Dolly's said she keeps herself out of politics unless she's directly attacked, like when that columnist for the Federalist slagged her for not being homophobic despite being a Christian.
I think they should instead say something like, "The tRump campaign is so inept, so disorganized, that they don't even know that they need to get permission first to use certain songs at their rallies. Sad."
You know it doesn't seem like all that long ago that people were being sued or threatened for playing music in shops or in the back office of a hotel and stuff like that. It might have been urban legend at the time when the music industry was over reacting to Napster, KaZaA, Limewire, Bearshare, etc, etc. but it is true that those venues officially need a license for any music they play in public. So how come a nationwide advertising campaign can make use of music, without the permission of the artist, and not be sued into oblivion by the RIAA? Or does the artist not own the copyright to their own work? Or does the RIAA sympathise more with gentle, kind Billionaires than nasty greedy non billionaires??
The Electronic Music scene has the Association For Electronic Music (AFEM), because the RIAA are insane about public performance rules and would completely kneecap the club scene if they were in charge. If DJs can't perform the shit in their collection without explicit rights for every track, the scene falls apart.
Interestingly, Trump could likely get away with hiring DJs and playing club anthems at his rallies, but that would probably alienate his base pretty severely.
A friend of mine made one of White's iconic guitars. That friend offered to make a copy of that iconic guitar for me. That friend was threatened with a lawsuit from White if that guitar were copied. I'm not sure that case would have held up in court given that the guitar in question is a copy of a copy, but...