Ownership of IP (songs) in political speeches

[Brian Roth]

While doing other reading, I was listening to the ex-president's bloviating from the other room in the house. Just to be clear, I am also not a fan of the current president who also bloviates. I am a registered Independent who leans libertarian.

My point is not the content of the speech, but the musical "outro".

Sam and Dave's "Hold On, I'm Coming", one of my all-time R&B songs from my 1960's youth.

It's an IP question for me. Can any politician appropriate any song to suit their campaign?

NOT intending this to turn into a political sh!t storm here (but sadly, I suspect I am stirring up a hornet's nest....sigh).

A simple question. Who controls the IP of a song when used for political purposes?

PLEASE start a new thread when arguing about the politicians involved. My question solely relates to the rights of writers, performers, etc.

Bri

 

[john12ax7]

The question in general seems to be no they can't just use them, but they seem to anyway, until they get a cease and desist from an artist who objects. That seems to be how things have played out in the past.

 

[Ó Draighnáin]

Probably more careful about it around here now:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-41744547

 

[Brian Roth]

I guess that whoever owns the publishing rights for "Hold On, I'm Coming" (written by Issac Hays (RIP) and David Porter) doesn't a rat about their IP rights these days.

Sigh....being a bit ornery now....but maybe someone can make infomercials offering a "female stimulation device" and use that song.

Bri

PS, it's a GREAT oldie song, regardless. Hate it turned into a political song!

 

[scott2000]

Always takes some of the magic away for me when hearing songs used in commercials as well. Which is weird bc , when used in movies, it doesn't for some reason..

But that one tuned used for on hold background music actually made for a good commercial... Knew I always liked being on hold when it played...lol

 

[volker]

There were plenty of musicians who refused their songs being used in the political campaign:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Musicians_who_oppose_Donald_Trump's_use_of_their_musichttps://www.forbes.com/sites/andrew...g-their-songs-at-his-rallies/?sh=8f9534674b87
Regarding the actual legal question, there is a quote in this article:

But the Trump campaign didn’t back down, alleging they were using the song legally by paying the licensing fees—and they were right. Campaigns have the same rights to play songs that radio stations do, through blanket licensing deals. Entities like ASCAP and BMI even have special licenses for political campaigns.

 

[crazydoc]

"The ASCAP Political Campaign License agreement provides a blanket license to perform any or all of the millions
of compositions in the ASCAP repertory. However, ASCAP members may ask ASCAP to exclude specific songs
from a particular political campaign’s license. In that event, ASCAP will notify the campaign of the excluded work."

https://www.ascap.com/~/media/files/pdf/advocacy-legislation/political_campaign.pdf
But I don't know if that has any legal teeth, not that that would matter to some campaigns.

 

[pucho812]

As I understand it…
As long as license fees are paid, the artist has very little course of action.
They can stand on their soapbox wagging their fingers crying foul or they can cash the check. They always do the latter even while doing the former.
It does make for a new cycle to see some aging former music star moaning about how so and so didn’t get permission but that tends to fall out of the news quickly.

 

[living sounds]

It depends (as usual, in the legal realm).

Collective licensing does cover many types of use, differing by jurisdiction (country), and use for political campaigns may or may not be classified as a type of use and may or may not be included in the collective licensing conventions.

The local IP law may also include defacement/misrepresentation provisions that may or may not apply for specific politicians, events, parties etc., depending on the context.

I guess the OP is looking for an answer regarding the situation in the US, can't help there.

 

[john12ax7]

The US law is still a bit of a grey area, not as simple as having a license and then it's ok. It's debatable whether blanket type licenses can be used for political purposes. Some artists have (successfully) stopped usage by arguing things like using their music could be misconstrued as endorsement, and there are laws that protect them from this.

The problem is there doesn't appear to be established case law. So no one really knows what arguments would or wouldn't hold up at trial.