If I make a product, put a price on it, and put it into the marketplace: may I discriminate with regard to who I will allow to buy it?

If I write a book, publish it, settle on a price of $24.99, and put it on the shelves of the public bookstore -- can I say for example, "no, that black man doesn't get to buy it!" ? If I make a hamburger, and open a public hamburger stand; may I say, "sorry, I don't sell to Chinese"?

When I write a song, establish it as a product, package it, put a price on it, and put it into the marketplace; at that point, do I get to decide who can pay for use of it and who can't? This gets shaky to me.

Well that is definitely what the folks (who've lost) Heart just tried to do.  Heart sent a cease-and-desist notice to the McCain-Palin campaign after their hit "Barracuda" was used at the Republican National Convention. "I think it's completely unfair to be so misrepresented," Nancy Wilson said. "I feel completely f--ked over." Its a bit narcissistic; no one is endeavoring to "represent" the personalities and character of Nancy Wilson.  An entirely different woman has a nickname, and there happens to be a song that ties into it.

 The Wilsons issued a statement; "Sarah Palin's views and values in NO WAY represent us as American women. We ask that our song 'Barracuda' no longer be used to promote her image." (It seems guitarist Roger Fisher was not so troubled).

Ironically, if they convince the Republican strategists to cease usage, they would be doing them a favor; while the song decidedly rocks, the tone is decidedly dark; and lyrically it is a terrible song for any desireable positive associations.

Heart is the very first band I fell in love with.  I could describe crystal-clear recollections of private moments in the middle of the night; in my parent's living room with my newly purchased Heart album delivering thrilling content from my father's turntable to the crappy headphones on my head.  But I'm no kid now; time demanded I grow up.  And likewise for the Wilson sisters.  These ladies certainly enjoyed the marketplace potentials for generating great personal wealth, but now they want to get to make the rules on how the marketplace works.  I am not an intellectual propertyrights lawyer; maybe what they'd liked to do is completely within their legal power. I bet its a question of how good your lawyer is. But it is wrong. It's not morally excellent, as I'm convinced they believe it is.  They made a lot of money off their product, by "playing ball" in the marketplace.  Now they would like to be repositioned as aloof poets who've never soiled themselves with sale of their product. They don't perceive their product as product; It is their soul. Well, then you inescapably sold your soul for years and years, didn't you?  Because even though I was a little kid, with no income; I had to fork over real cash to enjoy your music, your soul.  It was born of your soul, but it became a product once you put it in the marketplace.

Certainly musical rights have many dimensions.  To have one's song recur over and over in another product's commercial campaign certainly deserves unique measures of clearance and haggling in negotiation.  To deny your musical product to the makers of a toothpaste for such a campaign, seems quite reasonable.  But as regarding public performance licensing, there is a price tag, and should the price be paid, what sort of ethical swamp do we want to invite in declaring, "oh, I don't want to sell it to you, because you are _____"

The heart sisters want to define who is allowed to buy their product.  If the RNC organizers paid for the broadcast/reproduction/public performance rights of the song -- what ethical pretzel twists allows prohibition of the usage of these purchased rights.  Is this limited to politics?  Can we restrict those of a faith, creed, color, or age group as well? How about gender?

Can Shell, Exxon, and their brethren declare that the members of Heart may not buy their gasoline, as the Wilson sisters do not represent wives of oil executives "at all".  The Wilson sisters might want to buy a good mountain bike.

Now, perhaps the organizing elements of the RNC didn't secure appropriate performance/public broadcast rights beforehand?!  That would be a quite a different story!  But I seriously doubt this is the case.  How many lawyers were at that convention? Let's just assume, "gobs".  I strongly suspect the general knowledge of such legal issues didn't escape every law savvy member of the event.

To me, this isn't about politics, its a weird direction heading toward twists of fair business practices and basic tenets of equal access, and indeed equality.

So, Heart, I grew up on your tunes; but it's been a longtime since you generated significant cultural relevance, and now you appear to have lost the spirit of fair play and fair business.  In short, I declare that the the Wilson sisters have just lost the legal use of the term "heart".  Please cease and desist in pretending to own it.  Furthermore, I define right here and now, that any parties associated with the band (except Roger Fisher) have not the right to read this article.  Even if you bought it.

PS.  I owned that "unauthorized" first release version of "Magazine" (to which you Wilsons also applied a cease and desist).  I listened to it endlessly -- though you didn't want me to;  and it was better than your authorized version!!! Oh, hell...I still love you. And Roger Fisher, can I buy YOU a beer?