The "Stairway" Plagiarism Lawsuit

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 23 Jun 2016 4:07 am

Yes, when I first heard the intro to the Dolly Parton song I thought I was hearing a cover of Stairway to Heaven! Same counterpoint.

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 23 Jun 2016 4:42 am

Actually, I wrote this. It was originally called Steinway to Heaven. I don't know where Jimmy Page heard it.

If it's only a progression, the case seems clear-cut. Blue Skies has a melody; also My Funny Valentine and Chim Chim Cheree.
I don't hear much melody in either of the affected pieces. I hope the jury doesn't have to pause to decide what a melody is.

It's a big deal. Made it to the evening national news. There must be a lot old rockers out here.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 23 Jun 2016 5:45 am

Yes, it's a big deal because if the plaintiff wins, songwriters and bands will be extremely cautious in the future. There will be more "fishing expedition" lawsuits from greedy grifters. In this case, the song has earned $500 million. Even a small cut of that would be a lot of money.

Barry Blackwood · Post by **Barry Blackwood** » 23 Jun 2016 7:52 am

The latest?
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national ... story.html

Mark Eaton · Post by **Mark Eaton** » 23 Jun 2016 8:31 am

Don't the musicologists and armchair lawyers here think that the Trust for Randy California presented something more than just the chord progression and arpeggios?

If it were that cut-and-dried for a judgment in favor of the defense, the case might have spent all of one or two days in court and been water under the bridge by now.

There has to be something more to it. Until the judgement comes out otherwise - I'm going to give the attorney representing Randy's Trust, and the participation of Mark Andes some credit for having a modicum of intelligence.

Jeff Garden · Post by **Jeff Garden** » 23 Jun 2016 9:50 am

***News flash*** Looks like the jury went with Led Zep
http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/20 ... eaven.html

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 23 Jun 2016 9:53 am

Mark Eaton wrote:Don't the musicologists and armchair lawyers here think that the Trust for Randy California presented something more than just the chord progression and arpeggios?

What else could the Trust for Randy California present, beside that and the alleged fact (has it been established?) that at some point Led Zeppelin and Spirit toured together?

Parenthetically, I must say I find Page and Plant's denials of any knowledge of "Taurus" disappointingly (and gratuitously) disingenuous. Come on--Page has the album in his collection but "never listened to it"? But he admits Zep played a cover of "Fresh Garbage" in concert?

Personally, I prefer Spirit's music to Led Zeppelin's. In an ideal universe, the two bands' financial rewards would not be so disproportionate.

Nevertheless, I am glad the jury could understand that a few shared bars of chord progression in otherwise very dissimilar compositions don't entitle anyone to a share of someone else's earnings.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 23 Jun 2016 10:13 am

It's over. The relatives will have to keep their jobs.

Earnest Bovine · Post by **Earnest Bovine** » 23 Jun 2016 11:03 am

Brint Hannay wrote: Come on--Page has the album in his collection but "never listened to it"?

That is believable if you believe his claim that he had 10,000 records in his collection, which could certainly be true.

But it is irrelevant. Infringement can occur even if no one has ever heard the copyrighted material.

Brint Hannay · Post by **Brint Hannay** » 23 Jun 2016 12:08 pm

Sure, I can imagine him going into Tower Records and buying a pile of new releases and never getting around to listening to them all.

But then there's the fact that, by his own account, Led Zeppelin performed Fresh Garbage onstage. IF Wikipedia is correct, Fresh Garbage was not released as a single. I suppose Zep could have heard the song on the radio and liked it enough to learn the song from the album (not Page's copy?), but Jimmy at least had no interest in hearing what else was on the album. Not what I'd do, but who knows?

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 25 Jun 2016 3:24 pm

The plaintiff's lawyer was complaining on CNN today... he says the jury was not allowed to hear the recordings, just heard the testimony of experts based on the sheet music. And a guitarist came into court and played both patterns. It sounds like the plaintiff might appeal based on judicial error. He said that both recordings needed to be heard, both riffs in context. Good luck with that.
A lot of people are surprised at the outcome of the case when they hear both riffs, one after the other, played by the media... but what the media does Not point out is that the pattern is public domain and is a very small part of the two songs. The other 98% of the two songs is completely different.

scott murray · Post by **scott murray** » 1 Jul 2016 12:09 pm

this reminds me a bit of the Keith Jarrett vs. Steely Dan case, in which Garrett was awarded co-writing and compensation for their song Gaucho supposedly plagiarising his Long As You Know You're Living Yours.

the songs themselves are not similar aside from a I-IV vamp on the intro with a prominent tenor sax played in the same key but Garrett still won the case. pretty ridiculous.

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 1 Jul 2016 12:26 pm

You'd think Jarrett would have been happy with the tribute, but no....

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 1 Jul 2016 12:30 pm

I guess a jury of non-musicians can be swayed one way or another by a convincing a lawyer and his "expert" witnesses.

Dustin Rigsby · Post by **Dustin Rigsby** » 5 Jul 2016 4:59 am

There's only so many lyrical ideas,chord progressions, and melodies to go around. These plagiarism suits is one of the reasons I quit writing. Anyone can claim that you lifted their song. That (censored)Tom Petty threatened to sue the writers of a Sam Smith song a couple of years ago and got a writers credit for song that had the same melody in the chorus as his song "won't back down" . It sets a bad precedent, because a highly paid, low rent Dylan impersonator can sue you over a melody ! Won't back down is about as unique as an old converse sneaker. That's the equivalent of AC/DC suing every rock band over the use of an A5 power chord, or the Hank Williams Estate suing every country writer to ever write a song after Hank Sr.'s death......

Joachim Kettner · Post by **Joachim Kettner** » 5 Jul 2016 5:13 am

Ah Dustin, you once reminded me once of the Forum rules, and now you're calling people names?

Dustin Rigsby · Post by **Dustin Rigsby** » 5 Jul 2016 12:40 pm

Yeah, but it's not another forum member and it's not about politics nor religion. Tom Petty is a public figure, and could care less what I think of him. I have noticed that the forum mods have become lax on curse words as well....but....

Charlie McDonald · Post by **Charlie McDonald** » 5 Jul 2016 1:11 pm

Dustin Rigsby wrote:I have noticed that the forum mods have become lax on curse words as well....but....

That's the sorriest excuse I ever read.

Dustin Rigsby · Post by **Dustin Rigsby** » 5 Jul 2016 6:39 pm

Which part Charlie ? I censored the offending word, it wasn't even a curse word. Tom Petty's feelings weren't hurt....

Jamie Howze · Post by **Jamie Howze** » 5 Jul 2016 10:41 pm

I just noticed this thread. Mike Neer asked who Spirit ripped off. When I relistened to Spirit's "Taurus" it sounded a lot more like the walk down in The Tropics "Time" than Stairway. "Time" was quite a popular regional song in Florida during the mid 60's. Many, many garage bands also covered it. I can't imagine Randy hadn't heard the song.

I was a fan of Spirit and Kapt Kopter and the (Fabulous) Twirly Birds as well but I'm glad for the ruling.

Doug Beaumier · Post by **Doug Beaumier** » 6 Jul 2016 6:11 am

Yep, there it is again. It's a common pattern. It's also in "Summer Rain" by Johnny Rivers, "Set Me Free" by the Kinks, "Chim Chim Cher-ee" from Mary Poppins, "Blue Skies", and a lot of other songs. The jury understood that and did the right thing. I just wish the media would report the full story instead of playing six second clips of the riffs and saying they are surprised by the outcome of the case. They don't explain why the case was decided the way it was and that the two songs are completely different other than those six second riffs. The media is more concerned with sensationalism and info-tainment than details and analysis.