Many musicians have copyright gripes with Trump, but only some can win in the courts

Former President Donald Trump has angered a swath of musical artists for playing their songs at campaign rallies.

The list of musical artists angry about former President Donald Trump playing their songs at campaign events keeps growing.

This week, representatives for music icon Celine Dion slammed Trump’s campaign for using her smash hit “Titanic” ballad “My Heart Will Go On” at a recent rally in Montana, saying it was “unauthorized.”

“In no way is this use authorized, and Celine Dion does not endorse this or any similar use,” read a statement posted to Dion’s social media accounts on Sunday that quipped, “…And really, THAT song?”

Also this week, the family of late R&B singer-songwriter Isaac Hayes threatened to sue Trump for copyright infringement over the Republican presidential nominee’s “unauthorized” use of the musician’s song “Hold On, I’m Coming” at campaign rallies over the last two years.

“We demand the cessation of use, removal of all related videos, a public disclaimer, and payment of $3 million in licensing fees by August 16, 2024. Failure to comply will result in further legal action,” the family said in a statement posted to the Instagram account of Hayes’ son, Isaac Hayes III.

An attorney for the family sent a cease-and-desist letter to Trump’s campaign on Sunday, saying that the campaign has not gotten “a license or other authorization” to use the song, according to the family’s post, which included a copy of the letter.

If Trump’s campaign did not get a proper license, artists could sue and likely win

Songwriters and copyright owners angry that Trump is using copyrighted music at his rallies would most definitely win a lawsuit against the former president if he or his campaign did not obtain the necessary license to play the tunes, an expert in copyright law told B-17.

Under the law, any public performance of copyrighted music — which includes the playing of a song at a campaign rally — requires a license, according to the expert, Jessica Litman, a professor of law at the University of Michigan.

Litman explained that, typically, those licenses are obtained either by the venue or by the event from one of the performing rights organizations or PROs, which represent the songwriters and their music publishers.

“Each songwriter belongs to a single PRO, so the Trump campaign would have needed to secure a license from the appropriate PRO,” said Litman.

The American Society of Composers, Authors, and Publishers (ASCAP) and Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) are among the major performing rights organizations in the United States.

In recent years, performing rights organizations have typically required political campaigns to obtain a special license to use music at campaign events. At both ASCAP and BMI, members can request to withdraw their music from political campaign licenses.

“How it works is that the blanket license gives the campaign authorization to play any one of BMI’s 22.4 million musical works wherever campaign events/functions occur, but there is a provision built into this license so that if we receive an objection from a songwriter or music publisher about a particular song(s) being used in a campaign, we will remove that song(s) from the license,” Jodie Thomas, a spokeswoman for BMI, said in an email.

“We will then notify the campaign that the song has been removed from their license and that they are no longer authorized by BMI to perform that song at any campaign events or functions moving forward,” Thomas said.

According to Litman, ASCAP and BMI operate under antitrust consent decrees, and she noted legal experts disagree about whether the consent decrees permit the organizations to selectively withdraw music from the licenses they offer.

BMI says removing a work from a campaign license when it receives an objection from a songwriter or music publisher is compliant with its consent decree.

ASCAP did not immediately respond to a request for comment about this.

According to BMI, Trump’s campaign has taken out a “political entities license” from BMI for his 2016, 2020, and 2024 campaigns.

ASCAP did not immediately provide details about whether Trump’s campaign has obtained a license from the organization. Trump’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment.

Throngs of artists, from Rihanna to Elton John, have objected to Trump’s use of their music

Over the years, dozens of artists and bands, including Rihanna, Queen, the Rolling Stones, Neil Young, Elton John and Pharrell Williams, have spoken out against Trump using their music at his events. Some have even formally sent cease-and-desist notices and threatened legal action.

“If no license was obtained, the copyright owners in the songs can sue Trump, and they would win,” said Litman.

Litman explained that things could get complicated if the campaign did secure a license from one of the performing rights organizations, but it wasn’t a license for political campaigns, or the artist had sought to exclude their works from the license, but the campaign used the song anyway.

“That question has not yet been litigated,” Litman said.

Singer Eddy Grant sued Trump for copyright infringement in 2020 after his 1982 hit “Electric Avenue” was used in a Trump campaign tweet without the reggae-disco star’s permission.

“If no license was obtained, the copyright owners in the songs can sue Trump, and they would win,” said Litman.

Litman explained that things could get complicated if the campaign did secure a license from one of the performing rights organizations, but it wasn’t a license for political campaigns, or the artist had sought to exclude their works from the license, but the campaign used the song anyway.

“That question has not yet been litigated,” Litman said.

Singer Eddy Grant sued Trump for copyright infringement in 2020 after his 1982 hit “Electric Avenue” was used in a Trump campaign tweet without the reggae-disco star’s permission.

“Sound recording copyrights are usually owned by record labels, and one usually needs to negotiate directly with the relevant label to include a sound recording in any video, broadcast, or online post,” said Litman, who added, “If the case goes to trial, I would expect Grant to win.”

Isaac Hayes’ family wants Trump to pay up

James Walker Jr., an attorney for the estate of Hayes, the R&B legend, told B-17 Hayes’ music is licensed through BMI and that the Hayes estate has told BMI that the Hayes catalog is not to be used for political events.

Trump’s campaign has used Hayes’ music at the former president’s rallies more than 100 times and as recently as Saturday, Walker Jr. said.

Thomas, the spokeswoman for BMI, confirmed to B-17 that the organization is “executing on the estate’s withdrawal request.”

The Hayes estate complained publicly and to the Trump campaign in 2022 when the “Hold On, I’m Coming” song was used during Trump’s appearance at a National Rifle Association convention a week after the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting. Since then, the 1966 track has been used many more times at events, Walker Jr. said.

Walker Jr., a 30-year entertainment copyright lawyer, said the Hayes family hired him “after getting no response” from the Trump campaign for two years.

In addition to getting Trump’s campaign to stop using, “Hold On, I’m Coming,” at rallies, the Hayes estate is seeking the removal of all Trump event videos featuring the song, plus $3 million, an amount Walker Jr. said was “peanuts compared to what they should be paying.”

“We don’t want this to be seen as a money grab, but we’ve had to get research teams involved in tracking down all the uses,” the attorney said. “That’s a lot of manpower.”

Trump’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment about the use of Hayes’ music or about its practices when it comes to obtaining licenses for the copyrighted music it plays at events and rallies.