• Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    22 hours ago

    The current government strategy of illegal use of copyrighted materials, often with the full understanding that the artist/IP owners will not consent to it should really have a harsher punishment to it. The DHS social media pages in particular keep using songs without artist permission because they know it will be taken down but by that point it doesn’t matter and they just steal another song. Given that the use of these songs implies tacit approval from the artist, this should absolutely count as the rights of the artists to free speech are being infringed upon.

    • Tire@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Yeah it almost reads like Microsoft has endorsed the Trump administration and its marketing. Like a forced brand crossover. These things aid in the far right pipeline. Has young men thinking hating immigrants is as cool and mainstream as Halo.

      • Jhex@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        21 hours ago

        Not almost, it is exactly that

        Microsoft could have issued a note to the tone of “we were not consulted” but their vaporware spine did not amount to even that little

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      20 hours ago

      illegal use of copyrighted materials

      It’s quite literally the least bad thing they’ve done across two terms in office.

      Given that the use of these songs implies tacit approval from the artist

      Who seriously believes that? We’re so beyond “Death of the Artist” at this point. FFS, I can’t count the number of times I’ve heard the chorus line of Bruce Springsteen’s “Born In The USA” played full on patriotically, without a tinge of irony or self-reflection.

      • Encrypt-Keeper@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        19 hours ago

        Who seriously believes that?

        If an artist consents to the use of their song in a specific way, it’s not a matter of belief at all. It just is tacit approval. So when the government does this without consent, until the moment the artist responds, the implication is that the artist has approved it. Which isn’t as big a deal if a private entity does it, but it’s a much bigger deal when the federal government does it.