Led Zeppelin lose Stairway lawsuit round 1

[duff beer]

Originally Posted by 815C

Both Spirit and Zeppelin ripped off Chim-Chimminee from Mary Poppins Pretty much the same chord progression.

You can't copyright a chord progression. For example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5pidokakU4I

[zabdart]

I think Led Zeppelin, for all their influence, really preyed on the ignorance of their audience... by that I mean that so many kids who really dug their music had not been exposed to enough blues singers and players to understand how shamelessly they were ripping off their sources. I know I didn't. IMO, their first album, despite being their most derivative, remains their best. They got progressively worse as the numbers climbed. Even so, there were a lot of bands out there during the late 60s and early 70s who were even worse who gained enormous followings. It's all a matter of what you've been exposed to, and during "the STONED age" we were to busy getting high to bother to check out musical sources.

[frankmcr]

As far as the "everybody does it" argument goes ... the Rolling Stones never claimed they wrote "Little Red Rooster", the Who never claimed they wrote "Summertime Blues", the Beatles never claimed they wrote "Roll Over Beethoven", et cetera... Zep does appear to have a history of claiming other artists' material as their own and then stonewalling unless forced to settle out of court (as with "Dazed & Confused").

[seannx]

Yep, but it would not be so easy and common, if it was not so easy here to find 12 people who get all warm and fuzzy about taking from the haves, and transferring it to the have less.

But this is what you said. How do you have confidence in our legal or civil process, given the above?

And I really don't understand how you arrived at this:

To me the big picture in the context of my original post is that I would require 12 of my peers to do the job required of them, which would be to ascertain the facts of the case and consider them in light of the applicable intellectual property laws, and to come to a dispassionate determination. Doesn't matter who has what - only matters who did what that was inappropriate under the law.
Now, what I think about IP law is a whole nother can of worms, and again we may or may not agree, and that imo is just reality that is addressed by the democratic legislative process.

So imo, that is the proper place to determine which of our divergent opinions will rule - not the jury box.

What place would that be?

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

As far as the "everybody does it" argument goes ... the Rolling Stones never claimed they wrote "Little Red Rooster", the Who never claimed they wrote "Summertime Blues", the Beatles never claimed they wrote "Roll Over Beethoven", et cetera... Zep does appear to have a history of claiming other artists' material as their own and then stonewalling unless forced to settle out of court (as with "Dazed & Confused").

These are not fair comparisons. When the Stones did Little Red Rooster and the Who Summertime Blues, they were doing pretty much straight copies. When/if Led Zep took ideas, they transformed them so much that the material became their own. If Led Zep copied so much stuff, how come they don't sound like all these people whose stuff they used? The reason is that they transformed ideas into something new, exciting, and quintessentially Led Zeppelin.

[duff beer]

Originally Posted by ewalling

These are not fair comparisons. When the Stones did Little Red Rooster and the Who Summertime Blues, they were doing pretty much straight copies. When/if Led Zep took ideas, they transformed them so much that the material became their own. If Led Zep copied so much stuff, how come they don't sound like all these people whose stuff they used? The reason is that they transformed ideas into something new, exciting, and quintessentially Led Zeppelin.

Plenty of other artists have also taken other songs and transformed them...Hendrix with Watchtower, Johnny Cash with Hurt, etc.

[frankmcr]

Originally Posted by duff beer

Plenty of other artists have also taken other songs and transformed them...Hendrix with Watchtower, Johnny Cash with Hurt, etc.

Perfect example. Hendrix transformed that song. Hendrix didn't claim authorship of the song (and the $$$ that goes along with authorship).

[ewalling]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

Perfect example. Hendrix transformed that song. Hendrix didn't claim authorship of the song (and the $$$ that goes along with authorship).

He took the whole song, though, didn't he? He played it differently, but he kept to the lyrics through to the end. If a person uses a riff, that seems a very different case to me. Using a whole song and using a part of a song are not the same thing. In 'Keep on Rockin' Me Baby' Steve Miller uses a riff very similar to the one in Free's 'All Right Now', but Miller doesn't call his song "All Right Now". In Jumpin Jack Flash, the Stones make a very small variation to the riff they used in Satisfaction, but they don't call the song 'Satisfaction II' or anything like that. That's partly because they didn't play the whole song by another artist; they used a part of one.

[mc1]

GW: How did "Babe" evolve?

Page: This is a good time to clear something up that I've really taken offense
to. There's a book written by our former road manager, Richard Cole
[Stairway to Heaven, HarperCollins Publishers] that has made me
completely ill. I'm so mad about it that I can't even bring myself to
read the whole thing. The two bits that I have read are so ridiculously
false, that Im sure if I read the rest I'd be able to sue Cole and the
publishers. But it would be so painful to read that it wouldn't be worth
it.

The one false story has to do with "Babe Im Gonna Leave You". The book
claims that when Robert came to my house to initially discuss the band,
I played him a recording of Joan Baez singing "Babe" and asked him, "Can
you imagine us playing something like this?" The book claims that Robert
picked up my guitar and started playing *ME* the arrangement that
eventually appeared on the album. Arrrghh! Can you believe that?

First of all, I had worked out the arrangement long before Robert came to
my house and secondly, Robert didn't even play the flippin' guitar in
those days!! Thirdly, I didn't ask him if he could imagine playing that
song, I TOLD him that I wanted to do it. And you can take that right to
the horse's mouth.


GW: When you were borrowing from classic blues songs on the first two albums,
did you ever think it would catch up to you?

Page: You mean getting sued? Well, as far as my end of it goes, I always tried
to bring some thing fresh to anything that I used. I always made sure to
come up with some variation. In fact, I think in most cases, you would
never know what the original source could be. Maybe not in every case
-- but in most cases. So most of the comparisons rest on the lyrics. And
Robert was supposed to change the lyrics, and he didn't always do that
-- which is what brought on most of the grief. They couldn't get us on
the guitar parts of the music, but they nailed us on the lyrics.

We did, however, take some liberties, I must say [laughs]. But never
mind; we did try to do the right thing, it blew up in our faces... When
we were up at Headley Grange recording Physical Graffiti, Ian Stewart
came by and we started to jam. The jam turned into Boogie With Stu, which
was obviously a variation on "Ooh My Head" by the late Ritchie Valens,
which itself was actually a variation of Little Richard's "Ooh My Soul".
What we tried to do was give Ritchie's mother credit because we heard
she never received any royalties from any of her son's hits, and Robert
did lean on that lyric a bit. So what happens? They tried to sue us for
all of the song!! We had to say bugger off. We could not believe it. So
anyway, if there is any plagiarism, just blame Robert [laughs].

But seriously, blues men borrowed from each other constantly, and it is
the same with jazz. It is even happened to us. As a musician, I am only
the product of my influences. The fact that I listened to so many various
styles of music has a lot to do with the way I play. Which I think set
me apart from so many other guitarists of that time -- the fact that I
was listening to fold, classical and indian music in addition to the
blues and rock.

http://www.iem.ac.ru/zeppelin/docs/i...ews/page_93.gw
.

[HHP]

I think Clarence White's estate needs a new attorney.

[Wengr]

Originally Posted by seannx

But this is what you said. How do you have confidence in our legal or civil process, given the above?

I don't have a lot of confidence in it. I have seen too many jurors vote based on improper and irrelevant bias. Imo Robin Hood sydrome is a common problem in civil cases.
One example - I have seen a local civil case where blame was pro rated between the parties, and an award of 15k made to the plaintiff. Afterwards, when the atty request to meet with the jurors, they both expressed surprise at the size of the award, with the plaintiff atty stating: "I came up from the Philly area to do this case. I expected between $150k - $250k, based on my experience there. Don't you understand that this money comes from the insurance company?"
It does not matter to me where the money comes from when determining who is at fault. It does not matter how much the parties have when determining if someone is at fault.

Originally Posted by seanxx

And I really don't understand how you arrived at this:

All that really means is that I think jurors should leave their personal bias and feel good redistribution impulses at the jury room door.

Originally Posted by seanxx

What place would that be?

The legislated process of the democratic republic, hopefully conducted in light of the founding principals.

[ras1500]

I got to see Spirit around 1970 at the University of Connecticut. They performed an excellent concert. I also had one of their albums in 8 track tape, but don't recall the album name. It is long since gone. I also got to see Led Zeppelin about 2 years later at the Yale Bowl...outstanding. As to whether Page ripped off riffs from other bands is inconsequential to me. I like his work.

[KevWind]

Originally Posted by duff beer

Plenty of other artists have also taken other songs and transformed them...Hendrix with Watchtower, Johnny Cash with Hurt, etc.

Originally Posted by frankmcr

Perfect example. Hendrix transformed that song. Hendrix didn't claim authorship of the song (and the $$$ that goes along with authorship).

Lets not muddy the waters, doing an accurately and legally credited "cover" no matter how individually interpreted, has absolutely nothing to do with the question of whether or not someone illegally lifted an uncredited melodic phrase, or simply having some similarities which happens all the time and is not illegal. The two are completely distinct.

[duff beer]

Originally Posted by ras1500

As to whether Page ripped off riffs from other bands is inconsequential to me. I like his work.

Have you ever had anything stolen from you? If so, were you okay with that?

[zabdart]

Originally Posted by frankmcr

As far as the "everybody does it" argument goes ... the Rolling Stones never claimed they wrote "Little Red Rooster", the Who never claimed they wrote "Summertime Blues", the Beatles never claimed they wrote "Roll Over Beethoven", et cetera... Zep does appear to have a history of claiming other artists' material as their own and then stonewalling unless forced to settle out of court (as with "Dazed & Confused").

Why do you think their publishing company was called "Superhype Music"?