Seems like a lot of freepers need educating on copyright law. Using a song for a political campaign is NOT a public performance, it’s a commercial use. It’s not only a pertinent legal distinction, but one helluva financial distinction as well. Public performance rights are relatively cheap, but commercial use licenses have gone into the 7 figures.
Note that although it was settled in a pre-trial mediation, Charlie Crist’s campaign wound up paying big bucks to David Byrne for using his music without permission.
John McCain likewise wound up paying Jackson Brown big bucks.
Don Henley? Yep, you guess it, won big bucks from Chuck DeVore
Bachman's team played the song as she exited the stage at a press conference. The song was not used in any advertising, but was played over the speakers at a live event.
I'd have to look into the legal definitions. A political campaign is not a commercial enterprise, so i don't see how it would be a prohibited use. In a sense a political rally is like a family get together. If they used it in a politcal advertisement, then that would be different, but just to use it at rallies would seem to be a permissible use under the ASCAP and BMI rules.
Maybe there is a specific exemption for political rallies?
Thanks for the information! That’s helpful.
This is correct.
Seems like a lot of freepers need educating on copyright law.
And the McCain and Devore cases had to do with the creation of NEW (”derivative”) works that were parody/variants of the original composition. There were also issues of right of publicity, with fake cover singers mimicking the stars’ voices. “Dole Man/Soul Man” was the same issue.
Those are very different legal issues than simply playing a recording at a rally.
You’re awfully confident, but my decades of practice in intellectual property law says your confidence is unjustified.