Pearl Jam, R.E.M., Lorde and More Demand Consent for Use of Their Music in Political Campaigns
Following on from a series of instances in which Donald Trump has used music at his rallies without permission from the artists, a multitude of prominent musicians have decided to team up with the Artists Rights Alliance in order to ensure that permission is required before music is used in political campaigns. In order to do so, an open letter has been signed by a wide range of artists, including the likes of Rolling Stones’ Mick Jagger and Keith Richards, Panic! At The Disco, Aerosmith, Blondie, Elvis Costello, Sheryl Crow, Rosanne Cash, Amanda Shires, Lionel Richie, Green Day and Linkin Park.
As it is fairly difficult to regulate the use of music in public spaces, resistance to Trump's use of music is usually met with largely ineffective cease-and-desist letters. As it stands, so long as a blanket fee is paid, the use of songs falls under a statutory performance licenese which allows them to be played during public events.
You can read the full letter below:
Dear Campaign Committees:
As artists, activists, and citizens, we ask you to pledge that all candidates you support will seek consent from featured recording artists and songwriters before using their music in campaign and political settings. This is the only way to effectively protect your candidates from legal risk, unnecessary public controversy, and the moral quagmire that comes from falsely claiming or implying an artist’s support or distorting an artists’ expression in such a high stakes public way.
This is not a new problem. Or a partisan one. Every election cycle brings stories of artists and songwriters frustrated to find their work being used in settings that suggest endorsement or support of political candidates without their permission or consent.
Being dragged unwillingly into politics in this way can compromise an artist’s personal values while disappointing and alienating fans – with great moral and economic cost. For artists that do choose to engage politically in campaigns or other contexts, this kind of unauthorized public use confuses their message and undermines their effectiveness. Music tells powerful stories and drives emotional connection and engagement – that’s why campaigns use it, after all! But doing so without permission siphons away that value.
The legal risks are clear. Campaign uses of music can violate federal and (in some cases) state copyrights in both sound recordings and musical compositions. Depending on the technology used to copy and broadcast these works, multiple exclusive copyrights, including both performance and reproduction, could be infringed. In addition, these uses impact creators’ rights of publicity and branding, potentially creating exposure for trademark infringement, dilution, or tarnishment under the Lanham Act and giving rise to claims for false endorsement, conversion, and other common law and statutory torts. When campaign commercials or advertisements are involved, a whole additional host of rules and regulations regarding campaign fundraising (including undisclosed and potentially unlawful “in-kind” contributions), finance, and communications could also potentially be breached.
More importantly, falsely implying support or endorsement from an artist or songwriter is dishonest and immoral. It undermines the campaign process, confuses the voting public, and ultimately distorts elections. It should be anathema to any honest candidate to play off this kind of uncertainty or falsely leave the impression of an artist’s or songwriter’s support.
Like all other citizens, artists have the fundamental right to control their work and make free choices regarding their political expression and participation. Using their work for political purposes without their consent fundamentally breaches those rights – an invasion of the most hallowed, even sacred personal interests.
No politician benefits from forcing a popular artist to publicly disown and reject them. Yet these unnecessary controversies inevitably draw even the most reluctant or apolitical artists off the sidelines, compelling them to explain the ways they disagree with candidates wrongfully using their music. And on social media and in the culture at large, it’s the politicians that typically end up on the wrong side of those stories.
For all these reasons, we urge you to establish clear policies requiring campaigns supported by your committees to seek the consent of featured recording artists, songwriters, and copyright owners before publicly using their music in a political or campaign setting. Funding, logistical support, and participation in committee programs, operations, and events should be contingent on this pledge, and its terms should be clearly stated in writing in your bylaws, operating guidelines, campaign manuals, or where you establish any other relevant rules, requirements, or conditions of support.
Please let us know by August 10th how you plan to accomplish these changes.
Aerosmith Alanis Morissette Amanda Shires Ancient Future Andrew McMahon Artist Rights Alliance B-52s Beth Nielsen Chapman Blondie Butch Walker CAKE Callie Khouri Courtney Love Cyndi Lauper Dan Navarro Daniel Martin Moore Duke Fakir Elizabeth Cook Elvis Costello Erin McKeown Fall Out Boy Grant-Lee Phillips Green Day Gretchen Peters Ivan Barias Jason Isbell Jewel Joe Perry John McCrea John Mellencamp Keith Richards Kurt Cobain estate Lera Lynn Lionel Richie Linkin Park Lorde Lykke Li Maggie Vail Mary Gauthier Matt Nathanson Matthew Montfort Michelle Branch Mick Jagger Okkervil River Pearl Jam Panic! At The Disco Patrick Carney R.E.M. Regina Spektor Rosanne Cash Sheryl Crow Sia Steven Tyler T Bone Burnett Tift Merritt Thomas Manzi Train