This article has been imported from chorus.fm for discussion. All of the forum rules still apply. Rolling Stone: The letter calls for major political party committees in the U.S. to “establish clear policies requiring campaigns to seek consent of featured recording artists, songwriters and copyright owners before publicly using their music in a political or campaign setting.” […]The letter’s signees include the Rolling Stones’ Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, Aerosmith’s Steven Tyler and Joe Perry, Sia, Regina Spektor, R.E.M, Lorde, Blondie, Elvis Costello, Sheryl Crow, Rosanne Cash, Lionel Richie, Pearl Jam and Green Day. more Not all embedded content is displayed here. You can view the original to see embedded videos, tweets, etc.
It is journalistic malpractice in 2020 to not include or link to the damn source document you’re discussing. (That’s directed at Rolling Stone, not you, Jason.) I’d be very interested to know if the letter in question proposes an enforcement mechanism. I imagine people have considered asking the PROs to exempt political events from their blanket licenses, but maybe something in ASCAP and BMI’s consent decrees complicates that. There is no generalized First Amendment exemption to copyright law, so without those licenses, the rallies would have to rely on fair use. I wonder if any court has ever undertaken that analysis. Ditto for a Lanham Act false endorsement claim, though maybe there’s a Dastar issue there.
This seems like a no brainer, the campaigns should have to seek permission to use or even play someone's else music. But seeing the post directly above mine, it is a lot more complicated than I think.