Returning to a subject I touched upon before, I note that Atlantic writer Josh Green has a lengthy faux apology to Rand Paul for being the catalyst that got rock band Rush to seek legal action barring Paul from using their music. The crux of it is that Green blogged about Paul using Rush’s music during campaign events, and Rush got pissed. Things are further complicated by the fact that Rush is Paul’s favorite band, and Rush are known libertarians, like Paul.

I find myself questioning Rush’s actions here. If any politician plays the music of any band at his or her campaign appearances, does that suggest that the band is endorsing the politician? Not to anyone who isn’t completely retarded. Secondly, can’t Paul, or any politician, play whatever music they want at what is essentially a public gathering? Is Rush going to come after me if I play “The Spirit of Radio” at my neighborhood barbecue?

The answer to the above two questions is probably, “no” which points to the vagaries surrounding intellectual property rights related to music in the modern world. Campaign events are no doubt regulated under some strange series of laws that prevent unauthorized music from being played. But in a larger, more moral sense, libertarianism basically stands for freedom — freedom to do what you want short of physically or egregiously mentally damaging someone. Is Rand harming Rush by playing their music? I think not. In this sense, Rush’s actions strike me as anti-libertarian. And their eagerness to turn to the tools of governments to impose their will makes them seem bitchy.

If Rand Paul (or his opponent) want to use any of the songs from my hit album “Shadey’s Jukebox,” feel free. They’re much better than last four or five Rush albums anyway.