Len Cnut Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 4 hours ago, DieselDaisy said: Not in the slightest. The Beatles were perhaps the most innovative band in the history of popular music. Witness the bizarre chord changes, studio experimentation and lyrical innovation. Nobody else had their originality. You can sometimes detect their roots, but they are utilised in such an ingenious way, amalgamated with other influences, that their music is still profoundly original. Nobody was really doing things like, being essentially a rock band (this is their basis) yet combining rock with English music hall, psychedelia, Liverpudian humour and Hindustani classical. This is one album by The Beatles! Heck, I'm probably more a listener of The Stones these days yet I cannot deny that The Beatles were miles head in terms of songwriting. Yeah but if somethings changed beyond recognition i.e. You wouldve never sussed anything if the artists hadnt told ya thats something totally different to lifting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted April 13, 2016 Share Posted April 13, 2016 IMHO the difference is other muscians like the Beatles subtly were influenced by other musicians while Jimmy blatantly lifted major song structures . like I said he reworked others songs brilliantly but at least give them some writing credits and publishing money the cheap bastard......... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted April 15, 2016 Share Posted April 15, 2016 And that riff's been around for ages before Spirit too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted June 7, 2016 Share Posted June 7, 2016 wait for it... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 8, 2016 Share Posted June 8, 2016 The whole thing is dumb. If the music was all that why wasnt it a hit for for those guys? Ideas get passed around, they are acting like music people are living like monks. There's no order there. They leave ideas around, jam together. But Zepp took that music and made into a hit and toured it to make the whole thing successful. Then these losers come along and try to scab some money. It's the style and attitude that sell not a few generic chords. They should be embarrassed for themselves. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
axlslash Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 Case just ended, Zep win. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted June 23, 2016 Share Posted June 23, 2016 (edited) It was never in doubt. This baby is all theirs. Nobody else could've made it. Edited June 23, 2016 by moreblack 3 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 (edited) IMHO I still think Jimmy nicked that riff........It is not like it would have been the first time he was "inspired" by the work of others, yes?.... Interesting twist I heard on Sirius/ XM this past week is that jurists were not allowed to hear the actual recordings of the 2 songs but the case was based on a review of sheet music...wonder if the jury hearing the two songs would have changed the outcome.........also heard what swung the case in Zep's favour is the whole song was considered not just the opening riff.......... Edited June 26, 2016 by classicrawker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Towelie Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 What I don't get is this... I understand someone trying to steal something cuz it's the dogs bollocks, but everyone knows Stairway To Heaven is a pile of old shite. It's not that hard to compose a pile of old shite and be original, so why did Jimmy Page steal something just to make a crap song? I mean, couldn't he come up with a crap song all by himself? 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 26, 2016 Share Posted June 26, 2016 (edited) 13 hours ago, Towelie said: What I don't get is this... I understand someone trying to steal something cuz it's the dogs bollocks, but everyone knows Stairway To Heaven is a pile of old shite. It's not that hard to compose a pile of old shite and be original, so why did Jimmy Page steal something just to make a crap song? I mean, couldn't he come up with a crap song all by himself? I can understand if you hate it because it is played to death but from a song point of view it is hardly a pile of shite.............and it is easy to compose a pile of shite as is evidenced by today's music............ Edited June 27, 2016 by classicrawker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsh327 Posted June 28, 2016 Share Posted June 28, 2016 If Randy's estate won, GNR and others would have been sued. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Jay Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 Its a complicated thing, its all to do with money end of the day. I mean Zep have form regarding this shit i.e. the various blues artists they chiefed off but at the same time, prior to there being money in music, the blues was all about ripping itself off anyway, music was like a throwaway thing people played in bars and on street corners for pennies, in them days they all stole each off each other, its why you have so many folk songs that are the exact same thing musically just with different lyrics, often with the same vocal melodies and cadences, no one cared then. But it becomes a different thing when its a million dollar concern and you've basically gypped these old black whiskey-necks of their music and got a house in the stock broker belt and a Rolls Royce out of it. People in the 60s suddenly started considering popular music art and authorship became a thing and suddenly things started belonging to people that never did before. But Zep cant reasonably claim that as an excuse because they were well into the age of authorship when they decided that they wrote Willie Dixon songs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 17 minutes ago, Len B'stard said: Its a complicated thing, its all to do with money end of the day. I mean Zep have form regarding this shit i.e. the various blues artists they chiefed off but at the same time, prior to there being money in music, the blues was all about ripping itself off anyway, music was like a throwaway thing people played in bars and on street corners for pennies, in them days they all stole each off each other, its why you have so many folk songs that are the exact same thing musically just with different lyrics, often with the same vocal melodies and cadences, no one cared then. But it becomes a different thing when its a million dollar concern and you've basically gypped these old black whiskey-necks of their music and got a house in the stock broker belt and a Rolls Royce out of it. People in the 60s suddenly started considering popular music art and authorship became a thing and suddenly things started belonging to people that never did before. But Zep cant reasonably claim that as an excuse because they were well into the age of authorship when they decided that they wrote Willie Dixon songs. And every time Zep has paid someone for a music, it's been a melody or lyric, and this Stairway suit had neither. Just a progression, and those are much more difficult to get a result in the court room if you're the one suing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Len Cnut Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 10 hours ago, Silent Jay said: You smelly fuckin' metaller greasebag, how dare you steal off of Jimi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 29, 2016 Share Posted June 29, 2016 (edited) 12 hours ago, Silent Jay said: I have respect for Ritchie in that he makes no bones about "borrowing' inspiration from other artists while Jimmy "Leadwallet" Page will never admit he nicked others riffs even when he gets sued......... Edited June 29, 2016 by classicrawker 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Jay Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Spirit always chose the wrong direction, bad luck spirit bad luck. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Even if they nicked it, they made it successful. It's not about music really, style and hard work. Oasis look out! Just about every song is ripped off. Then Travis said their hit song was just Wonderwall chords backwards. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 8 hours ago, wasted said: Even if they nicked it, they made it successful. It's not about music really, style and hard work. Oasis look out! Just about every song is ripped off. Then Travis said their hit song was just Wonderwall chords backwards. Success has nothing to do with doing what is right. If you nick another artists work he deserves at least writing credit and a share of the publishing profits made from that success........... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 29 minutes ago, classicrawker said: Success has nothing to do with doing what is right. If you nick another artists work he deserves at least writing credit and a share of the publishing profits made from that success........... I see the success coming after they nicked it. If the music was so great why didn't Spirit have success with it? Who knows if that part of the whole song was even important to the success. If it was then you go have success with it. Fair enough calling them on it. Hey, you nicked my bike pump. But don't call the cops like a bitch. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 (edited) 2 hours ago, wasted said: I see the success coming after they nicked it. If the music was so great why didn't Spirit have success with it? Who knows if that part of the whole song was even important to the success. If it was then you go have success with it. Fair enough calling them on it. Hey, you nicked my bike pump. But don't call the cops like a bitch. Other musicians "called the cops" on Jimmy because he refused to acknowledge he stole their music. They had no choice in the matter..............Again it all comes down to Jimmy stealing other peoples work and not compensating them for it. Whether the original was successful or not has nothing to do with the fact that Jimmy has in the past, and very possibly in this case, stolen other peoples music and claimed it as his own. This is not the first time he has been hauled into court for nicking other peoples music and refusing to pay them for the privilege....... IMHO if you copy someone else's work and profit from it then you should compensate them for it...........that is why there are copyright and patent laws............. Edited June 30, 2016 by classicrawker Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Just now, classicrawker said: Again it all comes down to Jimmy stealing other peoples work and not compensating them for it. Whether the original was successful or not has nothing to do with the fact that Jimmy has in the past, and very possibly in this case, stolen other peoples music and claimed it as his own. IMHO if you copy someone elses work and profit from it then you should compensate them for it...........that is why there are copyright and patent laws............. What if you steal it and don't profit from it? Then they wouldn't bother. I'm sorry they didn't write Stairway to Heaven or work to make that song successful. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, wasted said: What if you steal it and don't profit from it? Then they wouldn't bother. I'm sorry they didn't write Stairway to Heaven or work to make that song successful. So based on your logic because money is involved the victim is guilty not the criminal.......... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 Just now, classicrawker said: So based on your logic because money is involved the victim is guilty not the criminal.......... I just question the integrity of their claim. And there's no way to prove he stole it. It's not impossible Jimmy just came up with the same phrase. But overall they didn't write Stairway to Heaven. When you just break it down into parts sure you can find parts that are the same. I heard one of Weiland's last album, it's some Nirvana riff like Lounge Act. Are they going to sue a dead man? Go next level. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
classicrawker Posted June 30, 2016 Share Posted June 30, 2016 2 minutes ago, wasted said: I just question the integrity of their claim. And there's no way to prove he stole it. It's not impossible Jimmy just came up with the same phrase. But overall they didn't write Stairway to Heaven. When you just break it down into parts sure you can find parts that are the same. I heard one of Weiland's last album, it's some Nirvana riff like Lounge Act. Are they going to sue a dead man? Go next level. Actually there evidently are ways to prove if someone nicked someone else's music as there have been numerous lawsuits to that effect and Jimmy has been sued in the past where he had to pay up. .Sure Jimmy could have come up with the riff but the fact that he has nicked other peoples music in the past and was forced to pay up and that Zep toured with Spirit before Stairway was written makes it very suspicious...........I agree California's estates claim is shaky due to the fact that it is only the opening riff but IMHO they sound suspiciously similar.....The fact that it was only the opening riff was one of the reasons California's estate claim failed...........whether that would entitle California's estate to compensation was questionable and the court decided there was no merit in the claim. I am guessing Weiland has an estate which will continue to get royalties after his death they could sue the dead mans estate if it can be proven music was stolen............ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.