One not-so-small step for Taylor Swift. One giant leap for artists worldwide.
On May 30, 2025, the singer-songwriter announced the outcome of a six-year-long struggle with private equity firm Shamrock Capital and ex-manager Scooter Braun over her master recordings. “All of the music I’ve ever made…now belongs…to me,” she writes in a letter on her website.
In 2019, Scooter Braun sold Swift’s master recordings to Shamrock Capital for $300 million. Swift bought back her masters, which include recordings, music videos, films, art, photos, and more, for $360 million.
“All I’ve ever wanted was the opportunity to work hard enough to be able to one day purchase my music with no strings attached,” she says. And work hard she did.
View this post on Instagram
Swift earned her good karma on the heels of her blockbuster Eras Tour, which catapulted her to billionaire status, and her ambitious rerecording project, Taylor’s Version.
Swift accomplished what few recording artists did in their lifetimes. For reference, the Beatles’ Paul McCartney filed for a publisher’s share of his songs in 2018—56 years after the songs were first released.
“To protect is to know,” says Atty. Maria Carmela Suarez, an intellectual property lawyer at Federis & Associates and Swiftie. Suarez untangles the intricacies of Swift’s case in the context of IP law and offers some tips on how artists could protect their work moving forward.
READ: Taylor Swift’s best lines for every ‘Tortured Poet’ girlie
What is intellectual property?
“Whenever I tell people I’m an IP lawyer, the first thing they’ll ask is ‘Oh, is that like land?'” says Suarez. What sets intellectual property apart from other resources, like land and money, is its intangibility. People don’t physically interact with ideas.
“It’s called property because the creators have rights that are attached to their work,” explains Suarez. “From a basic legal perspective, it’s the rights given to the owner of either creative work, a business, or an invention. You own your creations of the mind.”
Owners of these creations enjoy certain benefits, such as being able to reproduce and profit from them. As a pop artist, Swift derives her main source of income from the reproduction of her songs, specifically the master recordings.
In 2015, Apple launched Apple Music, a streaming service that rivals Spotify. Swift penned an open letter to Apple addressing the lack of royalties for artists in Apple Music’s three-month trial period. “Three months is a long time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for nothing,” wrote Swift.
After Swift’s letter, Apple committed to paying artists during the trial period and maintaining higher rates afterward. Though not an intellectual property dispute between Apple and Swift, this instance reveals the lengths Swift is willing to go to for appropriate compensation for creative work.
The rerecording process
In 2021, Swift released “Fearless (Taylor’s Version),” the first rerecording of the Taylor’s Version project. Taylor’s Version would take the place of the masters on streaming apps, media, and in her concerts. In short, the masters wouldn’t be used, therefore not generating royalties, and losing their value.
“Songs have different layers of copyright,” Suarez says. “The first is for the lyrics themselves. The second would be the masters, the recording, and the performance. With producers, there could be more layers.”
Since Swift is the creator of her songs’ lyrics, she holds copyright for the first layer, letting her reproduce the lyrics of the songs. The rerecording addresses the second layer. Swift, along with collaborators like Jack Antonoff, subtly changed the instrumentation and album rollouts to differentiate Taylor’s Version from the masters.
View this post on Instagram
As a Swiftie, Suarez prefers “Fearless (Taylor’s Version). “Taylor sounds more mature and experienced through the lens of someone who experienced heartbreak,” she says. The additional meaning might have helped Swift’s case for rerecording.
“Copyright protects the expression of an idea,” explains Suarez. “So Swift is expressing the album in a different way from a different perspective now.”
In addition to copyright, Swift filed trademarks for Taylor’s Version. Copyright protects how an idea is expressed through a piece of art, while trademark protects the use and reproduction of a name.
Swift’s trademarks, which can be seen on the World Intellectual Property Organization website, lets her create themed merchandise. “It keeps others from using ‘Fearless (Taylor’s Version)’ on a shirt.”
Intellectual property in the music industry
Swift’s landmark case has ripple effects throughout the entire music industry. On her website, Swift writes, “Every time a new artist tells me they negotiated to own their master recordings in their record because of this fight, I’m reminded of how important it was for all of this to happen.”
Swift’s contemporaries are also buying their masters. In 2023, Dua Lipa acquired the masters and publishing rights to her music from her previous publisher, TAP Music. In 2014, Rihanna purchased her masters when she switched labels from Def Jam Recordings to Jay-Z’s Roc Nation.
The attention on intellectual property changes how artists collaborate. “What’s happening now is a lot of artists are reaching out to whoever they base their songs on, so they’re not infringing on anyone’s copyright,” Suarez explains. Case in point, Olivia Rodrigo gave Swift and Hayley Williams songwriting credits on “Sour”—and, consequently, a share in revenue.
What Filipino creatives can learn from this
Of Swift’s rerecording project and fight to purchase her masters, Suarez notes, “Generally, for business people, artists, and scientists—know you have these rights.”
Intellectual property rights protect creators and ensure they’re properly rewarded for their creations. For more information about IP in the Philippines, Suarez recommends the IPO Philippines. In April 2025, the organization shared information on music-related IP.
“Once you’re aware, everything follows from there,” the lawyer says. “You’ll be able to appreciate how these intellectual property rights protect you and your works as well.”
