You must log in or register to comment.

majinpuar t1_ix4lp9i wrote



dtydings t1_ix4mrwv wrote

So much slamming. Everyone always getting slammed. Slam slam slam


doubleapowpow t1_ix59lfg wrote

You destroyed the term slam!


Big-Meat t1_ix6bey3 wrote

OP slams the term ‘slam’ in Reddit post, will slam ever slam again?


BKlounge93 t1_ix4zfxv wrote

Thank god he slammed her, now I can sleep at night


Caracalla81 t1_ix5hime wrote

IKR, why can't headlines use the wordier "criticized in strong terms"? Are they trying to brief or something?


thegreatestajax t1_ix4el2u wrote

Are we going to do this every day? Who gets the karma tomorrow?


chefr89 t1_ix4f830 wrote

this is literally on the front of the sub already in a post with 27,000 upvotes


undreamt_odds t1_ix4hqbu wrote

Can it be me? I’m in desperate need of internet karma.


imakenosensetopeople t1_ix4wxmn wrote

For what it’s worth, I don’t mind the repost, I’m just sad that politicians keep using unlicensed music, and strangely predictably enough it always seems to be from that side of the aisle.

Edit - the trolls have kindly/rudely pointed out, I should use the term “allegedly unlicensed”


thegreatestajax t1_ix4x2p6 wrote

Firstly, it’s not unlicensed. Secondly, find more important things to care about.


imakenosensetopeople t1_ix4xlsc wrote

Sure, I see “unlicensed” was the wrong word. What’s the correct term for “contacted the artist/estate/intellectual property owner and got permission to play the song?”


thegreatestajax t1_ix4ya7i wrote

The correct term is “they don’t need to if the venue has an ASCAP license”.


imakenosensetopeople t1_ix50d2v wrote

Except the concern was, the campaign was using it - not just a single instance in a single venue. Can the campaign purchase an ASCAP license, and did they? Or is the assertion here that any venue which played the song had their own ASCAP and the complaint filed by Petty’s estate is not going to hold up?


RadiationDM t1_ix4lchm wrote

What PR company do you work for? “Slams” lol?stfu, you were obviously paid to write this, just like you were paid to write the paramore post (or you just copied and pasted the content)


DecafMaverick t1_ix4nirs wrote

I’ve adopted a new policy. From here on out, any post with “slams” or any version thereof is an auto-downvote and I won’t open it. Enough is enough.


cornbeefbaby t1_ix4pmcb wrote

It’s just bad journalism. It’s a lazy word used to incite knee-jerk reactions in smooth-brained idiots


xlinkedx t1_ix4oznw wrote

Literally only clicked into this post to see someone else hate on the word "slams"


thirdAccountIForgot t1_ix4ti23 wrote

It’s almost certainly copied article, and fairly obvious from the writing style and contents. “Lakes campaign did not immediately return a request from The Hill for comment.”

OP shouldn’t be copying others’ content (there’s some rich irony there), but your response also reads a bit childish.


spucci t1_ix4v7p2 wrote

Redditor SLAMS other Redditor for being childish. OUTRAGED he takes to Twitter!


sloopslarp t1_ix51kuj wrote

Honestly, people complaining about "slams" is just as bad.

The horse was beaten to death years ago.


kjblank80 t1_ix4l6ok wrote

if the music was played at a venue with an ASCAP license, the law suit will go nowhere.


Tenpat t1_ix5g26y wrote

Right? This is almost always how it works out. Venue has a license so the politicians can play whatever they want because they are leasing the venue and by extension its license.

Every damn election usually because a Republican is using a song and every damn election every idiot on the thread acts like this will cost them big time.


JonasNinetyNine t1_ix48gg0 wrote

Love how petty (pun intended) it is to specifically mentioned, that the campaign failed. More power to Tom Petty and his legal team.


landof10000cakes t1_ix4fl1z wrote

We see these issues basically during every campaign season. My favorite response was the Dropkick Murphys telling Scott Walker not to use their music because “we literally hate you.”

So my point being campaigns will probably continue to use music unauthorized until they are held more responsible. Obviously they don’t care because they keep using unauthorized music.


kjblank80 t1_ix4lf0k wrote

They can't stop the campaign from using the music it they play it in locations with ASCAP licenses. The same reason a bar can play music without direct permission of the artist.


thegreatestajax t1_ix4oocd wrote

It sounds like you don’t know what makes music use authorizes or not.


norealmx t1_ix4wym0 wrote

The snowflakes keep melting, first post went into the Ether, now this one is being raided by qltists.


fpsmoto t1_ix5hzgu wrote

Better to ask for forgiveness than for permission.


Informal_Emu_8980 t1_ix63zf0 wrote

Ugh. Slam dunk this article right up your ass basket for using "slam"


Aluggo t1_ix5bn4u wrote

Why alleged if it miss fact that the song was used? Perhaps the unauthorized part?


devictionne t1_ix4s48s wrote

I hope the mods slam the delete button for this trash post


moneycomet t1_ix55q5g wrote

Funny coming from a guy who flew the Confederate Flag during his concerts.


TheJudgementIsDeath t1_ix56yhf wrote

It was a different time.


IDDQD-IDKFA t1_ix5i7pa wrote

And he acknowledged it as being stupid later.

>When we toured two years later, I noticed people in the audience wearing Confederate flag bandanas and things like that. One night, someone threw one onstage. I stopped everything and gave a speech about it. I said, “Look, this was to illustrate a character. This is not who we are. Having gone through this, I would prefer it if no one would ever bring a Confederate flag to our shows again because this isn’t who we are.”

>It got a mixed reaction. There were some boos and some cheers. But honestly, it’s a little amazing to me because I never saw one again after that speech in that one town. Fortunately, that went away, but it left me feeling stupid. That’s the word I can use. I felt stupid. If I had just been a little more observant about things going on around me, it wouldn’t have happened.


Sir-Barks-a-Lot t1_ix5uutu wrote

Chuck E Cheese also used to fly the Confederate flag in its restaurants. Wtf?


Cash907 t1_ix5bkdr wrote

If the rebroadcast isn’t done for commercial use, how is it illegal? While I think it is tacky to use art from any medium that you haven’t been given permission to for something like this, I don’t see how it is technically illegal or violating any copyrights.


bunnymud t1_ix5tjej wrote

Why would she use the song of a drug addict??


striderwhite t1_ix4omid wrote

Old news, already posted...boring!


khamuncents t1_ix4at7j wrote

The thing is... Tom Petty is dead.

If you were to use a Michael Jackson song at a wedding, and you were sued by his family members for using that song, I bet you'd be fuckin furious.

But as long as it happens to someone you don't know or particularly like, it's right?


Daredizzle t1_ix4c4if wrote

You can't get sued over the songs use at a wedding but you CAN get sued if you use it in a commercial function like an ad or other published media.

None of it matters over who is alive or dead, these are the laws of using media in a commercial setting.


spucci t1_ix4vtnq wrote

Curious if they used it in a campaign ad or a public setting like at a speech event of some sort. If the latter, I think they can only ask them not to use it.


Chewy85 t1_ix4cdhj wrote

The fact you can't tell the difference between playing a song at a wedding vs using someone's song in a promotional campaign is very troubling. Seek help


soda-jerk t1_ix4cyp5 wrote

Musicians typically leave control of their material to someone they trust, usually family. So when that musician dies, the trusted party takes over legal ownership of everything the musician owned. At the very least, they're able to approve/deny public usage requests, and take legal action when needed.

An artist's work doesn't become public domain when they die, unless they specifically ask for that to happen.

Also, you don't get sued for playing music at a wedding, unless your wedding is in a public area, and open to the public.


Rebelgecko t1_ix5k0h1 wrote

Someone's estate is allowed to override an ascap license? How does that work? Does the estate have to approve every licensee, or do they have to object to each one they don't like manually?


The_Original_Gronkie t1_ix4kww3 wrote

Conservatives are constantly showing their ignorance, but the Conservative Propaganda Machine gives them an innacurate 5 minute talk about FISA warrants or top secret document declassification laws, and suddenly they know more than a room full of Harvard educated lawyers.

The more they "learn," the dumber they get.


Jocko677 t1_ix3wljy wrote

Stop crying over the song use.


GumpsDrillSargeant t1_ix44ujh wrote

Right? Why can’t some politicians just steal an artist’s work and use it for their own purposes? Kari Lake deserves to take whatever she wants, consequence free.

Excellent point!


smashin_blumpkin t1_ix4jsaa wrote

It's not stealing. It's playing a song


Cthulhu_illithid t1_ix4ojr8 wrote

Playing a song in a private setting, and using a song in an advertisement are 2 very different things legally, this is literally copyright infringement.


Rocket_Lag t1_ix4vrmz wrote

This is obviously assuming that the venue in which the song was played didn't have a license to play the song.

If they did, then the Petty estate has no case.


smashin_blumpkin t1_ix4plue wrote

It's not stealing. Playing a song isn't taking that song from anyone else


KillerQuinn t1_ix4qzs3 wrote

Steal: To take another person's property without permission or legal right.

So yes it is stealing


DubiousDude28 t1_ix5ikaw wrote

Thank you for breaking it down simply, there's republicans present


smashin_blumpkin t1_ix4veyb wrote

They didn't take the song. Playing a song doesn't prevent anyone else from playing that song.


Cthulhu_illithid t1_ix4tifr wrote

Did I use the word stealing? I said copyright infringement look it up there are laws about this shit.


smashin_blumpkin t1_ix4vbmj wrote

The first person I replied to did. That's the point I was making. I didn't say anything about copyright infringement, so why bring it up if not to try and counter what I said?


GumpsDrillSargeant t1_ix51cn4 wrote

You’re the kind of person who, if I own a parking garage and you find a way to park there without paying for it, feels like it’s a victimless crime that you deserve. “I’m not stealing, I’m just not paying for this!”


smashin_blumpkin t1_ix5jcmx wrote

No, that's different because in your scenario, I'd be taking a spot from a paying customer. Playing a song doesn't stop anyone else from playing that same song


Ongargis t1_ix47za3 wrote

Stop crying about not winning an election and saying it was stolen.


liquid_at t1_ix47au0 wrote

Where do you work? I come by to get some free stuff if that's normal there.


jcb1982 t1_ix4lxhy wrote

I dunno. If I was an artist I really wouldn’t want my music associated with fascist-lite political candidates and movements.


Daredizzle t1_ix4c75x wrote

Literal laws they're breaking around commercial fair use but surrrrrreeeee.