Blind item: Which megastar is trying to sabotage a younger artist?

[corrykennedy]

Crazy Days and Nights has posted a new blind item about a mystery musical artist seemingly sabotaging a young and up and coming artist. According to the blind item, the big artist is playing up her controversial relationship to keep her name in the headlines, as the younger artist has music coming out this summer.

here!! pic.twitter.com/

Comments

[debbiesgirl]

[corrykennedy]

Taylors team apparently took 50% of the royalties/credit for deja vu because Olivia couldn’t fight it due to overlapping fan bases

[debbiesgirl]

[corrykennedy]

anytime someone has tried to sue taylor it goes on forever and eventually drops off. like the whole shake it off lawsuit. olivia was right now to fight it, even though it lost her millions it would have cost more in the long run and been bad pr. ia it's outrageous though, i think that's why olivia was so hurt.

[debbiesgirl]

[ty]

Is it? I only ask because Grimes (haha) posted that she will "only" ask for 50% royalties if other people create AI stuff using her voice.

[xaristotlex]

50% is outlandishly high in this situation because Olivia wrote/played/sang the song without any involvement from Taylor at all other than a vague inspiration for something that was generic anyway (shouting in the song). The hypothetical Grimes situation would be totally different because whoever created the AI songs would be using Grimes' voice as the sole method of creating interest in them and selling them, and any songs using her voice would reflect on her as a musician even if she didn't write them (as people would not necessarily be able to distinguish that they were AI-created).

Not that Grimes needs defending as a person, but the situations aren't similar at all so I think her 50% offer was very reasonable lol

[paint_it_golden]

It doesn’t work like that. Taylor’s team probably threatened legal action in order to get writing credit in the first place and Olivia caved so it wouldn’t get that far. She can’t sue her for a demand that she decided to agree to.

She probably made the right decision in the long run because going up against Taylor Swift in a lawsuit at the beginning of her career would have been awful. On the other hand, a lawsuit over this would have made Taylor look TERRIBLE so her team was probably bluffing. Calling her on the bluff and not giving credits would have just invited Taylor to plot another way to try to ruin her career or get revenge though :(

[totteringg]

50% is absolutely nuts and honestly gross especially when you’re basically a billionaire and she’s a teenage artist who may not even have a hit again.

[blood_pressures]

but this is how billionaires becomes billionaires

[baruchel]

Taylor - whose songs always borrow/steal or are influenced by other songs from lesser known artists.

Hypocrite.

Some could say there's a special place in hell for women artists not supporting other women artists or wait is that quote only applicable when someone doesn't support her?

[paint_it_golden]

The really sad part about this is she did it to someone who supported her from the time she was a child.

[love_galore]

She owes most of her current output to Imogen Heap, lbr.

[crystalzelda]

Is there a source on that? Not that I don’t believe you, but honestly even if Olivia didn’t want to fight it, 50% is so outrageous I have a hard time believing Olivia’s label would take that lying down.

[corrykennedy]

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/amphtml/benhenry/olivia-rodrigo-paramore-good-4-u-taylor-swift-deja-vu

It’s about halfway down the article, if you search for 50%

Edit that this does say it is what Billboard estimate she will receive. But I am inclined to think that if it was way off, Tree Paine would correct the record as this makes Taylor look pretty bad

[crystalzelda]

Huh, ok ty! I agree that 50% is nuts.