[PrettyHurts]

Originally posted by - JED -

This just screams 'I refuse to put my album available for free' to me, sorry

She's wrong for not wanting people to take HER music and make it available for free? K

[Lose My Breath]

I totally agree with her

[UFO]

Very articulate

I was expecting something immature.

[StephenNYMonster]

Clearly she is not going to put the album up anywhere since she is making money of off album sales. She is clearly going by the model movies go by and what I have been talking about for a while; you release the music and don't put it on streaming services until album sales start to dry up. If Streaming doesn't pay tht well, why put your album on there as soon as you release a new album?

[Slim Shady]

I get what she said about new artists but what does that have to do with not putting your most recent album on the sevice.. Like she just wants sales

[- JED -]

Originally posted by PrettyHurts

She's wrong for not wanting people to take HER music and make it available for free? K

No, good for her.
But just say it, don't come with this unpaid writers / producers / new artists melodrama.

[Eóghan Scherzy]

Originally posted by Shinning

Spotify paid very badly, Apple isn't paying anything for 3 months.
Taylor speaks against it, ATRL praises it.
Jay-Z speaks against it, creates a service more favorable to all kinds of artists, ATRL drags him.
Predictable.

That's all i learned from this thread
The ATRL hyprocrisy makes me sick

Lemme leave quick

[Cas]

Originally posted by iHype.

I’m sure you are aware that Apple Music will be offering a free 3 month trial to anyone who signs up for the service. I’m not sure you know that Apple Music will not be paying writers, producers, or artists for those three months.

She confirmed by saying 'those three months' that it is temporary. What are you comprehending differently from those sentences. Let me know.

They don't clarify if those 3 months are the first 3 months of the service, or the 3 first months of a new subscribtion.

[Fearless]

Originally posted by HyperCrush

Well, they're not the same thing. She's signed to an independent label, and she's not signed to the majors. How can she speak against the other labels when she has no experience with them? She's speaking out against this because it is a universal outcome, 3 months - no pay will be the reality for every musician on Apple Music.

She's arguably the biggest star in music and has been in the business for a decade now, I feel like that's enough experience for her to know how labels work. She has the pull and the status to speak out against them but she speaks out against streaming services, which do pay back(and if I'm not mistaken, Apple would have to pay for the right to stream music in the first place, so that's more compensation) and also give low income families a chance to listen to music that they probably can't afford. Plus, as others have mentioned, Apple plans to pay more after the free trial.

[Lose My Breath]

Originally posted by - JED -

No, good for her. But just say it, don't come with this unpaid writters / producers melodrama.

How do you know that isn't her reasoning? She's right, it isn't fair to the group of people who worked on her album.

Whether you believe what she said, you can't deny that she has a very valid point

[IamCY]

Eloquently put

[Cas]

I agree with her with this one. I can't at Apple (the richest company in the WORLD right now) wanting the artists, labels, etc to pay for Apple's new business. Why not offer 3 free months for the common user and then PAY to the respective streamed artist like Spotify and Tidal are doing for their first month of trial.


The universe and Apple's greed know no boundaries.

[iHype.]

Originally posted by Cas

They don't clarify if those 3 months are the first 3 months of the service, or the 3 first months of a new subscribtion.

This was clarified weeks ago.

Leaked contract reveals Apple Music will not pay rights holders during first months of existence

'First months of existence', not 'first months of a user's subscription'.

[Teneo]

We don’t ask you for free iPhones. Please don’t ask us to provide you with our music for no compensation.

[novembers17th]

she has a really good point..i still don't know my stance on the issue but this is something i'll take into account for sure

[Saintlor]

Everyone here defending Taylor acting like they've never illegally listened to music before

[Jack!]

She's right and wrong. Not being payed for three months is wrong, but she should know by now she'll always make more money off streaming than sales, and that's why streaming is taking a boom. She's probably making less than a dollar for every album she actually sells, which is a fraction of what you get from streaming when you factor in ads, company pay and contract agreements. She's putting herself into a lose/lose situation.

[zach]

Y'all don't understand. Her previous albums will be on there because the money was already made for them. 1989 is still selling heaps of albums each week. She mentioned herself making more than enough money through touring, but let's not forget the writers, producers, engineers, mixers, etc that work on the album? As I said, they already made the most money they are gonna get from her previous albums, but 1989 is still new and has more to make. It isn't about her. She doesn't need the money from album sales, but the other people involved in the making of the record do.

[Bey'Knight]

Eloquently stated

[ultraviolento]

Why would she take out only "1989" though? lol

She's so transparent