Neil Young seeks $10m in second Trump copyright lawsuit

By Elena Vasquez

What is Young seeking from Trump?

Neil Young is seeking $10 million (£7.47 million) from Donald Trump’s political action committee, Trump 47 Committee Inc, in a second lawsuit alleging copyright infringement over “Rockin’ in the Free World.”

Young’s lawyers say Trump used the 1989 recording as walk-up music at recent midterm-election rallies.

Filed Monday in the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, the complaint seeks an injunction against any further public performances of the recording.

The Trump administration has not responded to the suit.

Takeaway: Young wants $10 million and a court order stopping further performances of the song.

What did the 2020 settlement promise?

Young first sued Donald J Trump for President Inc in 2020. Trump settled that case, according to Young’s current complaint.

According to Young’s suit, the corporation promised it “would never again use Rockin’ in the Free World without a license and permission from Young”.

Young’s lawyers say the renewed use has damaged his reputation and brand. The complaint also says the association with Trump implied that Young supported the president in any way.

Young’s lawyers describe the 1989 recording as diametrically opposed to Trump’s values and as a blistering anthem contrasting hollow political promises with the harsh realities faced by poor, homeless and forgotten people.

The complaint says the lyrics paint vivid street-level portraits: a mother discarding her baby, addicts lost in despair, and garbage piling in the shadows of prosperity. It says the repeated chorus delivers savage irony by celebrating freedom that is not shared by all.

The lawyers conclude that the song is the opposite of everything Donald J Trump stands for.

Takeaway: Young’s case rests on copyright infringement and the political association created by the rallies.

Which rallies are at issue?

Young’s lawyers cite the president’s rally in Ohio on 12 October. They say the song has played numerous times at other rallies designed to encourage Republican votes in the upcoming mid-term elections, extending the conduct beyond the Ohio appearance.

The suit seeks an injunction against further public performances, not only the $10 million claimed in damages.

Young’s anti-Trump position is also documented in repeated condemnations of the president on his website. In 2025, he released “Big Crime”, a protest song about the Trump administration.

“Don’t need no fascist rules / Don’t want no fascist schools / Don’t want soldiers walking on the streets,” Young sings.

“Got to get the fascists out / Got to clean the White House out … no more money to the fascists, the billionaire fascists.”

Takeaway: Young has tied his request for an injunction to specific rally dates and repeated use.

How does this fit the wider music fight?

Across the past 12 months, the Trump presidency has escalated a strategy of trolling leftwing musicians through the sustained use of their songs in political communications. The administration used songs by Olivia Rodrigo, Sabrina Carpenter and SZA to soundtrack ICE propaganda and clips about Trump’s strategy in Iran.

In August, Taylor Swift’s “August” was removed from a video celebrating the Trump presidency.

Young’s case extends that conflict from repeated unlicensed use to a direct request for judicial limits on campaign programming.

Takeaway: The dispute joins music licensing with a broader fight over how political campaigns use artists’ work.

The next legal test is whether the court grants an injunction against future performances, not only whether Young can collect $10 million.