Breaking News English

The pop artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong Taylor Swift has removed her album '1989' from Apple Music. The singer disagrees with artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong Apple is giving her music away for artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. Apple Music is a new music streaming artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. It starts on June 30th. Anyone can sign up for a artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong and get the first three months for free. Swift says this is artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. She said Apple should pay artists for these three artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. After the trial artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong, there will be a monthly fee of $9.99. Swift suggested that Apple was being artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. She said: "We don't ask [Apple] for free iPhones. Please don't ask us to provide you with artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong music for [free]."

Swift criticised Apple Music in a artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong. She wrote: "Apple Music will not be paying writers, artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong, or artists for those three months." She added that Apple was being " artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong". She said: "I find it to be artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong, disappointing, and completely unlike this artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong progressive and generous artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong." She also said Apple had the money to pay artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong, saying: "We know how… artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong Apple has been and we know that this incredible company has the money to pay artists….Three months is a artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong time to go unpaid, and it is unfair to ask anyone to work for artistscompanyfreegreedyhistoricallyhowletterlongmonthsnothingourperiodproducersserviceshockingstarsuccessfultrialunfairwrong."