Heart to Palin - Quit using our song BITCH!

[AllieBaba]

I know it's not that simple.

 

[Vintij]

Don't bars play Heart without permission?

Yea they do. For 15 people, as oppose to the 40 million watching the convention. I know the license laws for music and its clear in the music industry that any time there is a chance for profit to be made you MUST get approval from the owner of the rights to the music which is Universal. Any time there is no chance of profit (bars) nobody wastes time or effort. Your right though, artists do not have power over there own music, its the label that owns the master copy's (rights to duplicate/remake or replay) For example, an artist can not even play a show under that persons stage name without approval from the label, another example.....micheal jackson owns over half the beatles discography, nothing gets played or remade without his consent, despite what the beatles say or do.

 

[Shogun]

And they would be right!

oh of COURSE.. THEN.


typical. This is why you people are about to fail in the next election. Consistency, to you, is like photons are to the dark side of the moon.

 

[Shogun]

You know , I was always told the the last resort of a desperate person is to resort to name calling without facts. Seems to be an epidemic with the Democrats. So let's review here for the sake of those that need to be educated because . I suppose humor is too high a concept for some to grasp. First, I suppose I was watching a different RNC last night when the song was played but I didn't see, and "Heart" CD's passed out on burned CD's to solicit donations, as well as the song used for any purpose other than it's entertainment value. It's called making an "assumption", in your fervor and little I hesitate to call you a democrat because even they apply logic, so will call you left-wing nut job how's that?, to label me and to label the RNC you should read the post as an attept at humor, meaning, that I thought Heart was a great band still do. but therer opinion does not mean a thing? Is that too simple for you ? or want me to break it down for you some more so you can understand it a little better?

You can backpeddle and defend your stupidity all day long dude.. You will STILL be stupid. It doesn't take the passing out of burnt cds to infringe on their rights as artists. It doesn't shock me that some dip shit right winger who is convinced that their shit don't stink would fail to realize that.


And, apparently, their opinions DO mean a few things as you watch as their songs wont be used by you sheisty motherfuckers anymore.


Now, go crai to to Toby Kieth, dude..

 

[Navy1960]

That not what i'm saying jillian , what i'm saying is this, there is a such thing in the law as "fair use" when a person d/l's music from a paid source or pay's for that music in a legitimate form i.e. a CD' etc. it is NOT stealing. If it used for "entertainment purposes" after the song has been legally purchased for such use then , and i'm stating an opinion here, they were within their rights to use it. They were not using the song for financial gain nor sale the song. if they had then artist is of course entitled to that money. So that leaves me with one conclusion, and thats this, the Wilson sisters are simply not McCain supporter's and made it a point to air that in the media by sending the cease and desist letter. It is rather like this, you d/l a song on your Ipod, and then hook your Ipod up to a speaker system and are playing it your backyard party, that is filmed by the local news crew, The song your playing on there is heard by artist send you a letter telling you to cease and desist playing the song after you have legally purcahsed it for "fair use"

 

[gowhite08]

Gotta complain about something...

 

[Shogun]

Don't bars play Heart without permission?

no. they don't. and it's a testament of your ignorance that you'd ask such a question.


ASCAP Licensing: Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Shogun]

That not what i'm saying jillian , what i'm saying is this, there is a such thing in the law as "fair use" when a person d/l's music from a paid source or pay's for that music in a legitimate form i.e. a CD' etc. it is NOT stealing. If it used for "entertainment purposes" after the song has been legally purchased for such use then , and i'm stating an opinion here, they were within their rights to use it. They were not using the song for financial gain nor sale the song. if they had then artist is of course entitled to that money. So that leaves me with one conclusion, and thats this, the Wilson sisters are simply not McCain supporter's and made it a point to air that in the media by sending the cease and desist letter. It is rather like this, you d/l a song on your Ipod, and then hook your Ipod up to a speaker system and are playing it your backyard party, that is filmed by the local news crew, The song your playing on there is heard by artist send you a letter telling you to cease and desist playing the song after you have legally purcahsed it for "fair use"

Your OPINION doesn't mean shit. They WERE using the song for political gain. A GAIN that the artists did not want associated with THEIR music. This isn't a fair use issue at all.

11. Do I need permission to perform music as part of a presentation in class or at a training seminar?

If the performance is part of face to face teaching activity at a non-profit educational institution, permission is not required. Permission is required when music is used as part of training seminars, conventions, or other commercial or business presentations.


ASCAP Licensing: Frequently Asked Questions

 

[Navy1960]

Shogun,

Do you know how I know I am right? because people like you don't resort to using intelligent debate to counter what I am saying, you resort to name calling. I completely understand I have a different opinion than you, but you did not hear me call you STUPID because my opinion is different yours, just uninformed, and thats okay, I understand, it's how you became a Democrat in the first place.

 

[Silence]

whatsa matter? Toby Kieth didn't put an album out this year?

Toby Keith is a Dem, can you believe that shit?

Toby Keith Praises Obama, Says He's A Democrat

"So as far as leadership and patriotism goes, I think it's really important that those things have to take place. And I think he's the best Democratic candidate we've had since Bill Clinton. And that's coming from a Democrat."

whouda thunk it

 

[Vintij]

Shogun,

Do you know how I know I am right? because people like you don't resort to using intelligent debate to counter what I am saying, you resort to name calling. I completely understand I have a different opinion than you, but you did not hear me call you STUPID because my opinion is different yours, just uninformed, and thats okay, I understand, it's how you became a Democrat in the first place.

?

Yea but, he just showed you that you are clearly wrong. Infact, I went to school for a year to learn copyright laws. I can show you hundreds of documents proving shogun right. Let me know and I will do so right away.

 

[Shogun]

Shogun,

Do you know how I know I am right? because people like you don't resort to using intelligent debate to counter what I am saying, you resort to name calling. I completely understand I have a different opinion than you, but you did not hear me call you STUPID because my opinion is different yours, just uninformed, and thats okay, I understand, it's how you became a Democrat in the first place.

Navy, wanna know how I know that you are dumber than shit? I posted EVIDENCE that proves that your argument is both ignorant and retarded. Please, email the provided evidence and tell them a funny joke about how Mccain will continue to use Heart's material. Im sure they will have a nice laugh at your expense.

The name calling is just the garnish to this feast of mudholes being stomped in your silly little ass.


Now, given which of us IS right and which of us DID have the neurons to pull up the fucking legal standard, I guess it's pretty obvious why it's REPUBLICANS who continue to have issues with legal ramifications despite their actions.


oh.. and welcome to the forum.

 

[jillian]

That not what i'm saying jillian , what i'm saying is this, there is a such thing in the law as "fair use" when a person d/l's music from a paid source or pay's for that music in a legitimate form i.e. a CD' etc. it is NOT stealing. If it used for "entertainment purposes" after the song has been legally purchased for such use then , and i'm stating an opinion here, they were within their rights to use it. They were not using the song for financial gain nor sale the song. if they had then artist is of course entitled to that money. So that leaves me with one conclusion, and thats this, the Wilson sisters are simply not McCain supporter's and made it a point to air that in the media by sending the cease and desist letter. It is rather like this, you d/l a song on your Ipod, and then hook your Ipod up to a speaker system and are playing it your backyard party, that is filmed by the local news crew, The song your playing on there is heard by artist send you a letter telling you to cease and desist playing the song after you have legally purcahsed it for "fair use"

I know what fair use is. And playing music publicly isn't FAIR USE... fair use is making a copy of your CD for your car... or burning the song onto your IPod and even then, it's not a limitless thing...

Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 17 U.S.C. § 106 and 17 U.S.C. § 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright. In determining whether the use made of a work in any particular case is a fair use the factors to be considered shall include:

the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purposes;
the nature of the copyrighted work;
the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work.

Fair use - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

But honestly, when I first posted, my thought wasn't about the fair use doctrine... it was about how silly it was to pick a song without permission. That just lets the repubs get embarrassed again. Did they really think Heart would want it's work associated with a right wing extremist any more than Springsteen wanted his work misused and misrepresented by Reagan?

 

[Navy1960]

In the final analysis, we may not know how well these arguments about fair use, pre-emption and misuse will play out until someone decides to bring suit. But in the meantime, the high stakes of potentially void contracts and unenforceable copyrights may rationally be deterring a host of enterprises from entering this market. If that's right, then a major threat to competition in the online music market may not be the lack of enforcement of antitrust laws, as suggested by those favoring the recent European actions against iTunes. Instead the culprit may be the very clumsy and potentially devastating rules of the copyright game itself.
F Scott Kieff . Law Professor Washington University

If you had bothered to read Shogun instead of working yourself up into a freenzy, you would have seen that my argurment is basically this " fair use" is the standard of the day, because as of now the issue has NOT been settled. Of course ASCAP is going to answer the question that way , they represent artist's , they should answer it that way. I think, artist's should get paid for their work and property, however at the moment, don't put it on commercially available sites for legal d/l unless you intend it to be used.

 

[Shogun]

Toby Keith is a Dem, can you believe that shit?
Toby Keith Praises Obama, Says He's A Democrat
whouda thunk it

no. i really cant. but. whatever. I do like a few of his songs (the product of bartending a VFW hall in college) but.. uh....


I can't believe Charlie Daniels In America hasn't been used. For real. It's such an easy choice and it rocks the fuck out.

 

[-Cp]

Makes me have a huge disrespect for Ann and Nancy....

The sister act behind "Barracuda," the song used by the McCain-Palin campaign in reference to Sarah Palin's "Barracuda" nickname, is none too pleased that their pro-woman anthem is being co-opted by the GOP. Ann and Nancy Wilson of Heart sent a cease and desist letter to the McCain campaign, and, in reaction to last night's use of it, Nancy sent an angry letter to Entertainment Weekly, tearing Sarah Barracuda a new one. "I feel completely fucked over," she said. "Sarah Palin's views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song 'Barracuda' no longer be used to promote her image. The song 'Barracuda' was written in the late 70s as a scathing rant against the soulless, corporate nature of the music business, particularly for women. (The 'barracuda' represented the business.) While Heart did not and would not authorize the use of their song at the RNC, there's irony in Republican strategists' choice to make use of it there." [EW]

The Soul Of Heart

 

[Navy1960]

Thanks you for the welcome Shogun and thank you for proving to me once more, why it's alway's fun to debate a liberal, because when a liberal will always resort, to moronic behavior, i.e. name calling when they lack the mental capacity to argue with any intelligence. By the way, loved the proof from the ASCAP, since when did ASCAP start writing copyright law's ? this is a new concept to me, I was always under the impression that ASCAP was a membership association? could be wrong though.

jillian thank you for pointing that out to me, your arguement is clear and concise and much appreciated.

 

[Shogun]

In the final analysis, we may not know how well these arguments about fair use, pre-emption and misuse will play out until someone decides to bring suit. But in the meantime, the high stakes of potentially void contracts and unenforceable copyrights may rationally be deterring a host of enterprises from entering this market. If that's right, then a major threat to competition in the online music market may not be the lack of enforcement of antitrust laws, as suggested by those favoring the recent European actions against iTunes. Instead the culprit may be the very clumsy and potentially devastating rules of the copyright game itself.
F Scott Kieff . Law Professor Washington University

If you had bothered to read Shogun instead of working yourself up into a freenzy, you would have seen that my argurment is basically this " fair use" is the standard of the day, because as of now the issue has NOT been settled. Of course ASCAP is going to answer the question that way , they represent artist's , they should answer it that way. I think, artist's should get paid for their work and property, however at the moment, don't put it on commercially available sites for legal d/l unless you intend it to be used.

And, if you had half a fucking brain you would have taken the effort to make your little index finger press the mouse button to follow the links that I provided which prove that ASCAP, and not some theory about Europe, IS the legal standard by which John Mccain will be forced to stop using Heart's songs. I really don't care if you think there is a debate here. There is not. This HAS been settled and you WON'T see the GOP using these songs anymore. They were busted with egg on their face for circumventing the legal requirements of using an artists work and no amount of bended knee dick sucking of republican excuses will change that. Downloaded songs are for PERSONAL USE. Not so you can DJ a fucking radio station. If you can't see the glaring fucking line between the legal FACTS and your ignorant opinion then so be it. Feel free to play Where's Waldo with Hart songs for the next 8 weeks.

 

[Vintij]

How can someone say that the song was not used for gain when it was played in front of 40 million people? It does not matter if they made money off of it, automatically when a song is exposed to that many people.....it is a gain by default, no matter who gains from it, Networks, palins reputation, republicans, speakers.....anyone. It does not matter who it gains, it has gained popularity by being exposed, therefore who ever exposed it is attached to the gain of that popularity. Meaning, they gained by playing it as well. Why do you think artists cant play even a free show with there stage name without asking for permission? Because that stage name is going to gain in popularity without consent from the label. Labels want consent no matter what, as long as many people have a chance to listen to see or hear something, its a gain for whoever threw the concert or paid to have it televised. These types of things cant happen without striking a deal with the label.

 

[jillian]

Thanks you for the welcome Shogun and thank you for proving to me once more, why it's alway's fun to debate a liberal, because when a liberal will always resort, to moronic behavior, i.e. name calling when they lack the mental capacity to argue with any intelligence. By the way, loved the proof from the ASCAP, since when did ASCAP start writing copyright law's ? this is a new concept to me, I was always under the impression that ASCAP was a membership association? could be wrong though.

jillian thank you for pointing that out to me, your arguement is clear and concise and much appreciated.

No worries. Hope it helped.

As for Shogun, he's not a liberal. I think you'll find him on your side of the aisle way more than on mine. And frankly, I won't take credit for him!

Welcome aboard anyway.