Dave Grohl – The Foo Fighters recently joined a growing list of musicians taking issue with Donald Trump after the former president used their song “My Hero” during a rally in Arizona without seeking permission. The 1997 hit played as a pyrotechnic display lit up the stage while Robert F. Kennedy Jr., fresh from suspending his 2024 presidential campaign, made an appearance to endorse the GOP candidate. The song choice, however, did not sit well with the Foo Fighters, who swiftly responded after clips from the rally began circulating on social media.

Fans and curious onlookers took to X (formerly Twitter) to express their confusion and question why the band’s song was being associated with a political figure they have vocally opposed in the past. It didn’t take long for the Foo Fighters to set the record straight. A spokesperson for the band quickly clarified to *Billboard* that Trump’s campaign had not asked for permission to use the song, and even if they had, the band would not have granted it.

This latest incident adds to the long-standing friction between the Trump campaign and musicians whose work has been used without authorization. The Foo Fighters frontman, Dave Grohl, has made his stance on the issue clear. In a sharp rebuke, Grohl announced that any royalties generated from Trump’s use of “My Hero” would be redirected to support the campaigns of Democratic figures Kamala Harris and Minnesota Governor Tim Walz. Grohl’s decision to funnel Trump’s use of their work into financial support for his political opponents underscores the deep divide between the band and the former president.

The Foo Fighters’ clash with Trump is far from an isolated incident. Over the years, a number of prominent artists have publicly objected to the Trump campaign’s use of their music, many of whom have taken legal action. On August 22, Beyoncé became the latest to enter the fray when she threatened the former president with a cease-and-desist order. The dispute arose after Trump’s spokesman, Steven Cheung, used her song “Freedom” in a now-deleted post on X to mock Vice President Kamala Harris. The post was widely criticized, particularly for co-opting a song with deep personal and cultural significance, a fact that only exacerbated the tensions between the artist and the campaign.

Trump’s apparent disregard for seeking permission before playing songs at his rallies has consistently drawn backlash. The estate of soul music legend Isaac Hayes is currently embroiled in a lawsuit against the Trump campaign for years of unauthorized use of the song “Hold On (I’m Coming)” at various political events. Isaac Hayes’ family, like many other artists, has made it clear that they do not want their work to be associated with Trump’s messaging or political activities. Similarly, artists such as Johnny Marr, the guitarist for The Smiths, Steven Tyler of Aerosmith, Rihanna, and the estates of Prince and Tom Petty have all spoken out against the unauthorized use of their music by the former president.

The issue raises larger questions about the relationship between music and politics, particularly the rights artists have over how and where their music is used. While musicians traditionally receive royalties for the public performance of their songs, the situation becomes more complicated when their music is tied to political messaging with which they fundamentally disagree. Some musicians have argued that beyond financial compensation, the use of their music at political rallies without consent violates their moral and artistic rights.

The Trump campaign’s cavalier attitude towards intellectual property has not only angered individual musicians but has also sparked wider debates about how artists can protect their work in the digital age. As political campaigns become more adept at using social media and music to amplify their messages, the potential for these conflicts only grows. The Foo Fighters’ decision to publicly call out Trump, coupled with Grohl’s pointed redistribution of royalties, highlights a broader trend of musicians taking action to assert control over the political use of their art.

For Donald Trump, these music disputes seem to be a recurring theme, and the consequences may extend beyond the courtroom. As more and more artists refuse to allow their work to be used in support of his political endeavors, Trump’s rallies may increasingly struggle to find music that resonates with his base while staying clear of legal trouble. In the meantime, musicians like the Foo Fighters continue to make it known that their music will not be co-opted without a fight, setting the stage for future legal battles and perhaps new legislation on the intersection of music and politics.