The lead singer of James has condemned the use of the band’s hit “Sit Down” in a video promoting Tommy Robinson’s “Unite the Kingdom” rally in central London, saying the track was deployed without permission and in a way that contradicted the song’s meaning and the group’s values. Tim Booth said he was “disgusted” to see the track soundtracking images from the march and added that the band was examining its options, a signal that formal complaints may follow over copyright. “Disgusted to see the cynical use of ‘Sit Down’ by @TRobinsonNewEra. No permission was granted, and we are looking into our options. The song and most of our topical lyrics, make it very clear where we stand, and it’s the antithesis of this organization,” Booth wrote on X on Saturday afternoon as crowds were still gathered around Whitehall and Trafalgar Square.
The video in which the track appeared was posted by Robinson, whose real name is Stephen Yaxley-Lennon, and was compiled from aerial and ground footage highlighting the size of the demonstration he organised. The clip was captioned: “Britain is awake, we are no longer afraid, you will not take our right to free speech @Keir_Starmer WE WANT OUR COUNTRY BACK.” Robinson’s supporters circulated the montage widely across X and other platforms within hours of the rally. Booth’s message, posted in response, made clear the group had not licensed the music for that use.
The rally drew an exceptionally large turnout by recent UK standards, with the Metropolitan Police estimating attendance between 110,000 and 150,000 people. Officers said violence broke out as a segment of participants confronted cordons, leading to at least 25 arrests and injuries to 26 officers, including several described as serious. The force said more arrests were expected as investigators reviewed footage. The scale of the crowds forced spillover from Whitehall and Parliament Square onto nearby streets and bridges, according to a post-event statement by the Met.
Senior politicians condemned disorder at the event while emphasising the right to peaceful protest. Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Britain would not tolerate assaults on police or the intimidation of minorities, and vowed the national flag would not be surrendered to those seeking to use it as a symbol of division. The rally also drew scrutiny for rhetoric from the stage and the surrounding crowd, with police later appealing for help to identify a man recorded on video calling for Starmer to be “assassinated.” Officers said further inquiries were under way as they examined material gathered during the operation.
Robinson billed the day as a “festival of free speech,” with appearances by far-right figures and a video address by tech executive Elon Musk that prompted cross-party criticism. Reports from the scene and subsequent governmental comments described a heavy police deployment and the separation of Robinson’s supporters from a counter-protest numbering in the thousands. Officials said the Met would pursue individuals suspected of violent disorder as additional identifications are made.
For James, the dispute centres on the combination of a recorded track with visuals in an online video—use that typically requires a synchronisation licence. UK industry bodies and rights organisations describe sync licensing as distinct from blanket public-performance licences; it ordinarily involves direct permission from publishing rightsholders and, if a specific recording is used, the owners of the sound recording. Guidance published by PRS for Music and the Institute of Contemporary Music Performance says producers seeking to pair copyrighted music with moving images should clear sync rights before release, with fees and approval determined by the rightsholders. Booth’s post indicated that no such permission had been requested or granted.
The episode also touches on longstanding friction between artists and political figures over music use in public life. While venues and event organisers often hold blanket licences covering public performance, those licences do not generally authorise synchronising a track to video for distribution on social media. PRS guidance notes that sync permission is a case-by-case approval that can be refused for any reason, including concerns about context or implied association. Rights lawyers further note that an unlicensed sync can give rise to claims both from the musical composition’s owners and from the owners of the master recording, with remedies ranging from takedown to damages.
“Sit Down” is among James’s most recognisable songs and a staple of British popular music since the early 1990s. Originally released in 1989 on Rough Trade, the track was re-recorded and released in March 1991 by Fontana; it reached number two on the UK Singles Chart, spending three weeks in the runner-up spot behind Chesney Hawkes’s “The One and Only,” and became the year’s twentieth best-selling single in the UK. The song remains central to the band’s live shows and catalogue, and has been re-used over the decades in campaign and charity contexts with permission.
James, formed in Manchester in the early 1980s, continue to tour and release new music. In April 2024 the band secured its first Number 1 studio album with “Yummy,” topping the Official Albums Chart more than four decades into its career. That milestone followed earlier chart success with the 1998 compilation “The Best Of,” and underlined the group’s enduring audience across the UK. Booth, 65, remains the group’s frontman alongside founding member Jim Glennie and a rotating roster that has supported a recent run of arena and festival dates.
Booth’s statement framed “Sit Down” as the opposite of what he characterised as Robinson’s movement. He described the band’s “topical lyrics” and the song’s message as antithetical to the rally’s aims. In previous interviews about the track, band members have linked its appeal to a sense of community and consolation, themes they argue are inconsistent with messages that target minorities. The terminology in Booth’s post—“cynical use,” “no permission,” “antithesis”—highlighted both a legal objection and a broader disassociation from the politics on display at the march.
The Independent reported that the video posted by Robinson was composed of aerial shots emphasising the size of the crowd, set to “Sit Down” and published with a message aimed at the prime minister. The same report noted that James were “looking into” their options, language that often precedes formal takedown demands under platform policies or notices sent by rights administrators. Platforms hosting user-generated videos typically remove content upon receipt of a valid infringement notice from rightsholders, though videos can persist for hours or days depending on moderation processes and re-uploads.
The Guardian separately published details of Booth’s message and situated it in the wider events of the day, which included a stage on Whitehall, speeches from high-profile figures and a programme that continued after marching concluded. The paper cited arrests and officer injuries confirmed by the Met and described the demonstration as one of the largest of its kind in years. That context underscored why the unauthorised pairing of a familiar anthem to the rally imagery drew swift attention from both supporters and critics online.
Legal experts say that if an artist or label objects to a sync, the immediate steps usually involve contacting the uploader and the platform to request removal, followed by a cease-and-desist letter if necessary. If the content remains live or is reposted, rightsholders can escalate to formal claims for copyright infringement. PRS and its sister society MCPS outline that approvals for synchronisation sit with the work’s publishers and recording owners; blanket public-performance licences held by venues, broadcasters or organisers are not a substitute for sync clearance in online videos. Those distinctions help explain why artists who accept their music being played over loudspeakers at a public event may nonetheless object to their songs being integrated into promotional clips distributed on social media.
Robinson, a controversial figure in British public life since co-founding the English Defence League in 2009, has often positioned his events as challenges to mainstream media and political leaders. He has a record of clashes with law enforcement and the courts and recently re-emerged with large-scale demonstrations that have attracted backing from prominent online personalities. Saturday’s rally featured a remote appearance by Musk that provoked condemnation from across the political spectrum, with officials warning that confrontational rhetoric risked fuelling disorder. Police have since appealed for information to identify individuals seen attacking officers and committing other offences.
The confrontation over “Sit Down” adds to a list of recent disputes in which artists have publicly objected to their work being used to signal support for political causes they reject. In such cases, the immediate issue is copyright, but artists often frame objections in ethical terms as well, seeking to prevent what they regard as implied endorsement. Booth’s comments focused on both fronts, signalling that his band does not consent to the use and does not want the song associated with the movement showcased at the rally. Whether further action follows may depend on how platforms respond to takedown requests and whether any additional versions of the video continue to circulate.
By Sunday, newsrooms were tallying the scale of the march and the resulting disorder, citing Met statements on injuries and arrests. Ministers said those who assaulted police would “pay a price,” and the government repeated that peaceful protest is protected while violence is not. Against that backdrop, Booth’s intervention became one of several cultural flashpoints from the day, alongside debates over the propriety of Musk’s contribution and police appeals related to threatening speech caught on camera. The band’s position—an explicit refusal to allow its best-known song to serve as a soundtrack for the event—stood out for its clarity amid a politically charged aftermath.
James’s catalogue and profile help explain why the choice of track drew attention. “Sit Down,” which the band has performed at stadiums and festivals for decades, remains closely associated with mass sing-along moments; its 1991 chart run cemented the group’s shift from Manchester indie stalwarts to mainstream recognition. The band’s more recent Number 1 with “Yummy” demonstrated that its audience is intact, a factor likely to amplify reactions when its music appears in controversial contexts. For Booth, the episode became an occasion to restate where the band believes the song belongs—and where it does not.
As of Monday, neither James nor representatives for Robinson had announced any legal filing. Rights guidance suggests a typical sequence would begin with platform notices and private correspondence before any courtroom step. If a sync licence is sought after the fact, rightsholders can decline or negotiate terms; if no licence is offered and the content remains live, litigation is an available avenue, though it is often avoided if platforms comply with takedown requests. In the interim, Booth’s public message sets a clear record that the band does not authorise the use and regards the pairing of “Sit Down” with the march as fundamentally at odds with its intent.
The fallout from the weekend underscores the continuing intersection of politics, online platforms and music rights. A single familiar track attached to rally footage can carry symbolic weight beyond its runtime, particularly when the artist objects and moves to assert control. Whether this case ends with the removal of a clip or develops into a formal dispute, the core issues are settled in industry practice: synchronising a song to video requires permission, and the creators of “Sit Down” say they did not give it.
