On June 16, 2015, Donald Trump descended an escalator to the blaring soundtrack of Neil Young's "Rockin' in the Free World" and announced that he was running for president. Young, a Canadian citizen, soon issued a statement blasting the New York businessman's use as "not authorized" while endorsing Bernie Sanders. Trump went on to tweet that the rock iconoclast was “a total hypocrite,” while Sanders used "Rockin'" at a campaign rally of his own.
A similar ritual—candidate uses a song, performer complains—has played out through the current election cycle. Trump's musical selections during rallies have drawn stern rebukes from Adele and R.E.M., not to mention Steven Tyler and, um, Everlast. Six months before Scott Walker formally introduced his short-lived run for the presidency, the Dropkick Murphys tweeted at the Wisconsin governor, "We literally hate you," after he entered to their music at a right-wing forum in Des Moines. In February, after a Ted Cruz campaign video featured an Explosions in the Sky track, the band and label Temporary Residence got the offending clip taken down. Likewise, Bikini Kill's Tobi Vail successfully issued a takedown notice for Hillary Clinton supporters' unofficial video set to "Rebel Girl."
The basic pattern is old enough, so at this point it's fair to wonder why more candidates don't take the hint. Twisted Sister's Dee Snider, who said Trump asked for and received his permission to blast "We're Not Gonna Take It" on the campaign trail, in 2012 issued a statement saying he "emphatically denounces" Paul Ryan's use of the same song. The same year, Survivor ("Eye of the Tiger") and the Heavy ("How You Like Me Now") served Newt Gingrich with legal papers. Mitt Romney won Kid Rock's blessing, but not so much K'Naan's. In 2008, John McCain got some of his own "straight talk" medicine from Foo Fighters, Heart, Jackson Browne, andmore. Obama, too, drew apparently principle-based resistance from Sam & Dave half Samuel David Moore.
The differences between, say, Ronald Reagan's 1984 misreading of Bruce Springsteen and Bernie Sanders' 2016 Iowa campaign ad backed by Simon & Garfunkel's "America" are more than purely legalistic. As the musicians-advocacy group Future of Music Coalition notes, politicians should probably go beyond what's legally required and ask for permission any time they plan to use a song in a big way. After all, no copyright law can protect a candidate from missing-the-irony embarrassment (like with Reagan and "Born in the U.S.A."). That said, here's a guide for music fans on when politicians can and can't use a particular song, and why that means we'll probably keep seeing more musician pushback over candidates' taste in music.
Campaign Commercials
Politicians using a song in a campaign ad had better be sure they get the right approvals. According to ASCAP, "The campaign will need to contact the song's publisher and possibly the artist's record label to negotiate the appropriate licenses with them." That goes for internet videos, too. McCain paid Jackson Browne an undisclosed sum and publicly apologized for using "Running on Empty" in a 2008 TV spot without permission. David Byrne reached a similar settlement two years later, for Florida Governor Charlie Crist's use of the Talking Heads' "Road to Nowhere." So when it came to Sanders' "America" ad, Paul Simon and Art Garfunkel were both feeling the Bern. By contrast, when Rand Paul launched his campaign to John Rich's "Shuttin' Detroit Down," YouTube automatically blocked a video of the speech, which Paul's campaign later re-uploaded without the unlicensed music.
Unofficial Campaign Videos
User-generated memes are so deeply ingrained in the fabric of online life that it may be easy to forget, but copyright law applies to videos that supporters upload, too. The licenses needed to clear unofficial videos "are essentially the same, even if the responsibility doesn't lie with the campaign," Future of Music's Kevin Erickson tells me. "Rebel Girl," we never knew you.
Campaign Rallies
Public events where politicians may appear with music are different. Most big venues already have "public performance" licenses with organizations like ASCAP, BMI, and SESAC that apply to any song in those groups' catalogues. Still, campaigns typically will purchase their own license, as well, in case the venues' licenses don't cover their music, or they want to use the music somewhere that doesn't have a license.
Proper licensing doesn't entirely protect politicians from legal headaches over their campaign-rally music, though. According to ASCAP, a musical act could still sue candidates under state-specific "right of publicity" laws, which protect a prominent person's "image." Other potential legal options include the Lanham Act, which guards against unauthorized use of a trademarked brand name, and "false endorsement," if a campaign's use of a song suggests the performer is a political supporter.
The expense involved in legal battles helps explain why performers are—like in the recent cases of Young, Adele, and R.E.M. scathingly against Trump—usually quicker to speak out about a candidate's unwanted soundtrack selections rather than file suit. As the 2016 presidential race kicks off in earnest, how candidates interact with the music world should keep up offering up drama. As if this election season doesn't have enough of that already.