Rock Legend Sues Trump for $10M, Calling His Hit Song 'Opposite of Everything' POTUS Stands For

Rock legend Neil Young is suing Donald Trump for $10 million (£7.57 million) over the alleged unauthorised playing of 'Rockin' in the Free World' at campaign rallies, according to reports by Deadline. His copyright complaint describes the song as 'the opposite of everything that Donald J. Trump stands for'.

Deadline also described Trump playing the song in 2015 and again in 2020, with Young warning him to cease using it on both occasions. The lawsuit includes allegations concerning a rally in Youngstown, Ohio, on 12 October, although the year of that event is unspecified.

A Rock Legend's Copyright Claim Against Trump

The complaint cited by Deadline alleges that the song was played shortly before Trump addressed the Youngstown rally. It attributes that use to an entity identified in the quoted passages as the Committee, whose full name is not given in the coverage.

According to Deadline, the complaint states, 'Just prior to Donald J. Trump taking the stage to speak at the Youngstown Rally, the Committee caused Rockin' in the Free World to be played.'

The allegation extends beyond that event. The complaint also claims that the Committee caused the song to be played at other rallies intended to encourage Republican votes in mid-term elections.

It qualifies that allegation with the phrase 'On information and belief', rather than presenting it as a direct observation. The dates and locations of those other alleged uses are not identified in the coverage.

Why the Song Matters to the Rock Legend's Case

Alongside its allegations about permission, the complaint objects to the political setting in which the song was allegedly played. It presents the lyrics as a criticism of political promises and the conditions experienced by vulnerable people.

Deadline quotes the complaint as stating, 'Rockin' in the Free World is a blistering anthem that contrasts the hollow promises of American political rhetoric with the harsh realities faced by the homeless and forgotten.'

The quoted passage describes a mother discarding her baby, addiction and rubbish accumulating in the shadows of prosperity. It argues that the chorus carries an irony because the freedom being celebrated is not shared by everyone.

That interpretation belongs to the complaint, as does its criticism of Trump. The passage sets out Young's objection to the association between the song and the political events described in his case.

The complaint states, 'In short, the Song is the opposite of everything that Donald J. Trump stands for.'

Permission at the Centre of the Rock Legend's Allegations

Young's case also alleges that Trump knew a licence was necessary and that Young would not grant it. Deadline attributes that assertion directly to the copyright infringement complaint.

The allegations about permission and knowledge remain claims advanced in the lawsuit. The coverage does not identify a court ruling on them or include a response from Trump or the Committee.

The complaint's wording refers to Trump's alleged awareness at the time of the statement and during rallies in the year it describes. Neither that year nor the filing date is specified.

According to Deadline, the complaint states, 'Donald J. Trump is now and at the time of all rallies this year was personally aware that the license would be required to play the Song at rallies and that Young has not, and would not, grant the required license.'