Scooter did nothing wrong

[pedrohemg 7,802]

Polemic thread here but some things need to be said. Scooter bought Big Machine Label Group for US$ 300.000.000. That's a huge amount of money. Is Taylor really considering he only did that because of her? Only to control her? That doesn't make sense. He saw a great business opportunity and he took it, that's all.

Taylor dislikes him, I understand that. She also wants to own 100% of her albums but that's not how things work in the industry. Tell me how many singers possesses 100% of their song rights. Record companies generally provide all the necessary structure for singers, composers, producers to work on an album. They invest money in production and marketing, so they own 60% of any songs published under their label. You may argue if this is right or not but things have been like this since always.

Also, why should we attack Scooter because of Taylor's words when there are other professionals supporting him, including women (Demi, SIA)? They know him better than Taylor does, I suppose. They've worked with him. It seems we're again in a crusade to destroy a man image only because he's a man and there's a woman against him. This have become pretty common in the last couple of years.

[Enzo 37,977]

the tea is good today but yeah

he's only doing his work and getting his coins

and the Taylor thing was problably in the middle 

 

[Guest]

I agree with you 100% but I think the industry needs a big change. And there should also be laws to protect young people from long term contracts that effected Taylor, JoJo, Kesha, and many more artists. But I see nothing wrong with what scooter did. Remember how Michael Jackson was attacked for owning the Beatles music and record labels tried getting it back?

Scooter did not stop Taylor from owning her own Music, its her old record label that did. Taylor is not mad because she cant own her music, shes mad because she wants to control who owns her music.

[Woohoo 6,534]

Taylor's been treated horribly lately so she probably assumes that anything relating to her business is an attack 

[sipthistea 21,099]

It's problematic. It feels like now he's in control of her art, and can earn tons of money from her. I find it morally wrong, but that's just my view.  In a way, the ones to really blame in this situation are the people from the record label.

They were the ones who didn't allow her to buy her masters. They conditioned her to release more albums in exchange. That's f***ed up. 

[Bio 23,538]

I feel so bad for Taylor. I don't follow Scooter or really know anything about him but she really seems to think he's a bad person and that he's done some bad things to her in the past. Imagine your bully owns all your work and can do anything he wants to it? That really really sucks. 

I think she was angry and wrote that letter so she could take a little bit of control of the narrative. That is natural. She has done that in the past but I don't think that's the right thing to do. Her fans are literally tearing everyone that showed support for Scooter apart and making things up about them, telling them to go kill themselves... She really needs to show that she doesn't support that kind of behavior and stop these kids.

Unfortunately the capitalist world is ****ed up. BM owned the masters and they sold it to whoever they wanted to.  But it's not like she hasn't benefitted from capitalism. Wasn't she the one who sued her fans for selling things associated with her name on Etsy? Wasn't she the one that demanded Spotify only released her albums to Premium users so they would pay her more? Wasn't she the one who sued her guitar teacher for just saying he taught her to play the guitar? Wasn't she the one that threatened to sue some podcast hosts for reciting some lyrics of her song on air?  Wasn't she the one that got signed by Big Machine because her father bought shares to the company?

Anyway, this is all just a mess. No one is right and no one is wrong. But the fans do need to calm down.

[AlexanderMagno 10,746]

3 minutes ago, pedrohemg said:

Taylor dislikes him, I understand that. She also wants to own 100% of her albums but that's not how things work in the industry. Tell me how many singers possesses 100% of their song rights. Record companies generally provide all the necessary structure for singers, composers, producers to work on an album. They invest money in production and marketing, so they own 60% of any songs published under their label. You may argue if this is right or not but things have being like this since always.

I think you're right. As bad as it sounds, it's business, and like it or not Taylor agreed with it. It really sounds like she's using this to promote this new chapter in her career. In fact, she has done this sort of strategy at least three times, I don't understand why everyone still blindly follows her.

 

Both Taylor Swift and Scooter Braun are entrepreneurs, and they are just using you pop fans for their purposes. And you think you know better. If you were truly smarter, you wouldn't even care about these multimillion-dollar deals.

You have absolutely no idea of what happens backstage, how these deals happen, how each artist uses what it has.

 

Of course it's bad that as an artist she doesn't own masters, but are you expecting a record label to simply give everything and not try to take as well? They are investors. You want them to support you, you have to give something. Otherwise, keep yourself independent and don't become a major pop star.

[Regina George 59,387]

Your point is kinda not valid because Taylor is literally the only big artist that has been signed to that label. Literally the only big artist. Investing in that label out of everything else to invest into is kinda weird. You really think he didn’t do that because he would get Taylor’s songs? Lmao. Also 300 million dollars is not that big of a deal when you consider that it’ll pay off in like a year only because of Taylor’s music. We all know he did it only because of that and let’s not delude ourselves. 

@pedrohemg so you’re not going to quote me? Lmao. 

[FlopSlurper 34,336]

sweeping other people's life work without giving them the chance to BUY it, and then controlling it

yep nothing wrong here

[pedrohemg 7,802]

2 minutes ago, FlopSlurper said:

sweeping other people's life work without giving them the chance to BUY it, and then controlling it

yep nothing wrong here

Nothing wrong. Taylor wanted to buy only her work and the label owners considered that wasn't good enough compared to selling their whole catalog. Business only.

[Lottie Winters 1,628]

Taylor Swift needs to stop playing the victim card and painting herself into these narratives. She has you all feeling sorry for her while she wipes her tears with hundred dollar bills and schemes and plots.

She supposedly knew beforehand and if she had already made the decision to leave her music behind when she left the label like she said, why do you all feel bad for her? 

[Blake 7,385]

Regardless of the Taylor situation, Scooter is gross for overworking his clients to the bone aka Ariana. 

[DeleteMyAccount 11,881]

"It seems we're again in a crusade to destroy a man image only because he's a man and there's a woman against him."

YOU think that. Stop making men out to be some oppressed group. Because that ain't it. Scooter is actually making fun of this be posting and then deleting posts...

Anyway, there's more to this than we know. I don't think using Sia as an example of protecting Scooter's character is much to go on because I doubt she lives and breathes his own intentions in the industry.

 

[Spock 20,290]

32 minutes ago, pedrohemg said:

Are Taylor really considering he only did that because of her? Only to control her? That doesn't make sense.

BMR's value is almost exclusively BECAUSE of Taylor's masters, and is Scooter's main interest in the purchase. The other acts are a bunch of country artists that are nowhere near Taylor's level of fame or money-making. 

Which is precisely why Scott wouldn't let Taylor buy her masters straight up, because if she had done, the label's value would have decreased exponentially and not come close to $300M in value  

so yeah, Scooter bought the label basically to own Taylor's masters. His family will be eating on them them for generations

[FlopSlurper 34,336]

11 minutes ago, pedrohemg said:

Nothing wrong. Taylor wanted to buy only her work and the label owners considered that wasn't good enough compared to selling their whole catalog. Business only.

That's not true. They refused to sell her anything, her only option was singing her life to them, go read the contract.

9 minutes ago, Wifey said:

Taylor Swift needs to stop playing the victim card and painting herself into these narratives. She has you all feeling sorry for her while she wipes her tears with hundred dollar bills and schemes and plots.

She supposedly knew beforehand and if she had already made the decision to leave her music behind when she left the label like she said, why do you all feel bad for her? 

she didn't leave because she wanted to, she left because she had no choice. it was either she signs her life to them and get her past work, or leave and secure her future. But go ahead and hate