|
|
Post by billhammond on Aug 22, 2024 16:29:07 GMT -5
Column excerpt:
By Leonard Greene / New York Daily News
If you cover politics long enough, you’re bound to learn something new.
Here’s what I learned last week: The iconic Sam and Dave song “Hold on, I’m Coming” was actually written by the late Isaac Hayes.
What does a 1960s classic soul song have to do with politics? Hold on. I’m coming with the answer.
After Donald Trump’s campaign used the R&B hit at a series of rallies, 134 to be exact, Hayes’ estate threatened to file a lawsuit against the former president for copyright infringement.
The family also demanded $3 million in licensing fees the campaign racked up from using the song between 2022 and 2024.
“It has come to our attention that you or the campaign have authorized the illegal public performance of the song on multiple occasions during various rallies for your political campaign without authorization from the copyright holder, despite being asked repeatedly not to engage in such illegal use by our client,” the family’s lawyers wrote Aug. 11 in a cease-and-desist notice.
“As we prepared this letter, there was an additional use in Montana just two nights ago, even with your office apparently aware that you had no permission.”
Exhibit A attached to the letter details every inappropriate use of the song, including a 2022 National Rifle Association rally.
The Hayes family says the $3 million price tag is a bargain.
“The normal fee for those infringements would be 10 times as much if we litigate, starting at $150,000 per use,” the letter said.
Good luck collecting that money. Trump plans to pay that right after he pays the $5 million he owes E. Jean Carroll, the woman who won a civil trial against him for sexual assault.
In other words, never.
“Hold On, I’m Coming” isn’t the only song on Trump’s copyright infringement playlist.
Trump has been warned for using music from other artists including Tom Petty, Rihanna, the Rolling Stones, the Village People, Aerosmith, Bruce Springsteen, Phil Collins and Journey.
Last week, Celine Dion asked him to stop playing her signature song “My Heart Will Go On,” which she said was a peculiar campaign choice, since the anthem anchors the soundtrack to the 1997 film “Titanic,” a movie about a sinking ship.
In contrast, when Vice President Kamala Harris steps out to the song “Freedom” during this week’s Democratic National Convention in Chicago, she’ll be doing it with singer Beyonce’s blessing.
According to reports, Beyonce gave Harris the OK to use the song throughout the campaign.
Meanwhile, if Trump insists on illegally using Isaac Hayes’ hits at his campaign events, he could at least select a Hayes song that would be more appropriate. “I Stand Accused” is one that comes to mind.
|
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 22, 2024 17:09:09 GMT -5
This has bugged me for years. And I don't blame the actual musicians. This particular one I'm far less sympathetic. This one is the action of heirs to the creative output they had nothing to do with but inherit. And they get to both profit and virtue signal.
There's really nothing that can be done about it. If you're a Republican you know going in that you are a total cultural outcast. And this isn't about Trump. The same thing has happened in every Republican campaign since I can remember. Democrats own entertainment. Absolutely own it. Just as they own the press, the arts, and the academic world. It's a complete cultural dominance. Complete.
Oh... except for country music. Oh, and apparently professional wrestling. And though there are a scant few non-Democrats in entertainment, for the most part they're not going to risk being cancelled just for a dubious political campaign. They've got to make a living after it's over. But, my god it's embarrassing that every Republican gathering is celebrated with country music -- confirming for all to see a party of dumb hayseeds and ivy league politicians pretending to like them. And then walks in Hulk Hogan. Seriously? Honest to god, could you not play some John Philip Sousa? Could you not pay some great musicians to arrange music that is public domain?
But, then, given the vacuous nature of pop music and musicians, I suppose on some level I should take comfort that they are Democrats and that Democrats are they. That the themes of pop music resonate with Democrats should be somewhat comforting to my sense of reason. Yes, the Democrats get all the fun music....but with it comes the excesses of cultural decay. Interesting marriage.
Of course, that's NOT true. The themes of pop music resonate just as strongly with Republicans. And boy oh boy are the Republicans jealous. Nothing makes those on the right more aware of their cultural leper status than being excluded from the popular culture that includes the world's best musicians, writers, artists, actors. COMPLETELY excluded. And if we even try, well....that's what this thread's about.
Welcome to the world of DEI. Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion. Oh, except for you guys.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 22, 2024 18:24:05 GMT -5
From the BMI site's FAQ on licensing music for political events: The BMI Political Entities license authorizes the public performance of over 22.4 million musical works in BMI’s repertoire at events and functions hosted by political campaigns and organizations. This blanket license ensures that political entities are in compliance with copyright law wherever events may occur throughout the duration of the campaign. The license includes a provision that permits BMI to exclude a musical work(s) from the license should we receive an objection from a songwriter or publisher regarding its use by the licensee. If that occurs, BMI will notify the licensee that the particular musical work has been removed from license and is no longer authorized by BMI to perform the musical work. www.bmi.com/licensing/entry/politicalASCAP has a similar policy and a fuller explanation at www.ascap.com/help/ascap-licensing/political-campaign-license-faqsSo when the GOP can't find sympathic composers to donate or license music for their events, they have to steal tunes, and that's some kind of politico-cultural problem? As John notes, there are already plenty of country artists who are content to be associated with the GOP, and even a few hip-hop folk. What's actually going on with the Trump campaign, I suspect, has more to do with its habit of stiffing the people who provide venues and services--there apparently are more than a couple of cities and venue operators with overdue bills out there. As for the Democrats-own-the-culture proposition, it's almost too broad and fuzzy and filled with unexamined assumptions to take on, so I'll just go get ready to sit in with my jazz-playing Commie pals. |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 22, 2024 19:04:48 GMT -5
As for the Democrats-own-the-culture proposition, it's almost too broad and fuzzy and filled with unexamined assumptions to take on No, it's really not. It's self evident. You even acknowledged it when you agreed that Republicans are stuck with country music. No, it's not too broad or fuzzy. |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 22, 2024 19:05:55 GMT -5
Besides, I lived in it. I lived in the art world.
|
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Aug 23, 2024 0:01:29 GMT -5
And I live right next door, in teacher-and-critic world. And, once upon a time, in journalist-world.
And I have to say: if your position were self-evident, I would see it. Which I don't. Now, if we were to somehow take a poll of all the significant artists* in American culture and somehow reduce their sociopolitical opinions to some kind of map and then map that onto the available sociopolitical groupings available, then maybe we could frame some propositions. Maybe.
And "cultural lepers"? Really?
* Because there's probably some kind of threshold an artist needs to pass to matter beyond a small audience circle. I mean, I play music in front of people, but I wouldn't call my efforts significant even within that small circle.
|
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 23, 2024 3:46:44 GMT -5
* Because there's probably some kind of threshold an artist needs to pass to matter beyond a small audience circle. I mean, I play music in front of people, but I wouldn't call my efforts significant even within that small circle. How about making a significant living as an award winning, best selling artist in a field of fellow artists, selling literally millions of dollars worth of work to literally tens of thousands of people, having work accepted to several of the top art shows in the country, living in a subculture of like-passioned artists who drove decades of a sub culture that drew millions of people to the largest art selling market in history, having my thoughts on the subject published in two of the medium's leading national publications, and maintaining personal relationships with hundreds of artists -- many of them still at the top of their game? How about not being a hobbiest? Oh, and yes cultural lepers. |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 23, 2024 4:46:09 GMT -5
(and it's at least a little bit funny that you express such skepticism in a thread that proves my point)
|
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Aug 23, 2024 5:49:23 GMT -5
* Because there's probably some kind of threshold an artist needs to pass to matter beyond a small audience circle. I mean, I play music in front of people, but I wouldn't call my efforts significant even within that small circle. How about making a significant living as an award winning, best selling artist in a field of fellow artists, selling literally millions of dollars worth of work to literally tens of thousands of people, having work accepted to several of the top art shows in the country, living in a subculture of like-passioned artists who drove decades of a sub culture that drew millions of people to the largest art selling market in history, having my thoughts on the subject published in two of the medium's leading national publications, and maintaining personal relationships with hundreds of artists -- many of them still at the top of their game? How about not being a hobbiest? Oh, and yes cultural lepers. Sure, and then you could be co-opted by any US candidate out there, without your permission. Maybe even AI'd into something compromising. "I didn't do it, it must have been someone else." |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 23, 2024 5:50:31 GMT -5
This has bugged me for years. And I don't blame the actual musicians. |
|
|
|
Post by jdd2 on Aug 23, 2024 6:08:23 GMT -5
This has bugged me for years. And I don't blame the actual musicians. Wow, how profound. Actual musicians vs those who are not? |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 23, 2024 6:17:51 GMT -5
Wow, how profound. Actual musicians vs those who are not? Those who are not. Like, for instance, the heirs who have filed the suit in question. |
|
|
|
Post by theevan on Aug 23, 2024 7:52:52 GMT -5
I wish this election cycle were over already. Seems like no area is untouched.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Aug 23, 2024 8:01:16 GMT -5
The law could say that all creative works enter the public domain upon the death of the creator. But it doesn't. Creative people get to pass the benefits of their work on to their heirs just like everyone else does. So Howard may be able to benefit from his father's hard work. I hope so.
Using copyrighted matter over the objections of the creator is theft.
|
|
|
|
Post by howard lee on Aug 23, 2024 8:23:57 GMT -5
The law could say that all creative works enter the public domain upon the death of the creator. But it doesn't. Creative people get to pass the benefits of their work on to their heirs just like everyone else does. So Howard may be able to benefit from his father's hard work. I hope so.Using copyrighted matter over the objections of the creator is theft.
Thanks, Don. In fact, he left me an account with Getty Images (<--- click on the link to see), which contains slightly more than 1,280 of his photographs whose copyrights I own. These can be licensed for publishing rights, and provide my family with a very modest income, which is welcome in my retirement. Any unauthorized use will result in communication from Getty's legal team.
Why shouldn't the heirs of an Estate continue to maintain control of copyrighted, intellectual property of their late parent or grandparent, and halt its unauthorized use? Any creator with a slight knowledge of copyright law should understand this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Aug 23, 2024 8:34:27 GMT -5
"These can be licensed for publishing rights, and provide my family with a very modest income, which is welcome in my retirement." This week I got a check from BMI for $44.07. In a few more years I may be able to buy my wife a fairly nice dinner.  |
|
|
|
Post by millring on Aug 23, 2024 9:01:41 GMT -5
Using copyrighted matter over the objections of the creator is theft. No disagreement from me. |
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Aug 23, 2024 9:08:35 GMT -5
"I wish this election cycle were over already. Seems like no area is untouched."
Amen. This morning I was thinking that Facebook is pretty irritating these days. I like reading about what people did or what trips they took. I don't go there to read about anyone's political views. These days I get sermons from both sides and a lot of them are irritating.
|
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Aug 23, 2024 9:34:55 GMT -5
Ok, so the great majority of smart, creative people - like artists - would, by their thoughts and personal values, be considered "Liberals" if categorized by today's political metrics? As would, similarly, educated people who chose to study current events and then report on them for a living? The great majority are Liberal in thought and value?
Ok, makes sense to me. And you are there. What is, is, I guess. Smart, creative, talented people, like artists and reporters, are Liberal.
But, you do want smart, educated, creative people to be able to make their own choices, right? You don't want to establish a quota system? Make half of them pretend to be conservative in order to follow their dream? Or fire 80% of the talented, educated, artists and reporters that are Liberal so their numbers match the few that are conservative? Even steven? Fair by quota, not by talent?
Boy, I don't know about that. Best leave it alone. This is the land of opportunity where talent can express and rise. We don't want results, people, to be governed by arbitrary quotas. At least, I don't.
|
|
|
|
Post by epaul on Aug 23, 2024 9:40:44 GMT -5
I just did a little run through in my head. Farmers are a diverse bunch politically and culturally , we don't need no stinking quotas. We're fine. Don't mess with us.
|
|
