In one way I would say yes to ‘no Rush’. Limbaugh that is.
But we’re here to focus on music.
I can’t think of many times where I would say ‘no Rush’ to the band. But here’s an interesting one, as pointed out in many news stories, and this Rolling Stones article: What if someone is using your work in a context that draws a stark contrast to what your art stands for, or how you feel about a topic?
I’ve seen my photos show up on other sites, not credited either. But I recently saw one of my past blog posts re-posted on a web site that, while seemingly harmless, differed greatly with some of my personal views. The article had no direct relation to the theme of the site. Yet I somehow felt it was misleading. Do I say something? I don’t want readers to think I support this topic that is being juxtaposed to my writing.
While Rolling Stone points out that artists like Peter Gabriel and Rush may not be able to-technically-stop Limbaugh from using their music, where do we draw the line? Can we draw the line? Art is up for interpretation, right? Though I don’t think Sledgehammer was the best choice for Mr. Limbaugh…ahem.
Has this ever happened to you, be it with music, artwork, writing, or photography? Do you think we should have the ability to stop someone from using our work like this? I’d love feedback-here, Facebook.com/LaParadiddle, and on Twitter.