Dear Musicians: Once Again, Politicians Can Probably Play Your Songs At Events Without Your Permission
from the hello-ascap dept
Election season is just starting to kickoff again, so of course we're going to get yet another series of stories about musicians complaining about politicians (that they disagree with) using their music at campaign events. You may recall that the Foo Fighters and Jackson Browne (among some others) got upset at John McCain for using their music, and the band Heart complained about Sarah Palin using one of the band's songs. Most of the complaints are about rally events, and almost all of the complaints are bogus. In cases where the music is used in a TV commercial (as was the case with Jackson Browne), the legalities are a little trickier (which is why McCain settled that lawsuit), but when it comes to events, the musicians are unlikely to get very far. That's because as long as the venue has the proper ASCAP/BMI licenses for public performance, they can play any covered songs they want. This has always been true.So, for all the talk (as plenty of people have sent in) about Tom Petty complaining about Michele Bachmann using is song at campaign events, there's not much legal basis for the complaint. Ditto for the complaint (also against Bachmann) from Katrina and the Waves. This is probably why Bachmann seems to have ignored Petty and is still playing the music.
Of course, as we've pointed out before, even if there's no legal recourse, it still amazes us that Presidential candidates don't at least reach out to musicians first. Because otherwise, they're just opening up a huge opportunity for musicians to generate headlines about how much they dislike a particular politician. Why not find some musicians who support them and use their music?
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: katrina and the waves, michele bachmann, music, performances, tom petty
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Because I can count the number of radical right wing nut musicians on one finger. Ted Nugent.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Why on earth wouldn't Bachmann be proud to play "Thunder Thighs" or "Little Miss Dangerous" played at her events?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Actually, as someone who lives outside the US, if you don't consider them radical, then you've been brainwashed by the US media who want everything to be "balanced."
Looking ath US politicians from a neutral point of view, it's pretty obvious that Obama is center-right. Schwarzennegger and Romney are right. McCain is far-right. Bachmann and her teabagging ilk are radical-right - so far gone they have no clue.
Remember, Fox considers it their job to move the definition of "center" to be "far right" - looks like they've succeeded with you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I suppose if you start with the socialist baseline of most other 1st-world countries as a "center", then your assessment is correct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
If your entire rebuttal is "that's only true if you define "center" as middle" then you are just proving me correct.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
> if you define "center" as middle" then you
> are just proving me correct.
And if your entire rebuttal is that "socialism is by definition 'center'", then you are just proving me correct as well.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
ps: that is a joke.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Take Warning
Artists can counter saying they don't particularly support that politician, but it's not their song anymore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Take Warning
Technically yes, but it should be noted, if you want to sign with a large record company you have to agree to such terms. Your other choices, up until recently (see efforts of Trent Reznor and Jonathan Coulton), were to: a) remain a starving artist, or b) start your own label (and in the meantime, starve until it gets going).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
because the mainstream media has so vilified the republican party that any artist who supported them would be immediatly ditched for the latest bush bashing band.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You mean like Conservative News Network?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
I admire your commitment to attacking strawmen but you may wish to update your references. Bush-bashing is so 2005. These days the liberal tastemaker machine prefers artists like Tyler the Creator, who engage in elaborate sexual violence-torture-miscegenation fantasies. We've stepped up our attack on traditional American values, so you best as well, son!
(By the by, A-Coward would be a great hip hop name! You can even have that one for free! Creative Commons, biatch!)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Also, this is for the comments posted so far, it's important to note the licensing is for the composition, not the performance. In these cases, I guess, it just so happens the songwriter and the song performer are the same, but the music licensing is primarily with the writer, not the performer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Song rights
Of course, it's also entirely within Mr. Petty's rights to complain about this, and that should be disincentive enough for someone to use his works without permission - it's just another reminder (justified or not) to the electorate of how out-of-touch you are with artists and creative people.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
don't sign with the MAFIAA
there a lot of other reasons why.I do play in two bands which both have releases and i have other releases with older bands i did.i never had the desire nor would i ever no matter the money offered sign with the devil.
Free music and more
www.bigmeathammer.com
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Why?
Because at some point even Republicans tire of Toby Keith.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Why?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Note to Tom Petty
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Note to Tom Petty
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Youtube videos
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Maybe covered, maybe not
Well, almost. That works as long as they're simply playing the song, like when the candidate takes the stage. But when the song in question has been rolled into a graphical/video montage or animated "splash" sequence, for example, and then used to intro the candidate, it becomes subject to synchronization rights, and that's where the screaming starts.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Maybe covered, maybe not
The very fact that something like 'synchronization rights' exists in the first place ought to make any sane person's head explode.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Serious Question
And is there a point (or points) at which liability transfers parties?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Serious Question
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Just not able to pretend I have much in common with either one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
easy...... that would require a politician who could think for themselves....maybe even pick out their own clothes, tie their one shoes, etc......... that is not the kind of politician that corporate is willing to allow in the running to be their CEO.....er president of the united corporations of america
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I know copyrights has nothing to do with how the artists can control where or when something is played in the U.S. in other countries that may be true like in Germany or Japan that have strong moral rights embeded into their copyright laws, but in the U.S.? nope, no such luck and still those same politicians take everything and use those things without permission all the while complaining how others are doing that to others.
I find that to be ironic.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Tough f-ing shit
You made your bed, you get to lie in it now.
Tough shit. Live with it or retract the laws.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
easy answer
get THAT onto twitter and watch the hilarity as they continue to use your music.....
Or (depending on the song) just make-up a reason for the lyrics.....oh yeah THAT song? yeah its a ballad about how awful politicians are and how they're all scum-sucking parasites that should be blasted into the sun!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
moral rights
So what is the basis for the suggestion that musicians have no recourse for political uses of their songs?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rights of Publicity
However, I'm not entirely sure that there wouldn't be a sound cause of action for trademark tarnishment / dilution, or violation of publicity rights. I don't know for certain, but I would have to see what the ASCAP/BMI language specifies; it may in fact preserve such a cause of action. In any event, those rules depend on venue, and there may actually be a cause of action for rights of publicity in California.
Also, I don't think that ASCAP/BMI licenses cover venue events that are recorded and then broadcast.
Anyone know?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Musicians who don't like politicians
[ link to this | view in chronology ]