Musician Tom Petty has complained to the Michelle Bachmann campaign about his song “American Girl” being used at her presidential run kick off. He is in the process of getting a cease and desist order. He had a similar issue with the Bush campaign over the song “I Won’t Back Down.”
At what point does an artist stop having control over where his or her music is played? I am not sure Petty has a leg to stand on if the campaign owns the recording. Could he come along and tell a club they cannot play the same recording as dance music? What about some kid with a boom box? What if Bachmann tells Tom Petty to stick it?
If a person is in the business of selling recordings of their music, then they have to expect it to be played.
Tom Petty is living up to his name. This is about as Petty as it gets.
I’m no expert on copyright law, and haven’t seen any Bachmann promo material, but aren’t you allowed to play a line or two from a song without it being considered copyright infringement? Just curious.
Answering my own question:
“There are no legal rules permitting the use of a specific number of words, a certain number of musical notes, or percentage of a work. Whether a particular use qualifies as fair use depends on all the circumstances.”
http://www.copyright.gov/help/faq/faq-fairuse.html
How does that diff from playing someone’s recording in a dance hall?
I never thought I would be defending Bush and Bachmann. Actually, it doesn’t matter who they are.
They aren’t calling the song their own. At what point does a song like ‘Happy Days are Here Again’ become public domain as far as listening goes.
Springsteen sure didn’t get that petty over No Surrender being used by Kerry.
Springsteen did get petty over Born In The U.S.A. with the Reagan campaign in 1984. Furthermore, that campaign missed the point of Springsteen’s song all together. Artists should have control over someone USING their music for political gain. Perhaps, if campaigns asked for permission before using an artist’s music, they might be granted the right to use/play their song. However, when campaigns just start using music, that’s a problem. How is this any different than the NFL, MBL, NBA, or NHL not allowing their respective sporting events to be replayed? Hey, if the thugs don’t allow their games to be rebroadcast, why should a musician?
I believe a certain “documentary couple” had to ask for permission to use In The Name of Love by U2 for their party clip down in Woodbridge a few years back. 🙂
I don’t recall Springsteen getting assy. Maybe I wasn’t watching.
Using music in a documentary you are going go sell for profit is a little different than playing a song at a political rally, a football game, at a dance, or a town picnic.
I am not sure how far the ownership goes after a recording is sold. I am no Bachmann fan–far from it– but I don’t see how an artist can designate who plays a recording when profit isn’t made.
I think it is very hard to narrow down ‘political gain.’
How about possible potitical advancement? 😉 A political seat is a profit of sorts in my mind.
@lafayette
I am not sure what the law says or how it can be regulated. I remember some sort of banter about Reagan not knowing what Springsteen had recorded and also something about the Beachboys and the secretary of the interior but it has been too many years to remember the details.
Every morning Morning Joe and Fox and Friends play various pieces from songs. Do they get permission? Politicians play music at rallies. Fairs play music and car sales events blast songs. Schools ‘adopt’ favorite songs to play at football games. Could Queen come along and ban schools or anyone else from playing We are the Champions or We will Rock You at a basketball game? That would cut curtain a whole lot of stomping.
I don’t know where the line is drawn but Tom Petty sure seems petty and I have very little use for Bachmann.
If the money was good enough, it wouldn’t be a problem…..guaranteed.
I remember thsi happened with Springsteen a few years back. A Republican was using his “Born in the USA” song (which couldn’t have taken any more than 5 minutes to write, it’s just the same line over and over again). Frankly, I blame both sides. Petty gets blamed for thinking he’s that important, and Bachmann for using a dumb song to “represent” her. “American Girl” has only one real use, for Senator’s daughters who are about to be thrown into a well and told to “rub the lotion on its skin”.
@Slow, so did the Republican stop using it? I suppose I am just a cave woman on this issue. If a song is out there and in my head, as long as I am not making money off that song, and I have bought the recording….back off.
Slowpoke, the earth might go backwards here but…I agree with you about these artists thinking they are so frigging important. It makes me want to not ever hear the song again. I sure wouldn’t buy it.
And yes, it was a stupid choice of songs. Not too promising or presidential. Just another love story…somebody done somebody wrong, even an American girl.
Now if it was the doll company…that would be another issue. Anyone been to the American Girl Store at Tysons?
It is not about copyright law. The legal issue is whether the campaign’s prominent use of a famous song identified with Petty might imply to some folks that Petty is endorsing the campaign. This issue pops up over and over again. It does not pop up when a song is just played, among many others, at a state fair or elsewhere. In this instance, the song was arguably being appropriated as a “signature” song for the campaign, hence the argument of implied endorsement.
Simple public performance of a song in the background at an event can be a copyright infringement if there is no license, but “blanket” performance licenses are easily availabe from entities like ASCAP, BMI and SESAC. Many public venues have such licenses if they routinely play music to the public. But even if the venue (or the campaign) had such licenses in place (and I tend to doubt it), that kind of license only deals with the potential copyright issue, not the false endorsement issue.
Also, the performance licenses do not cover the separate potentially infringing act of re-recording the song in the audio track of a video.
@Paul,
Thanks for the information. So was Tom being Petty or not, folks?
I guess we don’t know if “American Girl” was going to be a signature song or not. I am sure 100 artists will jump forward now with their own rendition of something she will use.
If a campaign, marketing company, etc. is willing to pay the royalty to use the music, the artist doesn’t have much of an argument.
I was completely turned off by Fleetwood Mac when Clinton/Gore used “Don’t Stop Thinking About Tomorrow” as their campaign anthem (although the lyrics “yesterday’s gone” are so appropriate for people who are so fond of historic revisionism), so I kind of understand Petty’s pettiness. But a single use, at a single public event, can’t be any different than a DJ playing any other song at an event. Or can artists only allow public playings by people who align with them politically? That could get complicated.
Emma, I actually starting liking Fleetwood Mac more during those years but I am a Clinton girl forever. Perhaps ‘girl’ is a bit of a stretch.
Other than that, I agree with you. Where do you draw the line? If she adopts a song as a campaign song, then she would have to go through whatever hoops are involved and probably pay. But a one time shot? I don’t see how artists can pick and chose who they like and don’t like to that degree.
I am wondering how Tom Petty even found out that quickly to even be petty.
Slow news day?
What REALLY hurt me was when Hall & Oates boycotted Arizona. Now I’m a gonzo-Hall&Oates junkie. I figured, well, I can separate music from politics.
Yea, it is possible. Suck it up. I had to get over it with Joan Baez. My parents kept screaming at me to turn that communist off.
I figure it this way….Lady Gaga is one hell of a talent, but I couldn’t care less what she thinks about gay marriage.
I believe that Petty has a right in this case. Between copyright, and implied endorsement, Bachmann should do the right thing.
It can’t be that hard to find a sympathetic singer and use THEIR music….oh…wait….it Hollywood. Never mind.
I’ll agree with Cargo on this one…it’s use was too close to endorsement.