A leftover from the fall election: The RNC and Jackson Browne have settled, after Browne sued the RNC for using his song "Running on Empty" for a commercial supporting John McCain and criticizing Obama's fuel policies. According to the New York Times: "In February a judge denied motions by Mr. McCain and the committee to have the case dismissed on the grounds that their use of the song was protected by the First Amendment and fair-use doctrine." I'm not a lawyer, but I'm pretty sure this was a stupid ploy on the part of McCain and the RNC. There's a reason why companies pay a lot of money to pop musicians to use their songs in television advertisements. (Probably the most famous case of this--and there are many--was when Microsoft paid a bunch of money to the Rolling Stones to use "Start Me Up" in a commercial for Windows 95.) Why would it be any different (i.e., a fair-use, First Amendment issue) if the company just happens to be a political campaign?
The more interesting case is when politicians use pop songs at rallies. Left-leaning musicians like Bruce Springsteen and John Mellencamp have complained when their songs ("Born in the U.S.A.," "Pink Houses," "Our Country") are played at campaign events by conservative politicians. In some cases, they've been able to convince Republicans to refrain from playing their songs at these events. But legally, my sense is that they probably can't be forced to stop. I'd also be interested to see if the fair-use, intellectual property, free culture people (who tend to be left-leaning) have a reaction to the settlement. It will be interesting to see what they have to say when the people being sued by copyright holders are conservative politicians and not college students. Until then, Salon has a pretty good summary of recent interactions between U.S. political campaigns and pop music.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
As the record shows, I def lean pretty copylef, but I think the law is correct here in failing to protect "moral" rights, as they're known (and commonly protected) outside the US. These guys should get to complain, request, etc., all they like -- wage a battle in the court of public opinion, by all means -- but unless it's a case of commercial exploitation (as the McCain campaign might have been shown to be, but I dunno) I think this sort of thing should be safe as fair use, much as one might object to their politrickal uses.
Post a Comment