Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Surprised no-one has mentioned this: http://law.justia.co...04789/476306/27 Court has dismissed the Jake Holmes lawsuit against Jimmy Page. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Robert Anthony II Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 It hasn't hit the news wire yet, that's why. I had no idea until I saw this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Robert Anthony II Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 By the way, it looks like they reached a out of court settlement based on the language used in the legal document. Probably the biggest pay day Jake Holmes has seen in a while. And while I am much more of a Led Zeppelin fan than a Jake Holmes fan, good for him. Led Zeppelin has tons of money and Holmes had a solid case, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 This was back in January, yet Holmes has said nothing since then. If indeed he did win an out-of-court settlement it's surprising nothing has been published. This was big news when first filed, yet we have silence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 Just checked ASCAP. It still lists Jimmy Page as sole composer: http://www.ascap.com/ace/search.cfm?requesttimeout=300&mode=results&searchstr=340128276&search_in=i&search_type=exact&search_det=t,s,w,p,b,v&results_pp=20&start=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Little Robert Anthony II Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Jake Holmes agreed to the dismissal, which is why it sounded to me like there was a settlement. I could be wrong, but that is the language typically used when an out of court settlement is reached. It could be a cash settlement and not a songwriting credit, who knows? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 I haven't read all the details yet, but sometimes in these cases part of the settlement is that the parties can't talk about it. Maybe that's why Jake Holmes has been silent. By the way, I, too, feel this is one case where the band should have given credit to Jake...at least a co-credit. So I hope Jake got something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 Well there is one thing Holmes would have definitely received. A bill from his legal representative. Until either camp says something, it's all speculation. If Holmes was looking get sole credit or a co-credit, that looks like it didn't happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swandown Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 It looks like an out-of-court settlement was reached in November. But they failed to properly follow Rule 41 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (relating to the way voluntary dismissals are reported), which is why the judge issued this court order in January. I'm sure Holmes received a substantial settlement. It will be interesting to see if the ASCAP credit ever changes (it usually takes them a few months to revise a writing credit). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hecube Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 My take on it is that both parties agreed to settle out of court with Jimmy Page acknowledging there was a prejudice towards Mr. Holmes. It's possible there was a non-divulgation clause requested of Mr. Holmes and that Mr. Holmes agreed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swandown Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 When Anne Bredon settled over "Babe I'm Gonna Leave You", the paperwork included language that said "All parties agree that there was no malicious intent by anyone involved" (or words to that effect). I'm sure Holmes signed a similar agreement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FunkyPhantom Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 whatever, maybe Jimmy can move on to bigger and better things now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 My take on it is that both parties agreed to settle out of court with Jimmy Page acknowledging there was a prejudice towards Mr. Holmes. It's possible there was a non-divulgation clause requested of Mr. Holmes and that Mr. Holmes agreed. It doesn't say Jimmy Page acknowledged there was a prejudice towards Holmes. It does say however both parties agreed to dismiss the lawsuit, with the judge agreeing to dismiss it with prejudice because it wasn't properly dismissed in November. Legally a "dismissal with prejudice" means the plaintiff (ie. Holmes) is permanently barred from further litigating the same subject matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Bloggs Posted March 3, 2012 Author Share Posted March 3, 2012 It will be interesting to see if the ASCAP credit ever changes (it usually takes them a few months to revise a writing credit). I doubt that it will change. On the subject of writing credits, I mentioned this in a previous thread, in that "Whole Lotta Love" no longer lists Willie Dixon as a co-credit. It was dropped straight after Dixon changed music publishers. I suspect that a deal had been struck with his new music publishers and Superhype but no-one has been able to confirm it. Do you have any further information on this Scott? http://www.ascap.com/ace/search.cfm?requesttimeout=300&mode=results&searchstr=530162664&search_in=i&search_type=exact&search_det=t,s,w,p,b,v&results_pp=20&start=1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melcórë Posted March 3, 2012 Share Posted March 3, 2012 Holmes got a co-credit on Cumular Limit - which is probably why that CD was pulled very soon after it was released. Well done, Jake. And shame on JP for ripping him off in the first place. Why all the blame on Jimmy? Frankly, everybody who was in the Yardbirds should be culpable, and I've always read contradictory stories about who exactly copped the song originally. I think he's a bit of a jackoff, to be honest...he had to wait over forty years to file suit, eh? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 I can't really see this as a rip off. Originally the Yardbirds played the song with altered music and then Led Zeppelin with altered lyrics added to the altered music. I know it's still similiar and based off the Holmes song but I think that by the time it was recorded the Zep version was different enough from the original to not be a case of plagerism. A judge, other fans, or the artists themselves may see it differently but that's what I think. This is a very common thing in music just nobody seems to care unless it's with Led Zeppelin for some reason. Alice Cooper admitted that his song No More Mr. Nice Guy is an altered version of a song by The Who. He even told one of the members (Roger Daltery I think) and he didn't care. He still liked the song. The song is stilled credited to Alice Cooper and Michael Bruce. No one has sued anyone to my knowledge and no royalties are being payed. In fact, listen to No More Mr. Nice Guy and The Substitute and you'll hear the simliarity yourself. Of course if I was Jake Holmes I might want to sue also so I'm not judging his actions since I'm not in his shoes. I'm just glad it's resolved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahfin Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Whether you're a Todd Snider fan or not, this clip is still worth watching to see how he handled being ripped off by another songwriter. The song in question was "Beer Run" which was made famous by Garth Brooks. Robert Earl Keen took a similar tact when one of his songs was stolen by Toby Keith. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Hilarious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mudslider Posted March 4, 2012 Share Posted March 4, 2012 Like the Plantation at the 02 gig "Everyone nixs it" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperDave Posted March 9, 2012 Share Posted March 9, 2012 Glad this seems to be resolved. No media coverage really, so it seems to be an out of court settlement. You'll probably hear little if any from either side in the future. Fine with me! Just give me the music!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yeldd Posted July 25, 2012 Share Posted July 25, 2012 I have to say it must be awful when you are composer of a piece of music and it gets ripped off and becomes famous but the origins are unkown and it makes so much money and is lauded as a masterpiece. I would be pig sick, glad Mr Holmes got something at last even if his version is turgid, well maybe thats the wrong word and that Jimmy's is really amazing. Wrongs have to righted and surprises me the Mr Holmes has had a few bad mentions on here, he isn't in the wrong however bad the original is, its quite clear it originated from him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Melcórë Posted July 28, 2012 Share Posted July 28, 2012 I have to say it must be awful when you are composer of a piece of music and it gets ripped off and becomes famous but the origins are unkown and it makes so much money and is lauded as a masterpiece. I would be pig sick, glad Mr Holmes got something at last even if his version is turgid, well maybe thats the wrong word and that Jimmy's is really amazing. Wrongs have to righted and surprises me the Mr Holmes has had a few bad mentions on here, he isn't in the wrong however bad the original is, its quite clear it originated from him. When bluesmen plagiarize bluesmen, the excuse is always "you can only do so much with 12-bars." When Mozart plagiarizes Beethoven, it's called "quoting" and treated like a really cool reference! Whenever Led Zeppelin is caught plagiarizing, even if other people have plagiarized from the same song(s)? "Thieves of the highest order!" Holmes didn't give a rat's ass about his music being stolen - he was pissed because he didn't make money off his god-awful psychedelic folk. The chances are his case would have been thrown out to die in the street - you really waited over four decades to litigate, Mr. Holmes? - so, really, we should chalk this up to some form of charity from the management. Now, all of that's not to say that plagiarism wasn't involved - of course it was, you'd have to be a total idiot to claim otherwise, and, ultimately, I don't mind that the originator of the music got some recognition - but it really sticks in my guy whenever people get on Zeppelin's case and seem to happily forget about every other case of plagiarism, ever. I had an unbelieveable argument with some jackass on the internet who was claiming that Led Zeppelin stole "Whole Lotta' Love," not from Willie Dixon, but from The Small Faces - who actually completely plagiarized Willie Dixon with their "You Need Lovin'" three years before Zeppelin copped a few lyrics with their song. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Strider Posted July 30, 2012 Share Posted July 30, 2012 When bluesmen plagiarize bluesmen, the excuse is always "you can only do so much with 12-bars." When Mozart plagiarizes Beethoven, it's called "quoting" and treated like a really cool reference! Sorry, as a classical music fan I cannot let this slander stand. Mozart came before Beethoven. Mozart died in 1791, whereas Beethoven's first works weren't published until around 1793. Mozart most certainly did not "plagiarize" from Beethoven. From Hayden? Maybe...but not Ludwig van. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS Posted August 5, 2012 Share Posted August 5, 2012 I think the word plagiarism is thrown around to causally. I mean how on earth were John Fogerty and Jimmy Page both accused of plagiarizing themselves? It's like when you don't like a politician you accuse him of being DC. If you don't like a musician call him a plagiarist and someone will dig up something somewhere at some time that sounds vaguely familiar to something else somewhere else and there's your proof. And the Mozart-Beethoven thing is not the first time I've heard a musician accused of plagiarism against someone who hadn't even written music yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
super slinky Posted October 18, 2012 Share Posted October 18, 2012 i just saw "celebration day" in atlanta. jake holmes receives a credit (i believe it was for "inspiration") for "d+c." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.