Huge news from the pop world! Taylor Swift just announced something monumental: she now completely owns her entire music catalog. This isn’t just a happy accident; Swift herself credited her incredibly loyal fans, who diligently bought her re-recorded albums (you know them as “Taylor’s Version”), and the absolutely record-smashing success of her Eras Tour for making this dream a reality.
So, what’s the whole story behind “Taylor’s Version” anyway? And why didn’t she own her original six albums in the first place? It really boils down to a messy mix of copyright laws, standard music industry practices back then, and her early contracts. Let’s break it down.
What’s Really in a Music Catalogue?
When you hear about a music catalogue being worth millions, it’s generally about two main types of rights: the “master rights” and the “publishing rights.”
Master rights are all about owning the actual sound recordings – that final, polished track you hear. They’re called “masters” because they’re the original source from which every single copy is made. Think of them as the definitive, finished product.
Under those old-school music industry contracts, record labels typically held onto these master recordings and pretty much everything associated with them. That could include music videos, footage from tours, unreleased songs, photos, even album covers. The label then licenses out this material, controlling how it’s used and, crucially, keeping the lion’s share of the royalties. In return, the artist gets financial backing, studio time, and marketing muscle.
Publishing rights, on the other hand, relate to the underlying composition – the actual music notes and the lyrics. These rights usually belong to the person who wrote the song, no matter who ends up performing it. Publishing rights dictate how a song can be used and who gets paid from those uses. For example, if a song is played on a streaming service, covered live, or licensed for a commercial or a movie, it’s the publishing rights that are at play.
Taylor’s Contracts: The Early Days
Taylor Swift was just 15 years old when she inked her first deal with Scott Borchetta’s Big Machine record label.
The contract terms she signed were pretty standard for the music industry at the time. In exchange for the financial support needed to create, record, and promote her albums and tours, Big Machine secured the rights to Swift’s master recordings and all related materials for her first six albums. This relationship spanned 13 years, a significant chunk of her career.
But here’s a key point: as the songwriter, Swift did retain her separate publishing rights to her songs (the music and lyrics) from those first six albums, licensing them through Sony/ATV Music Publishing.
In 2018, reports swirled that Big Machine offered her a new deal: she could “earn” back the rights to one of her original albums for each new one she produced. Swift, however, chose not to renew her contract. Instead, she moved to Republic Records (part of Universal Music Group), a move that notably allowed her to own her new masters going forward. She also shifted her music publishing to Universal Music Publishing Group.
The Big Sales Saga
Then came the drama. In June 2019, Big Machine’s entire catalogue was sold to Scooter Braun’s Ithaca Holdings for a reported $330 million. A whopping $140 million of that was attributed specifically to Swift’s catalogue.
Swift famously called this her “worst case scenario,” citing a tumultuous history with Braun, whom she accused of bullying. She also alleged that she only found out about the acquisition at the very moment it was announced to the world, without ever being given a chance to buy her own catalogue herself.
Throughout 2019 and 2020, there were reports she tried to regain ownership, but negotiations ultimately fell apart.
Finally, in October 2020, Swift’s catalogue was sold again, this time to Shamrock Capital, a private equity firm, for an estimated $300+ million. In recent years, these private equity firms have been snapping up music catalogues as profitable long-term financial assets, often with little to no interest in the artistic or cultural side of things.
These events directly fueled Swift’s monumental decision to re-record her first six albums, cleverly branding them “Taylor’s Version.” So far, four of them have been released.
By doing this, she was able to create brand new versions of her songs, each with its own fresh set of intellectual property rights attached. As the owner of these new masters, she now has full control over where these songs are used, and she receives a much larger slice of the income from streams, downloads, and licensing deals.
The strategy was an absolute smash hit. She rallied her enormous fanbase via social media, and they wholeheartedly prioritized buying “Taylor’s Version” over the original masters, effectively diminishing the value of the originals. Pure genius.
A Brighter Future, For Her and Others
Swift has consistently, powerfully emphasized the crucial need for artists to maintain control over their creative work and to receive fair compensation. In a 2020 interview, she even suggested that artists should always own their master recordings, simply licensing them back to labels for a limited time.
This approach would mean labels could still monetize, control, and manage the recordings for a set period, but the artist would retain ownership. Eventually, they’d get full control back, rather than just handing over permanent rights to the label.
Swift’s whole experience has sparked vital conversations within the music industry, prompting newer artists to approach record labels with much more caution and to push hard for fairer deals and ownership rights. Olivia Rodrigo, for instance, reportedly used Swift’s saga as a cautionary tale when negotiating her own contract.
Ultimately, by purchasing her catalogue and masters, Swift gains complete autonomy over how the rights to all of her music are used. Her fans are incredibly likely to continue supporting her by buying both the originals and “Taylor’s Version,” meaning the value of her original albums might actually continue to climb.
And, looking at the long game, this new acquisition is almost certainly going to make her even wealthier.
