Steven Tyler Praises Taylor Swift’s Historic Battle for Music Ownership Rights
Aerosmith frontman Steven Tyler, 71, has publicly declared his profound admiration for pop superstar Taylor Swift, 30, commending her relentless efforts to champion songwriters’ and artists’ rights to control their own music. In an exclusive interview, Tyler articulated his strong support for Swift’s stand against what he views as injustices within the music industry, drawing parallels to significant legislative achievements aimed at protecting creators.
When asked about his sentiments regarding Taylor Swift’s highly publicized conflict with Scooter Braun over the ownership of her early musical catalog, Tyler offered nothing but glowing remarks. His comments underscore a growing solidarity among artists who are increasingly vocal about the imperative for musicians to retain control over their intellectual property in the digital age. He specifically referenced the landmark Music Modernization Act, a pivotal piece of legislation passed into law in 2018, as a testament to the ongoing fight for artists’ rights.
Steven Tyler’s Deep Respect for Swift’s Advocacy
“I think it’s the most beautiful thing,” Tyler exclusively told HollywoodLife at his Grammys viewing party in Los Angeles, CA, on January 26. His words weren’t merely an endorsement but a recognition of a shared struggle across generations of musicians. “Dina LaPolt passed the Music Modernization Act just for that very reason so that people can sing and play and even get paid, maybe,” he added, highlighting the legislative efforts that paved the way for greater artist empowerment. “So, we went right for the neck. And she’s doing the same and so I look up to her.”
Tyler’s acknowledgment of Swift’s tenacity resonates deeply, particularly coming from a seasoned artist who has navigated the complexities of the music business for decades. His statement reflects a generational bridge, where a rock icon applauds a pop superstar for taking on systemic issues that affect all musicians. This mutual respect highlights the universal importance of music ownership and the ongoing battle for fair compensation and control in an ever-evolving industry landscape. It’s a powerful message of solidarity, emphasizing that the fight for artists’ rights transcends genre or era.
Understanding the Music Modernization Act: A Crucial Precedent
The Music Modernization Act (MMA), which Steven Tyler referenced, was signed into law with the express purpose of modernizing copyright-related issues for musical works and sound recordings. This legislative update became critically necessary in response to the seismic shifts brought about by new technologies, particularly digital streaming, which had complicated existing royalty structures and licensing agreements for decades. The rapid growth of streaming platforms exposed significant loopholes and outdated provisions in previous copyright laws, often leaving creators unfairly compensated or entirely overlooked.
The MMA is a comprehensive package that consolidates three separate, but interconnected, pieces of legislation, designed to create a more equitable and efficient system. First, the core Music Modernization Act focuses on reforming the mechanical licensing system for digital phonorecord deliveries, simplifying how songwriters and publishers are paid for downloads and streams. It established a new entity, the Mechanical Licensing Collective (MLC), to administer a blanket mechanical license for digital music providers and ensure rights holders receive accurate and timely royalties. This streamlining addressed a historically fragmented and often opaque process that frequently left songwriters struggling to collect their due.
Secondly, the CLASSICS Act (Compensating Legacy Artists for their Songs, Service, & Important Contributions to Society Act) addresses a long-standing inequity by ensuring that artists who recorded music before 1972 receive royalties when their songs are played on digital radio services. Prior to this, pre-1972 recordings were not covered by federal copyright law for public performance on digital platforms, leaving many legacy artists uncompensated for the use of their iconic work. This provision was a vital step towards acknowledging the enduring value of older recordings and the artists who created them.
Finally, the Allocation for Music Producers Act (AMP Act) ensures that music producers, mixers, and sound engineers receive a portion of the digital performance royalties collected by SoundExchange. This act formally recognized the vital creative contributions of these individuals, ensuring they too are fairly compensated for their essential role in bringing music to life. Together, these acts represent a significant step towards a more equitable and transparent system for all participants in the music creation process, laying a crucial foundation that advocates like Taylor Swift are now powerfully building upon to further strengthen artist control and financial fairness.
Taylor Swift’s Unyielding Battle for Her Masters
Taylor Swift’s public statements and powerful speeches about her personal struggles to own her original recordings serve as a stark and potent reminder of why the Music Modernization Act, and the broader fight for artist rights, is so critically important. Her widely publicized conflict began after businessman Scooter Braun, known for managing successful artists like Justin Bieber and Ariana Grande, acquired Big Machine Records. This acquisition notoriously included the master recordings of Swift’s first six albums, effectively granting Braun ownership over the original sound recordings of her most iconic early works.
The concept of “master recordings” is central to this dispute. These are the original audio files from which all copies are made, holding immense artistic and financial value. Owning the masters means controlling how the music is used, licensed for various media (films, commercials, video games), and monetized across diverse platforms, from streaming services to physical album sales. For artists, losing control of their masters can feel like losing ownership of their very identity, their creative legacy, and a significant portion of their potential earnings.
Upon learning of the acquisition, Swift took to social media to articulate her devastation and frustration. In a candid Tumblr post on June 30, 2019, she detailed her years-long plea to gain ownership of her own work. “For years I asked, pleaded for a chance to own my work. Instead I was given an opportunity to sign back up to Big Machine Records and ‘earn’ one album back at a time, one for every new one I turned in,” Taylor wrote. This arrangement, which she found unacceptable, would have perpetually tied her to a label she no longer trusted, forcing her to sacrifice future creative freedom for partial past ownership, a deal she viewed as predatory.
Her decision to walk away from that deal was agonizing, yet resolute. “I walked away because I knew once I signed that contract, Scott Borchetta (CEO of Big Machine Records) would sell the label, thereby selling me and my future. I had to make the excruciating choice to leave behind my past. Music I wrote on my bedroom floor and videos I dreamed up and paid for from the money I earned playing in bars, then clubs, then arenas, then stadiums.” This deeply personal revelation resonated with countless fans and artists, highlighting the emotional toll of losing control over one’s artistic output and the fundamental right to own one’s creative journey.
Escalation and Public Outcry
Despite Scooter Braun and Scott Borchetta’s counter-claims—which stated that Swift had indeed been given opportunities to own her music but had declined them—the conflict intensified. The dispute reached a fever pitch in November when Taylor Swift again took to social media, this time via a series of tweets featuring photos of a lengthy statement. In this powerful message, she alleged that Braun and Borchetta were actively preventing her from performing her older songs at the upcoming American Music Awards, where she was set to receive the Artist of the Decade Award, and from featuring them in a soon-to-be-released Netflix documentary about her life.
“Guys — it’s been announced recently that the American Music Awards will be honoring me with the Artist of the Decade Award at this year’s ceremony. I’ve been planning to perform a medley of my hits throughout the decade on the show. Scott Borchetta and Scooter Braun have now said that I’m not allowed to perform my old songs on television because they claim that would be re-recording my music before I’m allowed to next year,” a pivotal part of her statement read. This claim sparked widespread outrage among her fanbase and the wider music community, galvanizing support for Swift and intensifying scrutiny on music industry practices and the moral obligations of catalog owners.
The public pressure mounted rapidly. Soon after Taylor’s message went viral, Scooter Braun issued another denial, asserting that he couldn’t legally prevent her from performing her songs, framing the situation as a misunderstanding. Eventually, a reported deal was reached, allowing Taylor to perform her desired medley of older songs during the American Music Awards ceremony on November 24, 2019. Her performance opened with “The Man,” a powerful new song exploring the stark differences in treatment she would receive if she were a man in the industry and society at large. This song choice served as an indirect, yet undeniably bold and poignant, statement reinforcing her stance on gender inequality and artist empowerment, cleverly using her platform to highlight systemic issues.
The Strategic Counter-Move: Re-recording Her Catalog
Following the public escalation of her feud with Scooter Braun, Taylor Swift revealed a groundbreaking and strategically brilliant plan: she announced her intention to re-record her first six albums. This ambitious endeavor, which began in 2020, allows her to create new master recordings of her early works, thereby regaining creative and financial control over her legacy. By owning these “Taylor’s Version” albums, she can license them for various uses, direct how they are promoted, and ensure that she benefits directly from their continued success, effectively circumventing the original masters owned by Braun’s company.
This re-recording strategy is not just a personal victory for Swift; it has set a powerful precedent in the music industry. It highlights an innovative pathway for artists to reclaim their work and challenges the traditional power dynamics between artists and record labels. By demonstrating that artists can creatively circumvent unfavorable contracts, Swift has provided a blueprint for others. Her documentary, Miss Americana, which debuted at the Sundance Film Festival on January 23 and was subsequently released on Netflix on January 31, further chronicled her journey and struggles, offering fans an intimate look into the personal and professional challenges she faced, including this very public battle for her masters and her growth into a vocal advocate.
Prior to these public disputes, Taylor Swift had already made a significant career move. In November 2018, seven months before her battle for music ownership went public, she left Big Machine Records and signed a new, more artist-friendly deal with Republic Records and Universal Music Group. This new contract reportedly granted her ownership of her future master recordings, a crucial clause that underscored her evolving business acumen and her commitment to securing her artistic control. Her seventh studio album, Lover, released on August 23, 2019, was her first under this new agreement, marking a new chapter of empowerment and independence in her illustrious career and laying the groundwork for her bold re-recording initiative.
Broader Implications for Artist Empowerment and the Industry
The “Taylor Swift effect” on artist rights and music ownership cannot be overstated. Her brave and public stand has ignited crucial conversations across the entire music industry, prompting artists, labels, and legal professionals to re-evaluate existing contracts and power structures. Her actions have not only brought the often-opaque world of master recordings and intellectual property into mainstream discourse but have also inspired countless other artists, particularly emerging ones, to scrutinize their own agreements and advocate more fiercely for their rights to creative control and fair compensation.
This saga serves as a compelling case study on the evolving landscape of intellectual property in the digital age. With streaming services now dominating music consumption, the ways in which artists are compensated and control their work are constantly shifting. Taylor Swift’s proactive approach, supported by legislative efforts like the Music Modernization Act championed by individuals such as Dina LaPolt, signals a hopeful future where creators have greater agency over their art. The ongoing dialogue spurred by her efforts continues to push the industry towards more transparent, equitable, and artist-friendly practices, ensuring that the next generation of musicians inherits a fairer system that truly values their contributions.
Steven Tyler’s vocal support for Taylor Swift is more than just a nod from one legend to another; it’s a powerful endorsement of a movement. It solidifies the idea that the fight for artists to own their music is a universal one, transcending genres and generations, and is integral to the health and longevity of creative expression. As the music industry continues to transform, the principles of ownership, fair compensation, and artistic integrity championed by figures like Swift remain paramount, paving the way for a more empowered and artist-centric future where creators can thrive with their intellectual property securely in hand.