Posted on 06/29/2011 11:34:22 AM PDT by MissesBush
I think I am confused because I don’t understand how a political campaign would be considered a commercial enterprise. Is this something that has been addressed in copyright court decisions?
I suppose if there was a cover fee for entrance to the rally, that this would be the functional equivalent of a commercial venture, but a free rally in an open venue would not seem to be a venture where the artist would have any control over whether their song could be played versus another artist’s song.
After reading the article it appears that the Bachmann campaign used it in a political ad. That would clearly be a no no, but I don’t see how they can control the use at an open rally.
Yeah, but you don’t know he licensed it to BMI. And you don’t know they paid the license fee. People using music and not paying the license fee is a problem that is endemic. If she did, then all she’s gotta do is say, “Hey, I paid the license fee. If he won’t let me use it, then he’s in breach of contract.”
Most likely, the truth is somewhere between what you say and I say. In any event, it’s a tiny matter. Not a big issue.
I have several Petty albums in my Rhapsody download que that have their license renewed every month. I suspect he gets a proportional fee based on the fee I paid to Rhapsody and the songs that need to be licensed to my MP3 player. I suspect it would amount to no more than a nickle a month, but I think I will delete them all because I really don’t want him to have a nickle of my money after this.
Wow! Petty drives in NASCAR AND does music??
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.
A very dark song for a political campaign theme song.
Debbie whatzer name from The Pretenders tried to force Rush to stop using “Back to Ohio” as his opening theme. He is still playing the song.
I agree. If he’s going to be an a$$hole, then treat him like one.
Screw this tinny-voiced punk.
Well as always in matters legal, "it depends"... For instance Paul McCartney has no control over much of the early Beatles Catalog (as well as the other remaining Beatles/Beatles Estates.)
It all boils down to what sort of deal was signed. Much of the very popular music from the 60's 70's and 80's and even 90's is controlled by Big Music not the Artists who wrote and recorded the music.
An example of "Big Music" is Sony/ATV publishing which owns the rights to over a quarter of a million recorded works from Recording artist such as The Beatles, Eminem, Bob Dylan, Elvis Presley etc. (If memory serves) Also I believe Michael Jackson used to own much of rights to those published works but put them up for collateral for some business deal and now 50% or so is owned By SONY/ATV and the rest owned by the Jackson Family. Also estimates put the SONY/ATV catalog value at between 1.5 to 4 Billion Dollars.
Many of those published works in the SONY/ATV catalog are owned outright as far as Master License rights are concerned. (Though the Music and Lyrics rights are mostly still controlled by the Artists or their heirs.)
Repeating a discredited liberal meme as if it were factual does wonders for your credibility.
I’ve always found Petty’s music to be hack, anyway.
No problem, I ask questions sometimes just trying to understand something. I meant no offense by it.
Come on Fiji. I think she wants to be elected. Playing those songs would make her a laughing stock.
Perhaps hip-hoppers and other musical Philistines will laugh, but few of them will be voting for her.
Since her objective is the White House, maybe she could use The Little White House from the 1926 Broadway show "Honeymoon Lane." Waring's Pennsylvanians did the best version of this tune, but it's not available on Youtube.
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.