The Canadian-American rock icon has filed a fresh lawsuit against a Donald Trump fundraising committee, alleging the unauthorised use of his 1989 anthem “Rockin’ in the Free World” at campaign rallies violates a 2020 settlement — and he wants ten million dollars for the trouble.
A Settlement Ignored
The legal papers, filed this week, tell a story of a promise made and, allegedly, a promise broken. Six years ago, Young sued Donald J Trump for President Inc for copyright infringement after the campaign deployed his signature track at political events. That entity offered no defence. It settled quickly, undertaking never to use the song again without a licence and explicit permission from Young.
The new complaint argues that the current Trump committee — a separate corporate vehicle — has treated that agreement as waste paper. “Rockin’ in the Free World” has continued to blast from PA systems at rallies, the suit claims, creating the false impression that the 80-year-old musician endorses the Republican standard-bearer.
Young’s lawyers describe the song in the filing as “a blistering anthem that contrasts the hollow promises of American political rhetoric with the harsh realities faced by the poor, homeless and forgotten.” They add, with characteristic bluntness: “The song is the opposite of everything that Donald J Trump stands for.”
The Citizenship Cloud
This isn’t merely a royalty dispute. Young, a dual citizen who has lived in the US for decades, has been vocal about the personal stakes. As recently as last year, he voiced fears that his outspoken criticism of the president could see him barred from re-entering the country after international touring. The lawsuit seeks an injunction against further public performance for political purposes alongside the $10 million (£7.5 million) in damages.
A Growing Chorus of Objection
Young is the most persistent plaintiff in a swelling class of artists who have turned to the courts — or the court of public opinion — to stop the Trump operation from soundtracking its events with their catalogues.
The White Stripes filed a federal suit in 2024 over the use of “Seven Nation Army” in a campaign advertisement; they later dropped it. Abba demanded the immediate takedown of clips from a St Cloud, Minnesota rally where several of their hits were played, complete with a projected image of the group — a nod to the state’s Swedish-American population.
Ariana Grande has objected twice in the past year. A Team Trump TikTok post set to “We Can’t Be Friends (Wait For Your Love)” was stripped of its audio after Grande commented: “Never use my music again. Also, your truth is false.” In June, she denounced a White House post promoting ICE arrests that used her song “Bye,” calling the video “barbaric, inhumane, heinous nonsense.”
Sabrina Carpenter followed in December 2025, labelling the use of “Juno” in an ICE arrest video “evil and disgusting.” A month earlier, Olivia Rodrigo condemned the Department of Homeland Security for deploying “All-American Bitch” in a video urging undocumented migrants to “self-deport,” writing: “Don’t ever use my songs to promote your racist, hateful propaganda.”
Why it Matters
The case tests whether a settlement with one corporate entity binds its successors — and whether political campaigns can treat music as disposable content rather than licensed intellectual property. For Young, it is also a battle over authorship: the right to decide what his work means, and who gets to claim it as their soundtrack. If the courts agree that a six-year-old promise still carries weight, every campaign operative in Washington will have to think twice before hitting play.
