Phil Lynott's mother objects to Mitt Romney using Thin Lizzy's music
Source: Guardian
Phil Lynott's mother objects to Mitt Romney using Thin Lizzy's music
Philomena Lynott says her son would not have approved of the Republican campaign's anti-gay and pro-rich policies
guardian.co.uk, Monday 3 September 2012 13.14 EDT
The mother of Irish rock legend Phil Lynott has objected to the Mitt Romney campaign using Thin Lizzy's music at last week's Republican National Convention.
Philomena Lynott said her son would not have approved of the US Republicans playing the Thin Lizzy anthem "The Boys Are Back In Town" at Romney's nomination as presidential candidate.
She said that the late Thin Lizzy front man would have rejected any association with the Republicans particularly the Christian right wing of the party.
The Dublin woman told the Irish music magazine "Hot Press" that she was upset that one of her son's most famous rock songs was used by the Republicans to endorse Romney and his running mate Paul Ryan.
Read more: http://www.guardian.co.uk/music/2012/sep/03/phil-lynott-mitt-romney-thin-lizzy
= new reply since forum marked as read
Less government! Less regulations!
That way the Bullies and Baggers could just do whatever the fuck they wanted...like they worry as it is now.
...not to mention, any regulations regarding "rendering" away those that they don't like
'Cuz no one with any creativity wants anything to do with them.
Boo hoo hoo hoo.
Cher
For example, if the venue where the music is played has a blanket performance license from ASCAP/BMI, the rights of the songwriter may be covered (and there is only a very limited public performance right in the recording of the song that probably doesn't apply). If the recording is incorporated ("synched"
into video, that would trigger the need for a separate license (or licenses).
Frequently, when an artist demands that a politician stop using his or her music, the claim is based not on copyright but on a "false light" claim -- the assertion that the use of the artist's music suggests, falsely, that the artist supports the candidate. How successful such a claim would actually be if it went to court (where it would face, among other things, a first amendment defense) is not a readily answered question.
for answering.
How precious. 
