Ownership Trumps Artist’s Objections

The use or misuse of songs in Presidential campaigns has become part of the political landscape. When Ronald Reagan, highlighted the Bruce Springsteen song Born In The USA in a speech and then started to use it as an campaign anthem many were angered by the apparent misinterpretation the lyrics (protest song) as well as the song being used to pump up the crowd at Reagan rallies; Springsteen opposed Reagan’s platform. Now the Foo Fighters are not only taking artistic exception to the McCain camp’s use of the song Hero. Like the group Heart did with the use of the song Barracuda they are able to take legal action (cease and desist letter) to stop the use of the song. This would fall under the copyright statutes specifically ownership and compensation. The McCain has paid the licensing fees and therefore has complied with the applicable statutes. The BBC story states: Republican spokesman Brian Rogers said the campaign "respects copyright.” "Accordingly, this campaign has obtained and paid for licences from performing rights organisations, giving us permission to play millions of different songs, including My Hero." http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/7660650.stm Regardless of the Foo Fighters feelings about the song, ownership clearly dictates use of the song. This does not impact the “fair use” since ownership is with performing rights organization. Though, when artists to publicly object to use of material, it could theoretically undermine use of the song.