[Melas]

No! Using a song in a political campaign falls under the same use as using a song in an ad campaign. Artists typically reserve these rights for themselves, and aren’t sold to BMI, ASCAP etc. It can cost a fortune to secure the rights to a song for an ad campaign.

[Cboldt]

-- Using a song in a political campaign falls under the same use as using a song in an ad campaign. Artists typically reserve these rights for themselves, and aren't sold to BMI, ASCAP etc. --

That makes sense. I didn't know it either. What section of Copyright Law, 17 USC, covers that subject?

[Atlas Sneezed]

No! Using a song in a political campaign falls under the same use as using a song in an ad campaign.

---

Novel legal theory, but I’d like to see some credible legal basis for the notion.

[Mad Dawgg]

"No! Using a song in a political campaign falls under the same use as using a song in an ad campaign. Artists typically reserve these rights for themselves, and aren’t sold to BMI, ASCAP etc. It can cost a fortune to secure the rights to a song for an ad campaign."

Sorry but no, you are confusing public performance rights with using a song in a new recorded work such as a commercial or movie.

That is a totally different ballgame and does not apply to what the Bachmann Campaign is doing with the song.

[magritte]

No, I believe at a rally a public performance license is adequate. An ad, however, requires a synchronization license and a master license, which are pretty much under direct control of the artist.