I recently came across an article in my facebook newsfeed from Deathandtaxesmag about the band Skinny Puppy sending an invoice over to the US Government for usage of their music in the torture of inmates at Guantanmo Bay. At first I thought this was a joke, but then I thought about it, if people can get fined for using other peoples art without consent then why wouldn't this qualify right? I am not here to speak of whether or not I agree with practices at Guantanamo Bay or not but rather should they have to pay royalties to the band for using their music?
Artists really are an unprotected work group, they put out their art and many times it is used by others in ways that can not be controlled by them. Their brands are only worth what they are willing to sell it for, so to have someone use it , especially an entity without paying that amount is unfair to the artist. As a writer, I think every word I publish is a representation of my brand and to have someone use my words without my knowledge is at very least a form of theft. So in my opinion I would say yes, the US Government should pay them for the music, at least as much as a they would for any other item they use. A tool is a tool right and you have to pay for them if you plan on using them.
I'd love to hear what you think about this, it really is a volatile subject so please don't take this off topic, but try to focus the idea of the government and paying the artist for the rights to use it.