Listen to the article
Former President Donald Trump has reached a settlement with the estate of legendary musician Isaac Hayes over unauthorized use of the hit song “Hold On, I’m Coming” during his political campaigns, according to an announcement made Monday by the Hayes family.
The lawsuit, filed in August 2024, claimed the Trump campaign had used the iconic 1966 soul track without permission in campaign videos and appearances 133 times across both his 2020 and 2024 presidential runs. The legal action sought damages for copyright infringement against Trump, his campaign organization, and several of his associates.
Isaac Hayes III, son of the late musician, confirmed the resolution on social media platform X, stating that the family and estate “are satisfied with the outcome.” Specific details of the settlement agreement were not disclosed in the public announcement.
The soul classic in question was co-written by Hayes and David Porter and originally recorded by the legendary duo Sam and Dave. It became one of their signature hits and remains a staple of American soul music. Hayes himself was a towering figure in American music history, known not only for his songwriting but for groundbreaking albums like “Hot Buttered Soul” and his Academy Award-winning theme from the film “Shaft.” He passed away in 2008 at age 65.
The legal dispute had progressed significantly before the settlement, with U.S. District Judge Thomas Thrash granting the Hayes estate a preliminary injunction in September 2024. This court order required the Trump campaign to cease using the song in any capacity. Trump’s legal representatives maintained that they had already voluntarily stopped using the track before the judge’s ruling.
The case took an interesting turn when Sam Moore, half of the original Sam and Dave duo that performed the song, provided a sworn statement to the court suggesting he opposed the legal action pursued by the Hayes estate. Moore had previously performed “America the Beautiful” at a pre-inauguration concert for Trump during his presidency.
This settlement represents just one instance in a pattern of disputes between Trump’s campaign and musical artists. Numerous high-profile musicians including Sabrina Carpenter, ABBA, and Celine Dion have publicly objected to the use of their music at Trump campaign events over the years. These conflicts highlight the ongoing tension between political campaigns and artists who wish to control the contexts in which their music is presented.
Prior to the settlement, Trump’s legal team had argued that the Hayes estate failed to demonstrate legitimate copyright ownership and couldn’t establish that any actual harm had been suffered. Ronald Coleman, Trump’s attorney, had previously stated to reporters that the campaign had no intention of continuing to use the song, noting: “The campaign has no interest in annoying or hurting anyone, and if the Hayes family feels that it hurts or annoys them, that’s fine, we’re not going to force the issue.”
The White House, when asked about the settlement, redirected inquiries to Trump’s personal legal counsel. Requests for comment from Coleman went unanswered.
This case underscores the complex intersection of copyright law, political campaigns, and artistic legacy. For musicians and their estates, controlling how their work is used in political contexts remains a significant concern, particularly when the artist’s own values or beliefs may conflict with those of the campaign using their music.
Fact Checker
Verify the accuracy of this article using The Disinformation Commission analysis and real-time sources.
8 Comments
As someone who appreciates the artistic legacy of Isaac Hayes, I’m glad to see his estate take action to defend his copyrights. It’s important that musicians and songwriters are able to maintain control over the use of their creative works.
It’s interesting to see this legal dispute between the Isaac Hayes estate and the Trump campaign over the unauthorized use of the iconic ‘Hold On, I’m Coming’ song. I wonder if the settlement agreement included any details around proper attribution or licensing for political uses of copyrighted music.
While the specific terms of the settlement weren’t disclosed, the fact that the Hayes family expressed satisfaction with the outcome suggests they were able to achieve their objectives. Protecting intellectual property rights is crucial, even for high-profile political figures.
As a fan of Isaac Hayes’ musical legacy, I’m glad to see the estate was able to reach a resolution with the Trump campaign. Unauthorized use of copyrighted material is a serious issue, especially for high-profile political campaigns.
Agreed. Proper licensing and attribution are so important to protect the rights of artists and songwriters. It’s good the two sides were able to find a mutually acceptable outcome.
This settlement is a good reminder that even powerful political figures aren’t above the law when it comes to respecting intellectual property rights. It will be interesting to see if this case has any ripple effects on how campaigns approach the use of copyrighted material going forward.
While the details of the settlement aren’t public, the fact that the Hayes family expressed satisfaction suggests they were able to achieve their goals in protecting Isaac Hayes’ legacy and the value of his iconic song. Respecting copyrights is crucial, even in the political arena.
I wonder if this case will set any new precedents around the use of copyrighted music in political campaigns and advertising. It’s an interesting intersection of free speech, intellectual property, and the commercial exploitation of creative works.