While we're on the subject of litigating against rockers, I think we should sue bands for not playing our favorite songs. The bands my son and I went to see, Wilco and Sonic Youth, don't have hits. That's because their songs are not played on the radio. And that, in turn, is because, as the saying goes, radio sucks.
But both bands have recorded songs that their fans know, love, and expect to hear in concert. Wilco didn't perform "A Shot in the Arm" or that other one, I can never remember its name but, trust me, it's a big one as Wilco songs go.
It's possible, even likely, that Wilco didn't play these two songs precisely because the songs are so beloved. That would be a very alt thing to do. After all, bands constantly complain about having to play their timeworn hits. But Wilco's songs, follow me on the legal argument here, aren't hits. And written in the last few years, they certainly aren't timeworn. Not like, say, a Beatles or a Stones song. The Rolling Stones still play "Satisfaction" in concert. Paul McCartney plays "I Want To Hold Your Hand." I saw Chuck Berry last year and he played "Johnny B. Goode."
Ipso facto, it strikes me as entirely reasonable that fans could sue bands for not playing their favorite songs in concert.
If the Stones still play the hits, new bands should, too.
I rest my case.
On second thought, maybe I don't.