Jump to content
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble
Slate Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate Marble

Recommended Posts

8 hours ago, Tea41 said:

The 2 are not even close, unless you need a hearing aid.  Real musicians like Rik Emmett explain why in this video, he plays both and explains how they are not even remotely similar. But you know more than Rik Emmett, right? Go to 2:38, and also 5:30 and learn something..

 

Yawn, if you say so..:beat: Who the f is Rick Emmett anyway.

EDIT,  I watched, what he actually said is "they are not the SAME" which they are not, they are SIMILAR =  {having a resemblance in appearance, character, or quantity, without being identical.} Oh and please don't tell me to (go and) learn something, thank you.

 
Edited by JTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/14/2018 at 12:57 AM, TheMadIrishman said:

. If you read the sheet music, Stairway is completely opposite to Taurus- one is an A minor ascending chord while the other is an descending chord. However if you listen to them, thay sound simular because of this one chord progression.

Both riffs have the exact same descending notes played with the exact same cadence, with a refrain in the same place at the end. However, Page added the ascending treble notes and the turnaround after the refrain. To me, this provides a significant enough change to avoid copyright. 

For a copyright lawsuit to hold ground, it can't just be similar, it has to be exact, which they are not. For some reason the "estate" felt cheated because the actual audio wasn't played. But if the sheet music doesn't match, then it's outside of a copyright issue anyway. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, sixpense said:

Would anyone expect anything less from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals? They have a history of ridiculous decisions. (And at least one Judge has "issues" that forced him to retire early)

No, nothing to do with Kavanaugh!  

There is no decision too stupid for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is such a waste of time. I really hope beyond playing the tracks themselves that someone is smart enough to play for the jury the plethora of examples of composers, who were alive long before the members of Spirit and Zeppelin, using chromatic phrases. Neither of these two groups "invented" chromaticism and cannot own the technique. They can use it to write songs but one cannot claim they stole it from the other because as some other people have stated on here they both "stole" it from the classical maestros before them. Its so crazy how this drags on because yes Spirit can bring in experts that can point out similarities but those experts, if thats what they really are, can cite examples of the use earlier, way earlier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a new development from NBC about Zeppelins Stairway to Heaven.

Led Zeppelin must go back on trial in a lawsuit that accuses the legendary rock band of ripping off the intro to its rock anthem "Stairway to Heaven" from a little-known 1960s instrumental, a federal appeals court ordered on Friday.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco overturned a 2016 jury verdict that found that the British band did not steal any original music from "Taurus," a 1968 track by the Los Angeles band Spirit.

Taurus" was written by the late Spirit guitarist Randy Wolfe, better known as Randy California, whose trust brought the copyright infringement lawsuit.

Michael Skidmore, the trustee for Wolfe, has said Led Zeppelin lead vocalist Robert Plant and guitarist Jimmy Page may have been inspired to write 1971's "Stairway" after hearing Spirit perform "Taurus" while the bands toured together in 1968 and 1969. Skidmore has claimed Wolfe never got any credit.

The defendants have said Wolfe was a songwriter for hire who did not have a copyright claim, and that the opening of "Stairway" — a descending chromatic four-chord progression — is a common musical convention that did not deserve copyright protection.

The jury in the 2016 trial found that the two songs were not substantially similar.

But the federal appeals court panel that overturned the 2016 ruling held that parts of the jury instructions in that trial were erroneous and prejudicial. The appeals court also found that the U.S. district court that decided the first trial abused its discretion by not allowing recordings of "Taurus" to be played during the proceedings.

 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, JTM said:

Yawn, if you say so..:beat: Who the f is Rick Emmett anyway.

EDIT,  I watched, what he actually said is "they are not the SAME" which they are not, they are SIMILAR =  {having a resemblance in appearance, character, or quantity, without being identical.} Oh and please don't tell me to (go and) learn something, thank you.

 

Rik Emmett is the famous guitarist, songwriter, and lead singer of Triumph, who has 18 gold and 9 platinum records, and is also a music professor at Humber College in Toronto, Ontario. But gee, but what does he know, right? And I'm not the only one who "says so", anyone with a brain and even remotely functioning ears can hear the vast differences in the 2 songs and riffs in about 5 seconds flat, the Emmett video lays it out clear. And btw, those goofy emoticons don't help you make your weak point.

Edited by Tea41

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Tea41 said:

Rik Emmett is the guitarist, songwriter, and lead singer of Triumph,  who has 18 gold and 9 platinum records, and is also a music professor at Humber College in Toronto, Ontario. But gee, but what does he know, right? And those goofy emoticons don't help make your weak point any stronger.

It seems that you don’t know what the word  “SIMILAR” means. Your guy in Triumph said they are not the “SAME” and yes he is right, but they are “SIMILAR “.

Edited by JTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of beating dead horses, hasn't the main issue here already been discussed many times during this drama:  the generic nature of the riff, Davey Graham, Bach, whomever, is completely irrelevant.  The claim is that Zeppelin was influenced by Spirit's rendition of that riff and failed to properly attribute.  Whether or not Zeppelin is liable or even vulnerable on that point (Page and Plant have been somewhat evasive when asked about their familiarity with Spirit's music), they are definitely at risk in a court trial.  This is not a good turn of events.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JTM said:

It seems that you don’t know what the word  “SIMILAR” means. Your guy in Triumph said they are not the “SAME” and yes he is right, but they are “SIMILAR “. 

I believe he said "It's NOT the same song"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Speaking of beating dead horses, hasn't the main issue here already been discussed many times during this drama:  the generic nature of the riff, Davey Graham, Bach, whomever, is completely irrelevant.  The claim is that Zeppelin was influenced by Spirit's rendition of that riff and failed to properly attribute.  Whether or not Zeppelin is liable or even vulnerable on that point (Page and Plant have been somewhat evasive when asked about their familiarity with Spirit's music), they are definitely at risk in a court trial.  This is not a good turn of events.

I don't think being "influenced" by something is grounds for a lawsuit, is it? I may be wrong, but there's got to be clear evidence of an exact copy being reproduced for copyright cases. That's why the judges only looked at the sheet music. Although the descending melody is the same, it's just not the same chording overall.

But this brings up an interesting question; If the Stairway riff is not considered a replica of Taurus, then what if someone played the Smoke On The Water riff, but added another descending melody on top of the riff, does that put it in the clear?

Edited by gibsonfan159

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, gibsonfan159 said:

I don't think being "influenced" by something is grounds for a lawsuit, is it? I may be wrong, but there's got to be clear evidence of an exact copy being reproduced for copyright cases. That's why the judges only looked at the sheet music. Although the descending melody is the same, it's just not the same chording overall.

But this brings up an interesting question; If the Stairway riff is not considered a replica of Taurus, then what if someone played the Smoke On The Water riff, but added another descending melody on top of the riff, does that put it in the clear?

Well, these days it seems anything can be the basis of a lawsuit, but my point is that the claim is that Page and Plant came up with the idea for the song after hearing Spirit play Taurus, so any discussions about Cry Me a River from 1957, etc. are irrelevant.  The evidence for such a link in this case is indeed weak, but you never know what a jury will do (esp. in America), and Page and Plant have not helped themselves with various public statements about their familiarity with Spirit and their music.  In your Smoke on the Water example, I'm guessing (not a lawyer, just speculating on the internet) that the person doing it would have to convince a claimant that they'd never heard the original song, which would simply not be believable to any jury.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You're both right....the first argument would be that Spirit’s combination of chords, arpeggios, notes played are not sufficiently original to warrant copyright protection, and/or that STH didn’t copy it....STH doesn’t have to copy the entire Spirit riff, arpeggios, melody etc, just whatever combination of notes was deemed sufficiently original and creative by Spirit (if any) to warrant protection....it may be only a portion of the descending chords but it does have to copy exactly what was “original” in Spirit’s piece....

and secondly, if it does copy what was “original,”is that accidental etc or because they borrowed from Spirit....

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Zeppelin loses this than the Beatles are fucked, the stones are fucked, and so is every goddamned musician who has written a song since 1960. Page has said and is on record as saying as early as 1969 that his biggest influences on acoustic guitar were Bert Jansch and DAVEY GRAHAM. and that Graham was the most underrated guitarist ever in that he influenced EVERYONE on the British music scene.

The question should not be if Zeppelin were influenced by Spirit, but was Spirit influenced by Graham? Or more accurately, why is anyone giving a good shit about a chromatic progression which Graham himself (a music expert) has said is public domain as it goes back to at least the 17th century.

What I truly find ironic is how, or rather why Randy California never brought the case in his lifetime but his estate waited over 40 years but yet the courts find this is worthy of merit. A man can claim a priest fondled him 40 years ago and he is a survivor, a hero who was abused by evil authority, yet a woman comes forward 36 years later regarding a sexual assault and she is obviously a liar. Too bad Spirit was not L7 or the Slits and their accuser either Donita Sparks or Ari Up for if that were the case, since they are women, they would have immediately been called liars and laughed out of court.

This whole case, or rather the whole of the judicial system is complete bullshit. What a joke!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The thing missed in all of this is the pub Taurus got and the money churned into their corner for this endevour. Im sure the profits are way up, no?!?. . I was a dj for 10 years . . heard music from the time I could crawl and got through 40 years without ever hearing a song, a lick, or even the name Taurus before all of this.  What a crock. .nothing ever truer than lawyers gotta eat. .lol  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, JohnOsbourne said:

Speaking of beating dead horses, hasn't the main issue here already been discussed many times during this drama:  the generic nature of the riff, Davey Graham, Bach, whomever, is completely irrelevant.  The claim is that Zeppelin was influenced by Spirit's rendition of that riff and failed to properly attribute.  Whether or not Zeppelin is liable or even vulnerable on that point (Page and Plant have been somewhat evasive when asked about their familiarity with Spirit's music), they are definitely at risk in a court trial.  This is not a good turn of events.

If that is your threshold, then the Rolling Stones, who copied not just a few notes but an entire Chuck Berry riff for the start of "Star Fucker" should be sued by Chuck Berry's estate. ZZ Top should be sued by Slim Harpo for "La Grange". And on and on.

Only the lawyers win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, IpMan said:

  A man can claim a priest fondled him 40 years ago and he is a survivor, a hero who was abused by evil authority, yet a woman comes forward 36 years later regarding a sexual assault and she is obviously a liar. 

Because a priest molesting a kid is a lot more believable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Strider said:

If that is your threshold, then the Rolling Stones, who copied not just a few notes but an entire Chuck Berry riff for the start of "Star Fucker" should be sued by Chuck Berry's estate. ZZ Top should be sued by Slim Harpo for "La Grange". And on and on.

Only the lawyers win.

And Chuck was only taking the boogie woogie piano phrase and applying it to guitar. Easily provable in court just by looking at sheet music. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, gibsonfan159 said:

Because a priest molesting a kid is a lot more believable. 

Really? I would think both, statistically speaking would hold equal merit, but the again I don't hate women and tend to trust people who come forward with nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, IpMan said:

Really? I would think both, statistically speaking would hold equal merit, but the again I don't hate women and tend to trust people who come forward with nothing to gain and everything to lose.

Sarcasm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, anniemouse said:

One of the vilest travesties of justice in music history and another chapter of the evil life of Allen Klein. Total bullshit case.

I fear Led Zeppelin will get hosed just as bad.

Edited by Strider

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.newyorker.com/culture/cultural-comment/the-unoriginal-originality-of-led-zeppelin

There's definitely been some bad rulings due to the broad, vague and confusing nature of the copyright laws as they pertain to music....LZ I think has a better case than Blurred Lines, for example...

This was a very good article written around the time of the first jury....

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...