Paul Langlois, a guitarist for Canada카지노 게임 컬렉션�s The Tragically Hip, was more than , and in a series of tweets he resolved to stop it.

However, shortly after Langlois카지노 게임 컬렉션�s tweet, clarifying that the venue in question was licensed by the Society of Composers, Authors and Music Publishers of Canada (SOCAN), a Canadian performance rights organization.

The statement noted it meant 카지노 게임 컬렉션�the venue pays a fee to ensure artists and musicians are compensated appropriately when music is played on site. As such, specific permissions were not required in this case.카지노 게임 컬렉션�

The statement also said:

카지노 게임 컬렉션�It is (and has always been) our expectation that brands, political parties or public figures wishing to use our music for a campaign first seek our approval.카지노 게임 컬렉션�

There is a distinction between deliberate use of a song to support a particular campaign agenda or politician and incidental music in the background at a social function hosted by a political party.

In this case, the song was being played at the venue.

Musicians, politics and patronage

While musicians카지노 게임 컬렉션� complex relationships with political agendas and authorities extend well to , our contemporary era of pop music reveals no shortage of case studies.

When a Twisted Sister카지노 게임 컬렉션�s 카지노 게임 컬렉션�We카지노 게임 컬렉션�re Not Gonna Take It,카지노 게임 컬렉션� in a tweet, lead singer Dee Snider tweeted back in protest 카지노 게임 컬렉션�카지노 게임 컬렉션� and said the party missed the point of the lyrics.

In 2020, The Rolling Stones were to stop him using their music at rallies.

, and a have also spoken out against some political uses of their music.

Most of these objections are directed at conservative politicians.

Lorraine Segato, of Canada카지노 게임 컬렉션�s Parachute Club, former NDP Leader Jack Layton. Segato was happy to have Layton use her band카지노 게임 컬렉션�s 카지노 게임 컬렉션�Rise Up카지노 게임 컬렉션� , and went as far as to sing .

In 2015, Rob Baker, Paul Langlois카지노 게임 컬렉션�s Tragically Hip bandmate, publicly supported the .

What are the legal considerations?

Should artists have control over their art once it카지노 게임 컬렉션�s 카지노 게임 컬렉션�sold?카지노 게임 컬렉션� Do they?

In law, the creator is always the first owner, who can then license a work, either exclusively or non-exclusively, usually to a studio or a collective society like SOCAN in Canada that collects royalties for them.

This licensing is usually necessary for distribution, and is typically non-exclusive to a body like SOCAN. A studio often gets the exclusive monetary rights.

A good example of an artist losing (and then ) is Taylor Swift. However, musicians still maintain the right to protect their reputation and their brand.

In Canada, that right is formally recognized by the artist카지노 게임 컬렉션�s 카지노 게임 컬렉션�Moral Rights,카지노 게임 컬렉션� of the Copyright Act.

This section grants the author the 카지노 게임 컬렉션�right to the integrity of the work카지노 게임 컬렉션� and to have their name associated with it.

In the U.S., copyright law only includes . While U.S. authors of works other than visual art are entitled to having their name associated with the work (what카지노 게임 컬렉션�s known as 카지노 게임 컬렉션�attribution,카지노 게임 컬렉션�) they aren카지노 게임 컬렉션�t given the right to control the work카지노 게임 컬렉션�s distortion or mutilation.

In Canada, the moral rights of the author can be waived, but they cannot be assigned or licensed to another party. So, if an author waived the rights in the context of an exclusive license, they might lose the right to control how their music is used.

Case: Eaton Centre geese

There is a clear precedent, similar to the Tragically Hip incident, in the Supreme Court of Canada case .

The Eaton Centre purchased the sculpture installation of a flock by sculptor Michael Snow.

When the Eaton Centre wanted to put red bows on the geese at Christmas, . Snow카지노 게임 컬렉션�s lawyer said adding bows was not unlike dangling earrings from the Venus de Milo.

Social/ethical/financial ramifications?

Whatever else might be done about the unwanted use of their music, many artists are from particular political brands.

One might expect these musicians could benefit from media coverage of these disputes or increased social capital with politically like-minded fans or potential fans.

However, and discovered, many listeners don카지노 게임 컬렉션�t appreciate musicians taking political stances.

Any legal action to challenge music use costs musicians money, even a cease-and-desist letter from a lawyer. A musician just starting out wouldn카지노 게임 컬렉션�t be able to afford it 카지노 게임 컬렉션� but on the other hand, a politician is more likely to play a recognizable song from a popular artist.

Record labels also generally want to protect the brand of the musician and might be willing to help fund legal action.

Subject to distortion?

What does seem clear is that politicians should seek an artist카지노 게임 컬렉션�s permission to use their music in a campaign, and perhaps the artist카지노 게임 컬렉션�s help in understanding the message behind their music to avoid both embarrassment and bad media coverage.

In Canada, musicians can assert their moral rights when their work is subjected to a specific distortion that results in perceived harm to their reputation.

But it카지노 게임 컬렉션�s unlikely they would demand their work be taken off of playlists.

___________________________________________________

, Lecturer in Musicology, Dan School of Drama & Music, and , PhD Candidate, Law, .

This article is republished from under a Creative Commons license. Read the .