Posted on 07/21/2016 7:41:07 AM PDT by rktman
Wednesday's NBC Nightly News followed the example of CBS the previous evening in spotlighting the latest Republican presidential candidate to get in trouble with a liberal musician for using their music at a campaign event. Peter Alexander zeroed in on how "just hours after [Donald] Trump tried to cast himself as a winner, Queen complained the billionaire used the song 'against our wishes.'" He also cited how "George W. Bush had to 'back down,' after receiving a cease and desist letter from Tom Petty." [video below]
Anchor Lester Holt led into Alexander's report by noting that "sometimes, a song fits with a candidate in perfect harmony. But for the artist, it's not always music to their ears." The correspondent first spotlighted the current campaign music from Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump's rallies: "Hillary Clinton's come out swinging, with the help of pop stars Rachel Platten and Katy Perry. Donald Trump routinely revs up crowds with the Stones." He featured Rock and Roll Hall of Fame CEO Greg Harris, who claimed that "rock and roll musicians are some of the greatest idealists on the planet. They believe in three cords and the truth."
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
Ted Cruz was singing?
After breaking the pledge to support the RNC nominee no matter who it ended up being, it was possibly his swan song.
I heard a disc-jockey on a local station making fun of the GOP for using that music “without permission”.
The artist does NOT have a veto power. In most cases the rights belong to some publisher or record label. And even if he does hold the rights, once ASCAP or BMI have been paid the correct licensing fee it’s a done deal.
A guy who works in commercial radio would know this. Hence he or his employer were deliberately LYING to the public again.
“Please, can anyone point out what in this music score defines it as either liberal or conservative?”
Whatever reason I think I might have for pointing out anything like that would be technically incorrect because there are no lyrics present.
Show me something from the “tribal” rock musical HAIR and I’m sure I could find an example or three.
WHAT! Someone in the msm would lie? How can that be? LOL! The ASCAP/BMI thing I get. Mrs. rktman used to have a job where she was the head cheese and remembers all to well that since the office was open to the public and conducted business, they even had to pay the fees just for having the radio on in the office.
I seem to remember during the Bill Clinton campaign, they played ‘Captain Jack’, a Billy Joel song. Did they get the ‘okay’ from him beforehand?
I bet not.
That is a mighty depressing song, btw. Fitting for the Democratic Party.
It's not in the public domain since copyright's are still in effect. And all commercial use licenses for music, be they from ASCAP or whoever, have an exclusion for political events. But even if he did have the right to, why would Trump or any other candidate want to use a song if the performer didn't want them to?
And, yes, one must call their slavish ideologues "believers," because they are as fiercely intolerant and tyrannical as any so-called "religious" denomination or sect in the history of the world.
If one finds that hard to accept, just consider how they and their ilk have imposed coercive controls on the "education" (propagandizing) of children in America, or the imposition of regulations and limitations on industry, manufacturing, energy, and any segment which would lift their enslaved voters out of poverty.
Now, it's their music?
Every Kareoke host knows this.
If you pay BMI or ASCAP to use it
The artists can pound sand
Technically it was the NVA army who fought the Marines at Khe Sanh. The Viet Cong were used for the TET offensive in the cities because they could infiltrate as civilians into the city centers. Just another uneducated liberal making words fit into an agenda. But it was a catchy lyric.
Thanks for the update. So, is the band that was/is playing allowed to play some of the songs live? Now that is plagiarism. LOL!
Time to unleash Ted Nugent and Kid Rock!
My point exactly.
I foolishly bought the album when it came out. Caught up in the hype. I rarely paid attention to lyrics, and couldn't sing most of the songs I loved from my youth if my life depended on it (well, I can't sing, period).
However, I did start paying attention to the song because of Reagan's campaign. Tossed the album once I realized how anti-American it was.
Exactly, imagine if PepsiCo or CokeCo were out there saying You can’t drink our soda even though you paid for it because we don’t like your politics....
Idiotic, Republicans should have told artists to pound sand long long ago on this.. you don’t want it used, take it out of the catalog.. but if you are selling it and the fees are paid your gripes are just idiotic.
Good question. My suspicion is that they had a right to play the songs, since they wouldn't have opened themselves up to legal problems. But I think the whole thing is implied endorsement. If Trump uses the Queen recording of "We are the Champions" then that may lead some people to believe that the group is endorsing him. If Joe's Garage Band plays "We are the Champions" then only they could be considered the ones endorsing him.
The only thing the libs can complain about conservatives:
“Hey, they stole our music!”
I used to think that paying the licensing fee was enough, but read the link noted above in post 7. There is an exception for political campaigns. The artist can sue if he or she doesn't want to be associated with the political campaign.
There are three laws that cover this. I was unaware of this exception for campaigns until a Freeper mentioned the issue in some postings yesterday. Simple fact is, the campaign could be sued, and could lose the suit, if they keep playing songs against the artist's wishes, even though they've obtain the rights to do so via the music licensing.
Read the link at post 7. There is an exception to the licensing for political campaigns. Even if they secure the rights via licensing, the artist can still say no.
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.