Trump Shrinks, But Can't Shake Isaac Hayes Copyright Lawsuit
Weeks after a federal judge said Isaac Hayes' estate could pursue its copyright infringement lawsuit against President Donald Trump, the same judge issued a new written ruling dismissing some claims from the complaint while upholding the allegation Trump 'personally selected' the song 'Hold On, I'm Coming' for use at rallies.
In his underlying dismissal motion filed in January, Trump claimed the Hayes estate had failed to allege any infringing conduct that placed him directly on the hook. In the court's new ruling issued Friday and obtained by Rolling Stone, U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash said that wasn't the case.
More from Rolling Stone
'Top Gun: Maverick' Writer's Cousin Says He Wrote 'Key Scenes' in New Lawsuit
White House Correspondents Dinner Weekend Was the Death Knell for Traditional D.C. Media
Trump Assures Nation That Pete Hegseth Will Eventually 'Get It Together'
'The plaintiffs allege that defendant Trump 'personally selected' the work, performed it at least 133 times, and recorded and published those rallies on various media platforms,' Judge Thrash wrote. 'Defendant Trump fails to explain how the allegations that he 'personally selected' the work to be played at his campaign events do not state that he infringed on this exclusive right. The court will not dismiss any claims against defendant Trump on this ground.'
While upholding the two main copyright infringement claims, the judge did trim other aspects of the lawsuit in a partial victory for Trump. The judge shot down the estate's 'false endorsement' and 'right of publicity' claims, saying there was now allegations the defendants used Hayes' name or likeness when the song was played.
Hayes' estate sued Trump last year, claiming his campaign used 'Hold On' during rallies and in videos, against the wishes of Hayes' heirs. The musician's son Isaac Hayes III said in a post on X, formerly Twitter, that his family was upset by the infringement.
'Donald Trump represents the worst in integrity and class with his disrespect and sexual abuse of Women and racist rhetoric,' he wrote at the time. 'We will now deal with this very swiftly.'
Hayes, who died in 2008, co-wrote the Stax Records classic before it was performed and released by the duo Sam & Dave.
As part of his written ruling issued Friday, Judge Thrash dismissed one of the co-defendants from the case. Turning Point Action, Inc., known as a far-right, Christian nationalist group, was dismissed from the case on jurisdictional grounds. The Hayes' estate previously dropped its claims against the Republican National Committee, National Rifle Association, and American Conservative Union.
Best of Rolling Stone
The 50 Greatest Eminem Songs
All 274 of Taylor Swift's Songs, Ranked
The 500 Greatest Albums of All Time
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
30 minutes ago
Noem says Guard wouldn't be needed in LA if Newsom had done his job
Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem blamed California Gov. Gavin Newsom for the need to deploy the National Guard to assist in putting down violent clashes between police and immigration protesters in Los Angeles. Newsom has said local authorities don't need the help and accused President Donald Trump of inflaming the situation," calling the move "purposefully inflammatory" and saying it will "only escalate tensions." Noem disagreed with Newsom. "Margaret, if he was doing his, job people wouldn't have gotten hurt the last couple of days," she told CBS' Margaret Brennan on "Face the Nation." "We wouldn't have officers with a shattered wrist from bricks thrown through their vehicles, vehicles being burned, flags burned in the street and Molotov cocktails being thrown." "Governor Newsom has proven that he makes bad decisions, the president knows that he makes bad decisions and that's why the president chose the safety of this community over waiting for Governor Newsom to get some sanity," she said. Ahead of his departure for Camp David from New Jersey on Sunday, President Donald Trump was asked by ABC News' Rachel Scott if he is prepared to invoke the Insurrection Act. "Depends on whether or not there is an insurrection," Trump replied. Pressed on whether he believes there is an insurrection in California, Trump said, "No, no. But you have violent people, and we are not going to let them get away with it." White House border czar Tom Homan said Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass could face charges if their response to Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations exceeds the legal boundaries. "I'll say about anybody: You cross that line, it's a felony to knowingly harbor and conceal an illegal alien. It's a felony to impede law enforcement from doing their job," Homan told NBC News. Noem said Trump was making the move to protect the impacted communities and law enforcement. "So these 2,000 National Guard soldiers that are being engaged today are ones that are specifically trained for this type of crowd situation where they will be with the public and be able to provide safety around buildings and to those that are engaged in peaceful protests and also to our law enforcement officers so they can continue their daily work," she said. Reaction from lawmakers broke along party lines. House Speaker Mike Johnson told ABC News' "This Week" that Trump "did exactly what he needed to do." "These are federal laws and we have to maintain the rule of law. And that is not what is happening. [California Gov.] Gavin Newsom has shown an inability or unwillingness to do what is necessary there." "That is real leadership, and he has the authority and the responsibility to do it," the speaker said, defending Trump's decision. Sen. Markwayne Mullin, R-Okla., dismissed Newsom's assertion the deploying the Guard would escalate tensions. "Well, words are cheap, especially when you got video. And so you asked me did it look like it was under control, I'll ask you: Did it look like it was under control? It doesn't. It is absolutely not in control. You saw rioters throwing rocks, throwing fireworks. And being extremely aggressive towards not just federal agents, but even the county and the local PD that was there. So does it look like it's under control? Absolutely not," he told CNN's "State of the Union." Democratic Rep. Nanette Barragán, who represents part of the area, said Trump's action will make things worse. "I've spoken to the sheriffs on the ground who have said they have things under control. There is no need for the National Guard. They have the manpower that they need," she said. "So this is really just an escalation of the president coming into California. We haven't asked for the help. "This is him escalating it, causing tensions to rise. It's only going to make things worse." Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar said Trump was "hellbent on inflaming" the situation. "Individual governors look at their states and make decisions, but in this case the president time and time again has shown this willingness to, one, violate the laws, as we've seen across the country in many different situations outside of the immigration context, and, two, inflame situations," Klobuchar told "Face the Nation."
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Modesto City Schools trustee is critical of sex education plan for 5th-graders
A Modesto City Schools board member wants parents to know what's in a sex education curriculum designed for fifth-grade classrooms. Jolene Daly spoke at two recent gatherings, arguing that fifth-graders aren't psychologically prepared for the content about gender identity and sexual activity. Daly gave a scathing critique of the curriculum Saturday at Celebration Center, a church in Modesto. She said she spoke as a licensed family therapist, not as a school board member. 'It oversexualizes 10-year-olds,' Daly said. 'These children are not ready for this material.' The proposed fifth-grade sex education curriculum in Modesto City Schools is likely to run into some opposition several months after Stanislaus County voters swung conservative in the November presidential election and the culture wars were one of the issues. About 50 people attended Daly's talk at Celebration Center and more than 100 were at a June 2 event, she said. Several people at Saturday's presentation asked how to get involved with the school district's decision-making process. MCS trustees this month will consider two curriculum options: 'Puberty Talk for Grades 5 & 6' and 'Puberty: The Wonder Years, Grade 5.' A 16-member committee consisting of teachers, parents and board members reviewed curriculum choices and has recommended 'Puberty Talk.' The proposed sex education is under the school district's fifth-grade health curriculum, which focuses on hygiene, nutrition, puberty, internet safety, social influences, healthy communication and relationships. According to an MCS FAQ page, the California Healthy Youth Act also requires sex education topics when school districts offer health education. The classroom instruction must recognize diverse sexual orientations including same-sex relationships, teach gender concepts and cover gender expression, gender identity and the harm of negative stereotypes. The health education must include medically accurate, objective information appropriate for students 'of all races, genders, sexual orientations, ethnicities and cultural background,' the state law says. One of the goals is teaching fifth-graders, who are showing the early signs of puberty, to recognize sexual harassment and abuse and report inappropriate touching and child abuse, the school district says. During her talk Saturday, Daly contended that fifth-graders are too early in mental development for lessons about gender identity and the facts of sex. She referred to a student survey question in one curriculum that asks what transgender means. She also objected to proposed instructional content defining different sexualities and genders and what she said was content regarding hormone replacement therapy and masturbation. Daly said there's too much latitude for fifth-grade teachers to talk with students about sexual acts. It's too early for the kids to hear that sex is fun, Daly said, adding that the classroom material is not culturally sensitive to members of the Christian faith. According to the school district FAQ, fifth-grade sex education is widely taught in California to help students navigate the physical changes of puberty and learn the facts in a supportive educational setting. It follows a trend of young people experiencing puberty at younger age and dealing with developments including physical growth, change in voice, acne, body odor, oily hair and the need for good hygiene. To review the copyrighted curriculum materials, parents must go to the district's Department of Curriculum & Instruction, Professional Development Building B, at 1017 Reno Ave., at certain times through June 30. The school board is scheduled to hear more about the curriculum and receive community input Monday evening. The board could approve the curriculum June 23. The school district says parents can opt their children out of the sex education instruction. Forms will be sent home with children at least two weeks before the lessons, and a form will be provided on Parent Square. Daly said the Puberty Talk program is the sister curriculum of the Teen Talk sex education for eighth=grade students. She said local groups including Without Permission could educate students about human trafficking, harassment and other health education topics required by the state.
Yahoo
31 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump Is Using the National Guard as Bait
The Atlantic Daily, a newsletter that guides you through the biggest stories of the day, helps you discover new ideas, and recommends the best in culture. Sign up for it here. President Donald Trump is about to launch yet another assault on democracy, the Constitution, and American traditions of civil-military relations, this time in Los Angeles. Under a dubious legal rationale, he is activating 2,000 members of the National Guard to confront protests against actions by ICE, the immigration police who have used thuggish tactics against citizens and foreigners alike in the United States. By militarizing the situation in L.A., Trump is goading Americans more generally to take him on in the streets of their own cities, thus enabling his attacks on their constitutional freedoms. As I've listened to him and his advisers over the past several days, they seem almost eager for public violence that would justify the use of armed force against Americans. The president and the men and women around him are acting with great ambition in this moment, and they are likely hoping to achieve three goals in one dramatic action. First, they will turn America's attention away from Trump's many failures and inane feuds, and reestablish his campaign persona as a strongman who will brush aside the law if that's what it takes to keep order in the streets. Perhaps nothing would please Trump more than to replace weird stories about Elon Musk with video of masked protesters burning cars as lines of helmeted police and soldiers march over them and impose draconian silence in one of the nation's largest and most diverse cities. Second, as my colleague David Frum warned this morning, Trump is establishing that he is willing to use the military any way he pleases, perhaps as a proof of concept for suppressing free elections in 2026 or 2028. Trump sees the U.S. military as his personal honor guard and his private muscle. Those are his toy soldiers, and he's going to get a show from his honor guard in a birthday parade next weekend. In the meantime, he's going to flex that muscle, and prove that the officers and service members who will do whatever he orders are the real military. The rest are suckers and losers. During the George Floyd protests in 2020, Trump was furious at what he saw as the fecklessness of military leaders determined to thwart his attempts to use deadly force against protesters. He's learned his lesson: This time, he has installed a hapless sycophant at the Pentagon who is itching to execute the boss's orders. Third, Trump may be hoping to radicalize the citizen-soldiers drawn from the community who serve in the National Guard. (Seizing the California Guard is also a convenient way to humiliate California Governor Gavin Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass, with the president's often-used narrative that liberals can't control their own cities.) Trump has the right to 'federalize' Guard forces, which is how they were deployed overseas in America's various conflicts. He has never respected the traditions of American civil-military relations, which regard the domestic deployment of the military as an extreme measure to be avoided whenever possible. Using the Guard could be a devious tactic: He may be hoping to set neighbor against neighbor, so that the people called to duty return to their home and workplace with stories of violence and injuries. In the longer run, Trump may be trying to create a national emergency that will enable him to exercise authoritarian control. (Such an emergency was a rationalization, for example, for the tariffs that he has mostly had to abandon.) He has for years been trying to desensitize the citizens of the United States to un-American ideas and unconstitutional actions. The American system of government was never meant to cope with a rogue president. Yet Trump is not unstoppable. Thwarting his authoritarianism will require restraint on the part of the public, some steely nerves on the part of state and local authorities, and vigilant action from national elected representatives, who should be stepping in to raise the alarm and to demand explanations about the president's misuse of the military. As unsatisfying as it may be for some citizens to hear, the last thing anyone should do is take to the streets of Los Angeles and try to confront the military or any of California's law-enforcement authorities. ICE is on a rampage, but physically assaulting or obstructing its agents—and thus causing a confrontation with the cops who have to protect them, whether those police officers like it or not—will provide precisely the pretext that some of the people in Trump's White House are trying to create. The president and his coterie want people walking around taking selfies in gas clouds, waving Mexican flags, holding up traffic, and burning cars. Judging by reactions on social media and interviews on television, a lot of people seem to think such performances are heroic—which means they're poised to give Trump's enforcers what they're hoping for. Be warned: Trump is expecting resistance. You will not be heroes. You will be the pretext. [Conor Friedersdorf: Averting the worst-case scenario in Los Angeles] Instead, the most dramatic public action the residents of Southern California could take right now would be to ensure that Trump's forces arrive on calm streets. Imagine the reactions of the Guard members as they look around and wonder what, exactly, the commander in chief was thinking. Why are they carrying their rifles in the streets of downtown America? What does anyone expect them to do? Put another way: What if the president throws a crackdown and nobody comes? This kind of restraint will deny Trump the political oxygen he's trying to generate. He is resorting to the grand theater of militarism because he is losing on multiple fronts in the courts—and he knows it. The law, for most people, is dreary to hear about, but one of the most important stories of Trump's second term is that lawyers and judges are so far holding a vital line against the administration, sometimes at great personal risk. Trump is also losing public support, which is another reason he's zeroing in on California. He is resolutely ignorant in many ways, but he has an excellent instinct for picking the right fights. The fact of the matter is that tens of millions of Americans believe that almost everything about immigration in the United States has long been deeply dysfunctional. (I'm one of them.) If he sends the military into L.A. and Guard members end up clashing in high-definition video with wannabe resistance gladiators in balaclavas, many people who have not been paying attention to his other ghastly antics will support him. (For the record, I am not one of them.) So far, even the Los Angeles Police Department—not exactly a bastion of squishy suburban book-club liberals—has emphasized that the protests have been mostly peaceful. Trump is apparently trying to change that. Sending in the National Guard is meant to provoke, not pacify, and his power will only grow if he succeeds in tempting Americans to intemperate reactions that give him the authoritarian opening he's seeking. Article originally published at The Atlantic
