Posted on 02/07/2016 9:43:21 AM PST by WilliamIII
Precisely
Isn’t it interesting that the libs expect us to share absolutely everything that we earn or create with people who don’t share our values or our work ethic and yet they complain to no end about having to “share” what they create. Another case of liberals believing that the rules they want to force onto others should not have to apply to them.
Bingo. These pansies just need to STFU and take the money.
Why would he play ABore in the first place? Yes ABore has a good voice but her songs are about as exciting and stimulating as watching paint dry.
If you say so...
*YAWN*
I’m sure he pays her a bit more. As he should. That piece of music is now synonymous with him, not with her.
I haven’t either. Some pop culture icon I guess? You and I must be squares, steve86. (Do people still use the term ‘square’?!?)
Why would Trump need to pay for playing anything?
https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2009/10/court-rules-phones-ringing-public-dont-infringe-co
The ruling is an important victory for consumers, making it clear that playing music in public, when done without any commercial purpose, does not infringe copyright. That’s thanks to Section 110(4) of the Copyright Act, which exempts public performances undertaken “without any purpose of direct or indirect commercial advantage.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.