I can't help agreeing with the other posters that suggest broadcasters and streaming services just remove pre-1972 music from their playlists if copyright fee hunters start making good in their threats to file claims and reverse how the pre-72 rule has been interpreted for decades.
Musicians depend on distribution more than anything else. That's what put the recording industry's attorneys and businessmen at the top of the food chain in music. Even though they didn't create the music themselves.
Today's musician depends on search engines and streaming. If some misguided individuals become too intent on reversing the clock, let them do without. After a (small) initial outcry from the listening public, their songs will rapidly fade into a well-deserved oblivion.
Being a child of that era, and therefore a fan of that sort of music, I'll miss it. But not too much or for too long. Because any time somebody tells me "Take it or leave it - and we need you answer now!" my first, last, and final answer will always be: "No."
"It's not a code per se. More what you'd call guidelines."
I may have misheard, but didn't a woman working for the French press recently remind everybody that France does not have the legal equivalent of the U.S. First Amendment? Something about how "free speech" in France was a general understanding rather than a right protected under French law...
What's going to be even funnier is the US response to the warrants that are bound to be issued by the International Court for war crimes and "crimes against humanity."
At the very least they'll ruin Dick Cheney's whole day. And that can only be a good thing even though nobody of any importance will ever stand trial as long as the US government can do anything to prevent it.
I find it ironic that the complaint motivating Target and Walmart to pull it was initiated by three people who were offended because of the violence they experienced in real life while engaged in what is also considered by many to be an immoral and/or criminal activity.