The ongoing battle between musicians and political campaigns over the unauthorized use of music is not new, but the case of Donald Trump’s campaign and the iconic song ‘Hold On, I’m Coming’ brings fresh attention to this issue. Written by the late Isaac Hayes and Dave Porter in 1966, this classic R&B anthem was central to Trump’s campaign rallies until a recent lawsuit forced a cease-and-desist. A Georgia federal judge, Thomas Thrash, temporarily barred the use of the song, ruling in favor of the Hayes family, who expressed strong opposition to its association with Trump’s political persona.
https://twitter.com/IsaacHayes3/status/1831037128056193226
The Context Behind the Lawsuit
Isaac Hayes’ son, Isaac Hayes III, made it crystal clear during the legal proceedings: “Donald Trump has no valid license to be playing or his legal team would have sent it over. Second, this is NOT political” The Hayes family is adamant that Trump’s character does not align with the values Hayes stood for during his lifetime. In fact, they highlighted specific instances where Trump’s statements and behavior—particularly toward women—clashed with the legacy of the musician.
The lawsuit wasn’t filed lightly. The family initially requested that Trump stop using the song as early as 2022, following its unauthorized use at the NRA convention shortly after the tragic Uvalde mass shooting. They issued a cease-and-desist, yet the campaign continued to use the track at rallies, clocking 134 instances of unauthorized usage by 2024.
Why Music Matters in Politics
Trump’s use of ‘Hold On, I’m Coming’ at high-profile events, such as the Republican National Convention, was more than just a background soundtrack. Music plays a significant role in political messaging—it can energize crowds, connect with a broader audience, and symbolize the values a candidate aims to project. However, when that use happens without permission, it strikes a chord—especially with the artists behind the music, who may not share the political views of the candidate.
In this case, the estate of Isaac Hayes demanded $3 million in licensing fees for repeated use without consent. The family’s legal team continued to press against Trump “for 134 counts copyright infringement for the unauthorized use of the song “Hold On I’m Coming” at campaign rallies from 2022-2024.” They argue that not only did Trump’s campaign use the song without proper authorization, but it also defied repeated legal requests to desist. The estate’s stance is that such usage goes beyond legal lines, infringing on the moral rights of the late musician.
Trump’s Legal Defense
On the other side, Trump’s legal team argued that the Hayes estate did not hold the licensing rights to the song, a claim that the family’s lawyers quickly debunked. Ronald Coleman, Trump’s attorney, downplayed the court’s decision, saying that the campaign had already agreed to cease using ‘Hold On, I’m Coming’. “We’re very gratified that the court recognized the First Amendment issues at stake,” Coleman told ABC, highlighting the judge’s refusal to demand the takedown of existing event videos that used the song.
Similar Posts
The Larger Picture of Musicians vs. Political Campaigns
Trump’s legal disputes over music usage are not isolated incidents. In recent months, other musicians have protested the unauthorized use of their work at Republican rallies. From Abba to Celine Dion, a growing number of artists have publicly opposed the use of their songs in political settings that they do not endorse. The legal waters around such cases are often murky, with cases dragging on for years. Eddy Grant’s lawsuit over Trump’s use of ‘Electric Avenue’ is still ongoing, four years after the original complaint was filed.
For musicians, it’s not just about protecting their intellectual property—it’s about preserving their artistic identity. The unauthorized use of music in highly charged political environments can misrepresent the artist’s views, leaving audiences with a false impression that the artist endorses a particular political figure or cause.
Health and Well-being Considerations: The Impact on Artists
For those of us who prioritize well-being and artistic integrity, these disputes highlight an important point: artists often pour their heart and soul into their work. Music is a reflection of their personal journey, and using it without their consent can cause emotional distress. In the health and wellness industry, we often talk about the importance of boundaries and protecting one’s mental and emotional health. The music industry operates in a similar space—artists have the right to protect their creations from being co-opted in ways that clash with their values.
For Isaac Hayes III, this case represents more than a simple copyright dispute. It’s about safeguarding his father’s legacy and ensuring that his music remains true to the principles it was created under. “We have to take a stand that we want to separate ourselves from someone with Donald Trump’s character” Hayes III reiterated after the ruling.
Moving Forward: What This Means for Future Political Campaigns
As more musicians push back against the use of their songs at political rallies, campaigns will need to be more careful about how they use music. Licensing and permissions are not just formalities—they are essential to respecting the intellectual and emotional labor behind these creations.
In a world that values well-being and functional harmony, respecting these boundaries is more than just a legal obligation—it’s an ethical one. Music is deeply personal, and its use in public spaces, especially political ones, should always align with the artist’s intent.
For Trump’s campaign, the legal battle may continue, but the message from artists is clear: their music is not up for grabs. Moving forward, political campaigns may need to rethink how they engage with music, ensuring that every note played aligns with the values and permission of the creators behind the songs.
In sum, this case serves as a wake-up call for political entities that have long relied on cultural works to enhance their messaging. The battle for artistic rights continues, and as we prioritize well-being in all aspects of life, we must recognize the importance of maintaining artistic integrity in our political landscapes.
