Taylor Swift's '40-page prenup': How $2BILLION in assets divide up... and the one major concession Travis is predicted to have written in as special clause
A celebrity divorce attorney explains why the most consequential clause in Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce's prenup might not be about money at all — but about what she's allowed to sing.
1 / 5In the article
'Legal documents can have all sorts of language that talks about confidentiality, but also restricts her from writing or singing about anything that reflects on him.'”
'Legal documents can have all sorts of language that talks about confidentiality, but also restricts her from writing or singing about anything that reflects on him.'
Receipt
'There are ways you can get round it with creative license, because you can only draft so much and everyone's probably going to know what she's talking about, even if it is described very differently.'
Creative license may let Swift write around such restrictions, since total contractual control of her art is impossible.
Receipt
Swift paid $360 million to retrieve the masters of her first six albums — a woman who has already bought back her own past once is unlikely to sign away her future.
Swift's $360 million masters buyback frames her as someone who guards creative ownership fiercely before any marriage.
Receipt
'I think the prenup is actually going to be a pretty simple document — what's his right now will be his and what's hers is hers.'
An expert predicts the agreement will simply keep each partner's existing wealth separate, not entangle their finances.
Receipt
'Maybe they could have some language that talks about not getting into intimate details. It's possible, but it's hard to police.'
Even a clause limiting personal revelations would be nearly unenforceable in practice, an expert cautions.
Receipt
Didn’t see the line you wanted? Choose your own
Ask a question
Ask about anything in this article. We’ll try to provide an answer.