A Pentagon video promoting drone expansion under the Trump administration was removed from social media after a copyright complaint over the use of a Metallica song.
According to Rolling Stone, the video, presented by Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, featured the song “Enter Sandman” without permission, prompting a takedown at the request of platform X and further highlighting the longstanding friction between Metallica and unauthorized political use of their music.
Last week, the Pentagon published a video showcasing a renewed effort to increase drone manufacturing and deployment as part of the military’s modernization efforts. The video was hosted by Pete Hegseth, a former Fox News commentator who now serves as Secretary of Defense under President Donald Trump. In the clip, Hegseth discussed presidential actions aimed at elevating the U.S. drone industry. “We were brought here to rebuild the military,” Hegseth said in the initial video. “Match capabilities to the threats of today.” As he explained the administration’s strategy, a quadcopter drone delivered a document to his desk—a dramatized illustration of a memo signaling a shift in U.S. drone policy.
The video featured Metallica’s well-known track “Enter Sandman” playing in the background. According to the band’s spokesperson, Metallica never authorized the song’s use in the Pentagon video. This prompted X, formerly known as Twitter, to contact the Department of Defense about a potential copyright violation.
Metallica Objects to Political Use Once Again
Responding to the copyright alert, Pentagon Press Secretary Kingsley Wilson confirmed the agency acted promptly. “This afternoon,” Wilson stated, “representatives from X reached out to DoD regarding a video posted to our social media page and asked that the video be removed due to a copyright issue with the song ‘Enter Sandman’ by Metallica.” The Defense Department took down the video and then reposted it without music. The incident stirred renewed discussion about the political use of music without proper consent and Metallica’s ongoing objection to such practices. This is not the first time the band’s music has been associated with U.S. military operations or political messaging.
Metallica’s discomfort with their music being used in military or political settings dates back to the early 2000s. During the Iraq War, their music was played during interrogations, a detail later revealed by a Navy SEAL who participated in such operations. According to him, the band requested that their music no longer be used in connection with violent acts.
Past Parades and Cease-and-Desist Cases
The controversy over “Enter Sandman” follows earlier disputes between musicians and the Trump administration. An instrumental version of the track was played at a recent military parade led by President Trump. Fans criticized the decision, and this backlash came alongside other cease-and-desist disputes aimed at the administration for unauthorized music use. Organizers of the same parade allegedly received legal threats concerning another song—“He Ain’t Heavy, He’s My Brother”—after using it in defiance of prior warnings. More than 40 musical acts have gone on record objecting to President Trump’s use of their material, highlighting the recurring nature of this tension.
Drummer Lars Ulrich commented in 2016 that while he found some uses of Metallica’s recordings troubling, the band loses control once the music is distributed worldwide. Speaking with Vulture, he admitted that he was often asked about the military using their songs improperly, but stressed that once the songs are delivered publicly, they drift out of the band’s grasp.
Mixed Reactions From Band Members on Politics
Despite the band’s popularity, its members have shown a variety of perspectives on politics and their role in shaping public opinion. In a Danish interview, Ulrich expressed hesitation about taking firm political stances in the U.S. because he is not a citizen, even though he pays taxes stateside. “It's not for me to say,” he noted, referencing whether musicians should publicly oppose leaders like Trump.
Metallica’s lead guitarist, Kirk Hammett, on the other hand, was vocally critical during Trump’s first term. He posted on social media comparing Trump’s nationalist rhetoric to political messaging from Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia in the mid-20th century. Hammett emphasized the importance of resisting threats to democratic values. “If we don't put up a fight,” he wrote online, “we risk losing our rights.” His remarks echoed concerns from many artists who have argued that the use—or misuse—of their work in political contexts distorts its original intent and association.
Video Reupload Reflects Ongoing Content Hurdles
Hegseth remains a central figure in the military's modern messaging. Standing beside a large American flag and a military drone model in the removed video, Hegseth emphasized Trump's June executive order intended to elevate the American drone sector. “Not anymore,” he said, arguing that bureaucratic red tape had slowed innovation for years prior.
The administration has made drone technology a centerpiece of its national defense agenda. During Trump’s first term, there was a notable increase in drone strikes overseas, continuing a trend of relying on unmanned aerial vehicles to conduct military operations. In the corrected version of the Pentagon’s video, the message remained the same, though the soundtrack was removed entirely. The Department of Defense has not indicated whether they will face any ongoing legal challenge for the original version, nor have they commented on any future use of popular music in official productions.
Music Copyright Remains Key Legal Question
This latest episode serves as another example of the legal and ethical problems that arise when government entities use popular music in promotional content. Despite technology making it easy to pair visuals with high-profile soundtracks, failing to obtain the proper permissions puts agencies—and by extension, taxpayers—at risk for litigation. Though the music industry has seen many copyright disputes over digital platforms and remixes, the political use of songs often triggers heightened scrutiny due to the implications for artists’ reputations. Unauthorized music use by governments and political campaigns remains a persistent flashpoint.
As the debate continues over the intersection between art and politics, the Pentagon's reupload without Metallica’s music underscores the high stakes involved in content strategy, especially when national defense and cultural influence become intertwined.
