number of complainants, writing an open letter to Apple in which she says she will withhold her new album "1989" from the service. In the letter, entitled "To Apple, Love Taylor," the singer says that the company's decision not to make royalty payments is "shocking, disappointing, and completely unlike this historically progressive and generous company." Swift is an artist who could afford to shoulder the cost of three months of not being paid by Apple, but she has chosen to make a stand and stick up for those who are less fortunate.
Assuming she's for real in this respect, I appreciate her concern for her comrades in the industry. However, She's pulled her music from Spotify, and now she's pulling it from iTunes. So...she's living off Pandora royalties and CD sales? I mean, the album has been out for quite some time, so she's made most of her millions off it at this point anyway and this is more grandstanding than anything else...but if it were a new release, would she really be this adamant about giving up iTunes revenue, even if it spent a bit too much time in the 'Accounts Receivable' column?
If you're interested in reading a bit more of her rationale, she posted her announcement on her tumblr page, here: http://taylorswift.tumblr.com/...
The problem is, the music isn't the artist's property. The labels claim all the rights. The artists theoretical royalties invariably end up being a shit sandwich, without much bread. The labels signed the deal with Apple, because they know that the artists have signed away all their rights already.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
Metallica greedy is when you sue your fans.
I used to like Metalica but i haven't listened to them since they started suing fans.
Any insufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology.
There are plenty of other revenue producing platforms than Apple's scheme. It's ridiculous to buy into the Apple Hype.
There is no reason at all that Apple shouldn't pay 'promotional costs' for using musical artists as their sales inducement. The same royalties should go to the artists before and after the promotion period.
With regard to 'investors'- fuck off. Your 'investment' doesn't entitle you to spoils from Apple's rip-off of content providers. Maybe you should be clamoring for some fucking dividends, not kneeling at the altar of Apple's huge 'war chest' of unpaid dividends. It's almost Stockholm Syndrome. But everything about Apple seems that way sometimes.
She doesn't have "record label handlers". She owns her own label.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
She is a pop-country singer that comes up on a regular basis with catchy tunes with clean lyrics, and she did not build a career on dressing like a prostitute or releasing sex tapes
That's true, at least she keeps a clean image, but her songs pretty much carry on the stereotype that a woman's existence is defined by her boyfriend or lack thereof.
If you are not allowed to question your government then the government has answered your question.