Taylor Swift buys back rights to master recordings of her first six albums
Taylor Swift
has bought back the master recordings to her first six albums, giving her control over her entire catalogue for the first time.
She originally lost the rights in 2019 when her first record label, Big Machine, sold them to music executive Scooter Braun. Swift described the sale to Braun as her 'worst case scenario', and said she had not been given the opportunity to buy her work outright, but to 'earn' one album back for each new album she recorded for the label. Her subsequent albums, from 2019's Lover onwards, were released on Republic, with Swift retaining the rights to the master recordings.
Braun at one time managed
Kanye West
, who repeatedly targeted Swift after he infamously invaded her acceptance speech at the 2009 VMA awards. In November 2020, Braun sold the master recordings to the private equity firm Shamrock Capital in November for a reported $300 million.
In a letter to fans posted today, Swift said that she bought her masters back from Shamrock for a 'fair' price. It is understood that previous rumours that it cost Swift between $600 million and $1 billion are inaccurately high.
READ MORE
To regain control over her music after the original sale to Braun – and to devalue his investment – Swift embarked on a project to re-record all six albums, branding each one '(Taylor's Version)' and adding 'From the Vault' tracks from the original songwriting sessions that had not made it on to the original albums.
Between 2021-2023, Swift re-recorded her albums Fearless (originally released in 2008), Red (2012), Speak Now (2010) and 1989 (2014).
As the principal songwriter, she has the right to re-record the material and to block any use of the original recordings. Several re-recorded songs made their debuts in film and TV syncs: last week, the new version of Look What You Made Me Do – from the as-yet unreleased re-recording of 2017's Reputation – appeared in the new series of The Handmaid's Tale.
Reputation and Swift's self-titled debut album, from 2006, are the only albums not to be re-recorded. Fans
have been speculating as to their possible release dates
for years, leaping on the colours of her outfits and what they perceive to be clues in her limited social media posts to deduce when they would appear.
[
My three nights at Taylor Swift cost me €47 an hour. Cheaper than therapy
Opens in new window
]
Now that Swift has reacquired her master recordings, there is less reason to proceed with the recordings. In her letter to fans, she asked their thoughts about whether she should go ahead with them, and said she would follow their lead.
One suspects she might anyway: not only is there a vast appetite for the From the Vault tracks for those albums, but the essential redundancy of the project is unlikely to thwart its potentially vast commercial impact. The four previously released recordings broke commercial and chart records for Swift: in the UK alone, 1989 (Taylor's Version) clocked higher first-week combined streams and sales – 184,000 – than the original total of 90,000 a decade earlier.
[
All of Taylor Swift's albums ranked, from worst to best – plus which tracks to expect at her Eras tour Dublin concerts
Opens in new window
]
The recordings were interspersed with a run of new, original recordings. Swift has released four albums since 2020: her lockdown sister records
Folklore
and
Evermore
(2020), as well as
Midnights
(2022) and
The Tortured Poets Department
(2024).
Swift's monumentally successful catalogue was showcased on her
Eras tour
, which travelled the world between 2023-2024, became the first billion dollar-grossing tour, and eventually grossed more than $2 billion in total. The show was divided into album-specific segments, and updated when it hit Europe in 2024 to include a new Tortured Poets section. – Guardian
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Irish Times
an hour ago
- Irish Times
Bono criticises USAid cuts in lengthy interview with podcaster Joe Rogan
Bono has criticised cuts to the US Agency for International Development (USAid) budget in a lengthy interview with influential US podcaster Joe Rogan. He cited academic research by Brooke Nichols, a mathematician and professor of infectious diseases at Boston University, that suggests some 300,000 people have died as a consequence of the cuts. The U2 frontman's comments riled billionaire Elon Musk, whose department of government efficiency (Doge) implemented the dismantling of USAid. Mr Musk formally exited his role in the Trump administration on Wednesday. On his social media platform X, the Tesla chief executive responded to Bono's remarks on the subject by calling him a 'liar/idiot' and saying 'zero people have died'. READ MORE During a three-hour interview on The Joe Rogan Experience, which is streaming service Spotify's top podcast, Bono talked about his role in encouraging former US president George W Bush to increase overseas aid spending, particularly on antiretroviral drugs intended to combat Aids. He said a broad coalition of support for the aid spending was built and it greatly benefited the US's image overseas. Now, he said, 'all of that was torn down without a heads-up, without any notice, because people thought foreign aid was like 10 per cent of the budget or 20 per cent and it was doing things that it shouldn't have been doing'. 'I'm sure there was some waste ... but I can tell you as a person who saw what the United States was doing around the world, I saw America display itself at its finest,' he said. 'I remember being in the Oval Office with president Bush and we had these antiretroviral drugs. I said, paint them red, white and blue, Mr President, because these are the best advertisements for America there'll ever be.' [ Bono: Stories of Surrender review: A punch-to-the-guts stage show once you get past the Bono-ness of it all Opens in new window ] He said that to celebrate the slashing of USAid, as some have, is an act of 'evil'. He said it felt like these vital programmes were vandalised and destroyed 'with glee'. Bono maintained an amiable tone with Mr Rogan throughout the interview, which aired on Friday. Mr Rogan, who has previously been accused of spreading misinformation during some of his podcasts, endorsed Donald Trump in advance of the 2024 US presidential election. The bulk of the discussion was concerned with Bono's new film Stories of Surrender, his book Surrender, U2, and the band's upcoming album.
Irish Times
9 hours ago
- Irish Times
US judge blocks Trump bid to invalidate work permits for 5,000 Venezuelans
A federal judge prevented the Trump administration from invalidating work permits and other documents granting lawful status to about 5,000 Venezuelans, a subset of the nearly 350,000 whose temporary legal protections the US supreme court last week allowed to be terminated. US district judge Edward Chen in San Francisco in a Friday night ruling concluded that Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem was likely to have exceeded her authority when in February she invalidated those documents while more broadly ending the temporary protected status granted to the Venezuelans. The US supreme court on May 19th lifted an earlier order Judge Chen issued that prevented the administration, as part of president Donald Trump's hardline immigration agenda, from terminating deportation protection conferred to Venezuelans under the Temporary Protected Status, or TPS, programme. But the high court stated specifically it was not preventing any Venezuelans from still challenging Ms Noem's related decision to invalidate documents they were issued pursuant to that program that allowed them to work and live in the United States. READ MORE Such documents were issued after the US Department of Homeland Security, in the final days of Democratic president Joe Biden's tenure, extended the TPS program for the Venezuelans by 18 months to October 2026, an action Ms Noem then moved to reverse. TPS is available to people whose home country has experienced a natural disaster, armed conflict or other extraordinary event. Lawyers for several Venezuelans and the advocacy group National TPS Alliance asked Judge Chen to recognise the continuing validity of those documents, saying without them thousands of migrants could lose their jobs or be deported. Judge Chen, in siding with them, said nothing in the statute that authorised the Temporary Protected Status programme allowed Ms Noem to invalidate the documents. [ US supreme court allows Trump administration to revoke Venezuelan migrant protections Opens in new window ] Judge Chen, an appointee of Democratic president Barack Obama, noted the administration estimated only about 5,000 of the 350,000 Venezuelans held such documents. 'This smaller number cuts against any contention that the continued presence of these TPS holders who were granted TPS-related documents by the secretary would be a toll on the national or local economies or a threat to national security,' Judge Chen wrote. The Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment on Saturday. Judge Chen ruled hours after the US supreme court in a different case allowed Trump's administration to end the temporary immigration 'parole' granted to 532,000 Venezuelan, Cuban, Haitian and Nicaraguan migrants under a different Biden-era programme. – Reuters (c) Copyright Thomson Reuters 2025
Irish Examiner
13 hours ago
- Irish Examiner
‘Feels bigger than herself': the importance of Taylor Swift's latest victory
It goes without saying, but Taylor Swift has scored a lot of victories in the past few years. There was, first and foremost, the blockbuster Eras Tour, which became the bestselling concert tour of all time and a certifiable cultural era in itself. She released the bestselling concert film of all time, with a distribution model that upended the theatrical market. There was yet another album of the year Grammy. She turned the Super Bowl into the ultimate rom-com. Even with mediocre critical reviews, her most recent album, The Tortured Poets Department, set more streaming records than I can count. Read More Taylor Swift announces she has acquired the rights to all of her music All of these were beyond impressive, if at times threatening overexposure and annoyingly at odds with her self-styled narrative as an underdog – the emotionally astute lyricist battling against a sliding scale of villains, from careless boys, bitchy girls and heartbreak to gossip, criticism and misogynistic double standards. Often, the targets are petty; I never want to hear a Kim Kardashian reference again. But on Friday, with the announcement that she purchased the master recordings of her first six albums, Swift notched arguably the most significant victory of her career, over the one remaining foe worthy of her stature: the artist-devaluing practices of the music industry. For those who do not follow what has become canon in Swift's massive fandom, ownership of her masters has been the animating force behind the last six years of Swift's career, ever since Scooter Braun, most famous as the music manager behind Justin Bieber, purchased them from Swift's former label Big Machine Records for $300m in 2019. Like virtually all young artists, Swift had signed a deal that did not entitle her to ownership of her recordings, just royalties from their sales. The deal 'stripped me of my life's work', Swift wrote at the time, and left her catalog 'in the hands of someone who tried to dismantle it'. (Braun used to manage longtime Swift antagonizer Kanye West.) Taylor Swift performs during her Eras Tour. Picture: Charles McQuillan/TAS24/Getty Images for TAS Rights Management For the following six years, even after Braun sold the catalog to private equity group Shamrock Capital for $360m, Swift re-recorded each album under the moniker 'Taylor's Version', a business masterstroke that at once devalued the originals, ginned up nostalgia and set the stage for the Eras Tour. The ownership of her master recordings, as well as her all her music videos, concert films, album art, photography and unreleased songs, is, in Swift's own words, deeply meaningful on a personal level. 'To say this is my greatest dream come true is actually being pretty reserved about it,' she said in a handwritten letter posted on her website to announce the acquisition. 'All I've ever wanted was the opportunity to work hard enough to be able to one day purchase my music outright with no strings attached, no partnership, with full autonomy.' (Swift, the daughter of a Merrill Lynch stockbroker and forever a savvy dealmaker, also thanked Shamrock Capital for being 'the first people to ever offer this to me' and praised the private equity firm for being 'honest, fair, and respectful'.) But it is also a victory that, for once in this era, feels bigger than Swift herself. Swift owning her masters is a small step toward transparency and artistic integrity in the music industry, and one made possible by her immense wealth and power. The fact that we're even talking about ownership of master recordings, that millions of music listeners now question the business standard of recording industry contracts, is a testament to the power Swift can wield when she chooses a worthy target, even if that target often takes direct form in the figure of Braun (who, for what it's worth, said he's 'happy for her'.) 'I'm extremely heartened by the conversations this saga has reignited within my industry among artists and fans,' Swift wrote. 'Every time a new artist tells me they negotiated to own their master recordings in their record contract because of this fight, I'm reminded of how important it was for all of this to happen.' This is Swift in her best crusader mode – grounded in the work, clear-eyed on the stakes, speaking as a songwriter in perhaps the one arena where she remains an underdog with something to fight for. Though often overshadowed by gossip and her personal life, in ways both self-inflected and expected by a culture that loves to see women fail, her flexing of her exceptional clout over the music industry for artists rights is one of her most enduring fights. It dates back at least to an open letter to Apple Music withholding her album 1989 from the company's streaming service because it would not pay royalties to artists during the service's first three months. (Apple quickly caved.) Or her Billboard's Woman of the Year speech in 2014 in which she called for fairer compensation of writers, musicians and producers – a point she cited five years later when accepting Woman of the Decade in 2019, in a speech that is worth revisiting for the contrast between which fights resonate, and which rankle. Taylor Swift arrives on to the Aviva stage for the first of her three sold-out Dublin gigs as part of her Eras tour. Picture: Chani Anderson The part about adjusting her sound and image to appease critics? Flop, mild applause, one of many instances where Swift evinces a sensitivity to criticism and bone-deep desire for popularity that is so incongruous with her stature as arguably the most famous woman on the planet that I find it endearing, the most human element of her incomprehensible celebrity. The part where she bluntly calls out 'the unregulated world of private equity coming in and buying up our music as if it is real estate, as if it's an app or a shoe line'? It's the most strident and fair she's ever sounded, and it holds up. Even if the purchase of her masters feels a bit like settling out of court before the full trial – the re-record project remains unfinished – this is the win that could have the most salient downstream effect for both artists and people who appreciate music. Similar to how her criticism of Ticketmaster, and fan frustration over the experience of buying tickets for the Eras Tour, led to efforts to reform ticket transparency and break up the Live Nation monopoly, this is power appropriately applied upward. 'Thank you for being curious about something that used to be thought of as too industry-centric for broad discussion,' she wrote to her fans. 'You'll never know how much it means to me that you cared. Every single bit of it counted and ended us up here.' Swiftie or no, this is a Swift victory worth cheering for. - The Guardian Read More Aviva stadium company enjoys Taylor Swift and Pink dividend as operating profits increase to €7m
