MaverickWolf

How can taylor swift re record songs?

https://lemmy.world/post/1111020

How can taylor swift re record songs? - Lemmy.world

I’m so confused. My sister was telling me about how Taylor swift is re recording her old music because scooter Braun owns her old music and she wants to have sole ownership over it. So how can she release similar or exact copies of songs she doesn’t own but other artist constantly have legal battles for having songs that have some similarities to it? Like Ice Ice Baby for example. Is she not violating copy right laws by doing this?

Jul 6, 2023 at 8:34pmWeb
Show threadfuboJul 6, 2023

Music copyright has a notion of “compulsory licensing”; as long as the original creator is credited and the copyright holder paid a statutory fee, anyone can record & publish covers of any published piece of music.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compulsory_license
www.copyright.gov/circs/circ73.pdf

Compulsory license - Wikipedia

Show threadMaverickWolfJul 6, 2023
So she has to pay Scooter Bruan to re record her songs?
Show threadCaptainHowdyJul 6, 2023
In not a lawyer, but I think the recordings are what is owned by the label. As long as she wrote the song, she can re-record and release the new recordings.
Show threadmoon_crushJul 6, 2023

Best TL;DR yet!

A finer detail is that Swift was contractually prohibited from new recordings for two years after original contract ended — that time has now passed.

Show threadSlartibartfastJul 6, 2023

I've done a bit of this for TV/film stuff, and yeah there's basically two copyrights on a piece of music - there's the rights to the song in general, and the performance rights. That's why you've got to be careful with public domain recordings and check the date of the performance - if you use a song that's old enough to be public domain but a more recent recording of it that isn't, you can be in trouble.

I'm pretty sure that's also why so many trailers have weird covers of famous songs on them (usually a woman doing a slow acoustic version of a rock song for some reason) - that way they can pay for the song rights, and get some aspiring singer to record it for next to nothing so they don't have to also pay the performance rights for it.

Show threadTheRealKuniJul 6, 2023
Others have answered but I thought I’d throw in a video about the subject for audio-visual learners. Here’s the LegalEagle video on the subject.
How Taylor Swift (Legally) Changed Music Forever ft. Rick Beato

YouTube
Show threadCarlsIIIJul 6, 2023
I’m curious as to what the fan response is. Artists making recording newer versions of their songs is not often received well, if for no reason other than that fans tend to still prefer the originals.
Show threadgk99Jul 6, 2023
According to the article @moon_crush linked, she broke a popularity record previously held by The Beatles with them.
Show threaddumplesJul 6, 2023
Everyone loves the new versions. The new 10 minute version of all too well is amazing. She plays it at her eras concert every night and everyone knows the lyrics by heart
Show threadCarlsIIIJul 6, 2023
Were those re-recordings? I thought they were just longer edits.
Show threaddumplesJul 6, 2023
Rerecording and cut verses. Since she owns the sheet and not the recording she had to remake the whole thing.
Show threadSatelllliiiiiiiteeeeJul 6, 2023
All of the "Taylor's Version" albums and songs are rerecorded.
Show threadblazeraJul 6, 2023
God thats a depressing question. How can artist play music they created.
Show threadLunyanJul 6, 2023
So when it comes to copyright music can actually be divided into two things: the song itself (the lyrics and melodies) and the performance of a song (the recording). I don't know the entire situation but I'm guessing Taylor Swift owns the rights of the songs themselves, but not the rights to the recordings of the songs that were made, so she's in her right to make her own recordings of the songs and then she would have full ownership of those. (Sidenote: I study composing for media and though copyright is part of my study, I'm not an expert)
Show threadSanctusJul 6, 2023
Vanilla Ice is actually why “Soundalikes” are legal. Thats right, if it wasn’t for Ice Ice Baby we might not be able to freely make recordings that sound similar to other songs. Shit, the whole EDM industry might have never happened. Of course, people were doing this in hip-hop since the dawn of time. But Ice Ice Baby is what gave it legal precedent.
Show threadAwkwardTurtleJul 7, 2023
Care to provide any more backstory on this? That’s absolutely fascinating haha, never would’ve thought that from Ice Ice Baby
Show threadSanctusJul 9, 2023
I am not looking this up. It came up during a study at a trade achool like 10 years ago. But IIRC he got sued for it sounding like Under Pressure and he had to prove he remade the sound and didn’t rip it from the recording directly. This is important becsuse you get to dip out on royalties.
Show threadRevAug 4, 2023
I guess it may depend on the rights of scooter. He may only have rights to the recordings themselves and not the lyrics.