Taylor Swift ‘has no regrets expressing her thoughts’ about Scooter Braun

Taylor Swift shows off her legs as she leaves her apartment in New York

Last week, there were some additional reports around Taylor Swift’s 2019 Summer Beef, which is her beef with Scooter Braun, music manager and now the owner of Big Machine, which means he owns Taylor’s masters for her first six albums. There’s no question that Taylor got massively screwed over for the ownership of her life’s work up to 2017. There are questions about Taylor’s version of events, because of her chronic habit of misrepresenting what actually happened so that she can look like a bigger victim.

In the days that followed Taylor’s reveal of this year’s Summer Beef, there were more questions – was Taylor even offered the choice of BUYING her masters from Big Machine? Would she be able to sue Scooter Braun? Why did Taylor make a business decision so personal? And on and on. THR did a good piece analyzing the business side of this deal and their music experts say that Taylor probably won’t sue Braun, nor would she really have a case. The Blast also did a story about how Taylor has of course known for eight months that Big Machine was in negotiations for sale, and that “everyone in the business knew it was for sale, including Taylor Swift and her team,” and she never bid on the company, nor did she pursue anything about it. All in all, it’s sort of weird how the energy around Taylor’s version of events keeps changing. So we’re due for a sympathetic piece about Taylor, huh?

Taylor Swift received plenty of support — and backlash — when she publicly called out Scooter Braun and Scott Borchetta after news of their $300 million deal went public. But despite any negativity she may have received over the last week-and-a-half, Swift isn’t backing down from her claims, a source tells PEOPLE exclusively.

“She has no regrets expressing her thoughts about Scooter acquiring her music catalog,” says the source. “She wanted to share her truth with her fans.”

After Swift claimed she learned of the sale of Big Machine to Braun, 38, with the rest of the world and accused the manager of “manipulative bullying” over the years via a Tumblr post, it’s been a game of he-said, she-said between the singer, Braun and Big Machine Label head Scott Borchetta, who first signed the superstar when she was a teen. Last week, the singer doubled down on accusations she made via her post that she “wasn’t given an opportunity to buy” her “life’s work.”

“Scott Borchetta never gave Taylor Swift an opportunity to purchase her masters, or the label, outright with a check in the way he is now apparently doing for others,” her lawyer Donald Passman told PEOPLE in a statement.

[From People]

That’s the new information, the fact that Taylor’s lawyer says that Borchetta never gave Taylor the chance to buy back her masters or even buy the whole company. That’s what I had wondered, because the Big Machine purchase price was $300 million and Taylor has that. Taylor has the money to buy back her masters, but according to her lawyer, she wasn’t given the chance. Which… also sort of makes sense from Scott Borchetta’s perspective, because Taylor’s masters are the most significant asset of Big Machine, and her masters are one of the big reasons why the company could sell for $300 million.

Still… I have questions. Taylor clearly knew that Big Machine was likely going to be sold when she was figuring out whether she would stay with them or move on. Did it really never occur to Taylor, her father or her legal team that she could force the issue ahead of the sale and proactively try to buy her masters? Or did she choose to leave her masters behind and she really only got upset about it when Scooter bought them?

iHeartRadio Wango Tango 2019

Photos courtesy of Backgrid, WENN.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

27 Responses to “Taylor Swift ‘has no regrets expressing her thoughts’ about Scooter Braun”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Arizona says:

    he never would have given her the option to just buy her masters. that would have seriously lowered the cost of the label itself, and that would be poor business. I think she decided she was unhappy but okay leaving her masters behind, and then freaked out when it was Scooter that bought them. She seems to think that Scott sold them to Scooter specifically just to screw her, but I’m pretty sure that he sold them to Scooter because he’d worked with him and Scooter was paying an amount that he liked. I don’t think it had anything to do with Taylor personally.

    didn’t we already have a story about how she didn’t regret speaking? also, petition to completely abolish the phrase my truth. there’s no such thing as your truth. there’s your version, their version, and the truth. I hate that we’ve completely forgotten what the word truth even freaking means.

    • The Hench says:

      Yep. I came here to comment still twitching about the phrase “her truth”. Grrrr.

    • Sarah says:

      Agreed! The “my truth” thing drives me crazy! I feel like when celebrities say that, they’re basically saying “what I’m saying can’t be questioned because I believe it to be so” That’s not how life works and that definitely not the definition of the word truth. Grrr!

      • Arizona says:

        Yeah, they really mean my belief or perspective, but end up on truth because truth sounds like something you can’t argue with, IMO.

    • Jamie says:

      Oh, yeah. I will sign that petition in a heartbeat. “My truth” makes me roll my eyes every time.

    • holly hobby says:

      “My truth” aka someone’s distorted view of reality. Honey unless you have proof (hard cold receipts) that’s not the truth. Hearsay is not truth. Yes abolish that phrase.

      Also, why is she wearing that rainbow mop monstrosity?

  2. Digital Unicorn says:

    Yeah Taylor got screwed over her master and yeah she misrepresented some of the facts to play the victim but NO ONE involved came out smelling of roses.

    Its also worth noting that Universal Music Group, her current label, was in the mix as a potential buyer for Big Machine Group. Its likely she knew this and hedged her bets with the idea that if UMG bought BMG then she could get ownership of her masters that way. UMG and other big labels pulled out of the bidding process as the price got way too high.

    Personally I think $300mill is waay to much to pay for a label that owns Taylor’s masters so I still think there is some dodgy BtS sh!t that went down between the 2 Scott douche bro’s.

    Her freak out was because it was Braun that bought the label, she didn’t like the outcome of a business deal. And she has every right to be p!ssed, Braun will milk those masters for every penny he can get as he has to make the investment back somehow.

    • Leriel says:

      “Braun will milk those masters for every penny he can get as he has to make the investment back somehow” – he needs her permission on any deal if he wants to give a license for any song, she owns publishing rights, THR piece got it covered.

      • OriginalRose says:

        ooo so does that mean she could block any use of them for anything?

      • Leriel says:

        @originalrose “Sammataro also notes that Swift will still have some control over certain exploitations of her masters that require permission from the owner of the underlying composition. For example, a film studio can’t license “Shake It Off” for a movie without the green light from both Braun and Swift”

        This is the quote from THR article, provided by Kasier in text. So I guess yes – she will be able to deny any types of using her songs for anything in future (like Apple had Drake covering Shake it off or something in their ad)

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Only if it’s for use in a media project I.e. tv ad. If he says wants to license her whole back catalogue to say a new steaming service he can do so without her permission as he owns the masters. She only owns the publishing rights. both are different.

  3. Croatian says:

    Team Taylor on this one. I know she plays the victim, but we know she is very smart when it comes to her business. If there was a way for her to buy her masters, she most definitely would! I have a feeling they screwed her over and now she’s trying to manipulate the story to get at least something out of it?

  4. Bri W. says:

    This whole story is fascinating especially since there was this big blow up what 1-2 weeks ago and it has mostly quieted down since. I mean I know that news moves quickly but this news almost seemed to move too quickly out of the news cycle almost like it was being brushed under the rug.

    • Gingerbread says:

      I think in general, this story is not juicy enough to stick around, unless you’re a Taylor fan.

      I also think she cane out with this story originally so her fans will go overboard in support of her new album, which I think they will. Taylor needs drama to keep her career moving forward and this gives her a bump in sales.

  5. BaronSamedi says:

    I think she did herself zero favours by coming at this from the victim/men trying to control a woman angle. The music industry famously fucks over EVERYONE, we all remember Prince going through exactly the same fight decades ago and nothing has really changed because the companies have the power.

    Had Taylor used her considerable power to maybe try to unionize with other artists and used this case as an example she could have actually gotten somewhere with this. The way she did she made herself out to be a poor victim and in 2019 nobody is willing to cry for a priviliged multi millionaire who has beef with other multi millionaires over ways to make more millions.

  6. DS9 says:

    You can own truth. You can only have a perspective.

    This is similar to people stating that they’re entitled to their opinion when denying facts.

    Facts and truth are immutable.

    Opinions and perspectives vary.

    I need miss ma’am to grow up.

  7. Sassbr says:

    I feel like it’s a pretty easy concept. Like everyone says, they wouldn’t let her buy just the masters-to get the masters she had to buy the whole label. She didn’t want or couldn’t afford the whole label so she had to let it go. That’s just business-she maybe would have said something in an interview but maybe wouldn’t come out against Borchetta. But then Braun bought the label and THAT’S why she got upset.

    Someone had said that the news that Big Machine was selling was circulating for years and that big players were in the mix, and then cited names of some of the major labels. Obviously, Scooter Braun got in the mix and that’s where the surprise came in she thought or assumed a major label like Sony or maybe even her own Universal would pick up the label. It’s not that she didn’t know it was for sale, it’s that somehow for some reason her catalog got sold to Scooter Braun and company.

    I think she assumes that this was done as a slight to her specifically because she hated Braun and why would you sell to Braun, who definitely had to get a whole investment group together either specifically for this or had to convince an already existing investment group to do this, when you could sell to a major label, all of whom were allegedly interested (or so she was told.) I think where she may be telling the truth that she was not given an opportunity to buy the masters is actually she didn’t realize she could buy the label-she never thought she could buy the label to get the masters because the deal was only open to major labels and not offered to her. She couldn’t afford the whole label on her own, but she could have gotten a group together like Braun.

    I think another part of the deal is that Borschetta is still in charge at Big Machine-everything largely gets to stay the way it is, it’s just sold to someone else and Borschetta makes a profit and keep his job. I think that’s one reason he decided to get in bed with Braun, because the label would have been swallowed by a big buyer just for the TS masters and he would have been tossed away summarily in the process (granted, with a big sum of money.)

    • Valiantly Varnished says:

      Except…that’s not true. She was asked to extend her contract in exchange for receiving her masters at the end of said contract. She turned it down.

      • Sassbr says:

        That is true. She wasn’t given an opportunity to buy her masters. She was given the opportunity to basically be chained to a small potatoes label for another decade to get back in her masters. Not the same thing as being able to give them like 200 million. I think she wanted to buy the masters-period-and she was shut out of any other type of deal except for that really crappy one she was offered. Now, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with not owning your masters because it’s an industry standard but they clearly were giving her a deal they KNEW she wouldn’t take because they couldn’t let her have the masters or else their catalogue would become totally useless. The only reason to buy Big Machine is for Swift.

      • Arizona says:

        Just a quick change: if she had signed the contract, she would have gotten control of her masters upon the execution of the contract, not the end of the contract. So she would have gotten them as soon as the contract was finalized. She wanted the contract to be for 7 years, they wanted 10, she said no.

      • Restoration says:

        Arizona’s correct; her contract was pretty extraordinary given the masters would have immediately reverted to her when contract was signed, not when the 10-year period was up! She had a great offer relatively speaking but understandably didn’t want to be locked to the same company for so long.

        She made this personal; it likely wasn’t for Braun and the guy selling his company but about money. She should have focused on lobbying for a change of the copyright laws (she has 35 years before they automatically revert back to her, with no money needing to change hands) instead of making it into a women-are-victimised thing, which it likely wasn’t.

  8. Lex says:

    Why would it matter if he decimated the business by selling her masters to her? 300 mill was the price, she couldve paid it and taken the whole label? Im confused

    I do believe something shady went on as Taylor did make a point of talking about owning her masters when she signed to her new label months ago. Some of what she is saying is true. I wish she hadnt gone the “bullying” route because it is so junevile but semantics I suppose

    • Cee says:

      Swift isn’t the only artist signed to the label. She is the biggest, yes, but the label also has obligations to every artist signed to them. I’m sure Ithaca Holdings signed contract protecting every act already signed, and vowing to uphold each contract.
      Borchetta wanted to sell and he was not going to be able to do so without her catalogue. He owed every artist a new home, too, not just a “I’ll sell her the catalogue for the same price I could sell, but godspeed to all of you”

  9. Cee says:

    Borchetta made a business deal and recognised that Taylor Swift and her catalogue were the label’s most valuable assets. He tried to get her resigned by using the masters as a reward; when the label’s biggest act decided to sign somewhere else, he was left with the catalogue es the most valuable asset. He would have been an idiot to let the catalogue leave the label before a sell was done. I don’t understand why everyone is surprised.

  10. Juliet Persephone says:

    K, but her shoes in the top picture are fabulosity at its finest. Do want!! 🤓

  11. Yes Doubtful says:

    It’s business Taylor. Most notable artists do not own their masters, or don’t until well into their career. Remember when Michael Jackson bought The Beatles masters? Paul was furious and still doesn’t own them. Taylor could have owned them if she stayed with that label and she chose not to. I don’t think it’s even about the masters honestly. I think she just hates that guy and wanted to lash out. He outsmarted you, move on.

  12. Shannon Brown says:

    She was only given the option to buy her masters back if she signed a new contract and gave them more albums. Her best chance was taking this public. She can’t sue him, but if she wins the court of public opinion she could hurt him where it hurts most…in the pocket book.