Taylor Swift Opens Up About Her Master Recordings Being Purchased • Page 2

How many other ways do I need to say I want those things? I’m tired of repeating myself now.

 

The first one will never happen, period. The second one requires giving labels an extremely good reason to trade out copyright ownership for a limited-purpose license as a default. I'm all for the latter if you've got any thoughts on how to sell it.

 

Uh. I want to dismantle capitalism.

 

File under "proposals that will in no way help Taylor Swift or anyone like her anytime in the near-future."

 

File under: missing the entire point.

 

I'd love to have more control, but I don't feel like I deserve it by any means. But maybe I'm just too indoctrinated in the system to see it.

I do realize that you personally have much more first-hand understanding of this than I do, especially given that AP.net was yours, then AP.net wasn't yours (sellout!!), and now chorus.fm is yours again. You can probably identify pretty closely with what Taylor is saying regarding ownership of your IP that's made from blood, sweat, and tears.

I suppose it also explains why people like Mark Zuckerberg, who every rational person can realize should have left his post by now, are so incapable of letting go of the reins.

 

Eh, cool but I'm out. I'm not going to play the "the farce we're calling capitalism (and make no mistake, in its current incarnation it's a complete farce) and the power structures/people pulling its strings are inevitable parts of life and also somehow they're helpless babies who have no control over the completely immoral system they participate in and benefit from so there's nothing anybody can do except of course for the people being taken advantage of who are ultimately somehow responsible for this" game, but it's been real. The phrase "it takes two to tango" comes to mind, and in said tango it matters who's leading because they choose the steps. (In case the metaphor didn't land, the people writing the damn contracts and holding the money are leading. Turns out power structures matter.)

Yes, Taylor Swift is a very privileged example of how this tends to play out. That's the only reason we're talking about it. But I can't accept this argument is in good faith unless you accept the status quo as an inevitability, which you seem to (fascinating considering how young our government/the ~way we do things~ is). I'd rather beat my head against a brick wall for the rest of my life than become the kind of person who sacrifices humanity for complacency. To each their own.

 

You’re raging against basic building blocks of contract and copyright law that have literally been around for hundreds of years (we inherited both from English common law) and are subject to layers and layers of judicial precedent, uniform state and federal codes, and international treaties. There is no realistic way to unwind them, which is why I’m trying to focus on what’s practical and actionable rather than simply bemoaning “the system” writ large. It’s a little bizarre that you’d accuse *me* of being the one settling for inaction under these circumstances.

 

She is worth $360 million. Seems like capitalism has worked in her favor.

 

I feel like the fact that capitalism can and does screw over those (often women or poc) who also benefit from it so greatly just adds more fuel to how much it sucks. Like if the 1% is getting screwed over, God help us plebs!!