I've noticed that musicians tend to be protective of their work. It's completely understandable from their position. If I were them I wouldn't want to prostitute my work out to sell some stupid car or shoes. I read that Billy Corgan was offered some huge amount to use "Today" in a commercial and he wasn't sure what to do because "Today" is such a personal song for him. Or when Micheal Jackson sold the rights to The Beatles' "Revolution" to Nike or Reebok for a commercial. Pual McCartney became angry.
As I said it's perfectly understandable...but...
Other artists routinely have their worked altered or used in commercials or for some other purpose. I know I've seen famous paintings and sculptures in commercials. Often times they're used for some comedic value. Charictures are sometimes used from famous plays or movies to sell things as well. It seems that these artists don't have any say over how their art is being used. (Possibly because their dead.)
When it comes down to it though musicians are much more sensative that other artists at least it seems that way. It doesn't seem fair...
Bookmarks