Buzz
Every song, whether created by the songwriter, performer, or a record label, is owned by someone. Whether permission is necessary to use the song depends on various factors. For example, a DJ playing Peter Gabriel’s 'In Your Eyes' or The Righteous Brothers’ 'Unchained Melody' at a wedding doesn’t face any legal issues. Similarly, sports arenas can play the Rolling Stones' 'Start Me Up' without requiring a special release.
In politics, however, campaigns and rallies that use music to energize their supporters often face scrutiny for unauthorized use. What’s behind this?
As reported by Rolling Stone, the issue usually isn’t about copyright infringement, although using a song without approval is technically a violation. If a song is played in a public space like a stadium that has a public performance license, no extra permission is needed. These licenses are generally granted through organizations such as the American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) or Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI). Despite this, ASCAP advises [PDF] that political campaigns obtain permission from the artists or songwriters, as these licenses don’t cover music played during conventions or campaign rallies.
Most artists are generally unconcerned when their music is played at weddings or sports events. These occasions offer free publicity and exposure, and the artists don’t typically profit significantly from their work. However, politics is a different matter. Since artists may hold different political views than a candidate using their music, they often worry that their work could be seen as an endorsement of that candidate’s stance.
This is when artists might begin to voice their objections and request that politicians stop using their songs. They can do so by invoking their Right of Publicity—a legal argument protecting how their image is used. They can claim that using their music violates their right to avoid being associated with something they find objectionable. Additional legal grounds can be found under the Lanham Act, which addresses trademark confusion (or False Endorsement) and argues that the use of an artist’s music in a political context implies they endorse a particular political message.
For instance, in 2008, Jackson Browne won a lawsuit against John McCain and the national and Ohio GOP after the McCain campaign used his song 'Running on Empty' in advertisements criticizing Barack Obama over gas conservation issues.
Even if an artist doesn’t support a candidate, taking legal action isn’t always the best course. A contentious legal battle can often lead to more publicity than if the musician simply allowed the campaign to continue unchallenged. In some cases, however, artists feel strongly enough about distancing themselves from a message they disagree with that they’ll take whatever actions necessary to stop it.
Ultimately, most of the time, a song used in a political campaign is not there because the artist or label authorized it. Unless the artist strongly opposes the campaign’s message and is prepared for a legal battle, they likely have little power to prevent the song’s use.
