Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...1314151617181920212223...LastNext
Current Page: 18 of 57
Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: roller99 ()
Date: June 24, 2016 06:35

Quote
35love
Quote
roller99
I was inside the courtroom today. Lawyers in Zep Trial Ramble On

Only partway thru reading (shouldn't have skipped ahead to see verdict!)
But just wanted to say:
Great writing roller99 thumbs up

Thank you very much 35!

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: roller99 ()
Date: June 24, 2016 06:38

Quote
mr_dja
Haven't followed the trial all that closely but would like to give a shout out to roller99 for a well written, entertaining article. Will you let us know here when you post "Part 2"?

Peace,
Mr DJA

Thanks Mr DJA. I finished part II and combined them.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: roller99 ()
Date: June 24, 2016 06:39

Quote
Hairball
I was thinking that because the jury deliberated for 5 hours might be because not all of them are on the same page (no pun intended).
Perhaps there is a lone wolf Zep hater siding with the plaintiffs. On the other hand, possibly a single die-hard Zep freak holding out for the defense.
If there is a hung jury, what happens next? Possibly a retrial?

ps - nice article roller. thumbs up

Thanks Hairball!

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Long John Stoner ()
Date: June 24, 2016 07:01

Quote
mr_dja
Quote
DeanGoodman
Quote
hopkins


Also I wonder how much the legal fees were for both parties, and how in the world could Wolfe's estate afford this? Are both parties responsible for only their own legal fees and/or court costs?

At $900 an hour, it must be pushing a million when all expenses are tallied up. I assume Malofiy was working on spec in hopes of a career-saving win. If he knew in advance that the jury would never get to hear the Taurus sound recording, why did he proceed and why is he crying victim now?

The estate doesn't even own the copyright, so probably blew its annual income on parking fees at the courthouse.

Jimmy and Robert paid dearly, though these things are relative. Maybe Atlantic chipped in as the owner of the recordings? I believe in England that the losing party is often obliged to pay the victor's costs; but that does not happen here.

Does anyone remember reading somewhere that Malofiy is actually also the trustee of the estate? Somehow I thought I saw that somewhere.

Peace,
Mr DJA

He's not. He represents the trustee, Michael Skidmore.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: jambay ()
Date: June 24, 2016 08:11

Quote
HomerSimpson
Let's see how their iTunes sales are next week. How much publicity are they getting out of this - particularly having won the lawsuit? Led Zeppelin, Robert Plant - Jimmy Page - their name is all over the news and has been all week - TV, radio, internet - And no publicity is bad publicity, right?
Right

"Don't care what they say about us, as long as they spell our name correctly"

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: onestep ()
Date: June 24, 2016 15:26

Quote
stanlove
Quote
onestep
Good .... Zeppelin created a great song that is played all over the world for decades, and they shouldn't have to share their composition with the estate of someone who has passed on, and never thought to bring suit against them in the first place.

What does any of this have to do with anything. And he did talk about suing them.

If they stole it they should have lost, if they didn't they should win. Its really simple.


The jury finds they didn't steal it, so they won...what logic the jury used to make that decision is not known at this time. I am pleased with the decision personally for the reasons stated above....if you don't agree with my reasoning, that's fine with me. I prefer to believe in the mystery of music and the blues roots of Led Zeppelin....so there...

If you would like to reply nah uh, I can reply uh uh all day long...which is sort of how this expensive litigation went. So pick up you rattle and go home...wait did I get that last idea from an obscure band named Fleetwood Mac???

I realize Mr. Love that you are merely pointing out what the legal part of the argument should be...but I truly feel that the entire case was a waste of time and money...that there are plenty of songs with similar chording that could merit such a suit and tie up courts forever. I think there should be a law against frivolous trials brought against defendants. If a lawyer or law group that files a suit, and if that said suit found to be frivolous, then that legal group, or lawyer should have severe sanctions, including losing the license to practice for a period of time...using language or action ambiguity to harm innocent parties should be criminal, especially if found by jury that someone didn't do what is charged. Some lawyers and legals mine society to steal cash from defendants. I guess that is why there are so many negative lawyer jokes.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LAWYER JOKES?

LAWYERS DON'T THINK THEY ARE FUNNY, AND PEOPLE DON'T THINK THEY ARE JOKES.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-06-24 15:35 by onestep.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: roller99 ()
Date: June 24, 2016 17:21

Quote
onestep
Quote
stanlove
Quote
onestep
Good .... Zeppelin created a great song that is played all over the world for decades, and they shouldn't have to share their composition with the estate of someone who has passed on, and never thought to bring suit against them in the first place.

What does any of this have to do with anything. And he did talk about suing them.

If they stole it they should have lost, if they didn't they should win. Its really simple.


The jury finds they didn't steal it, so they won...what logic the jury used to make that decision is not known at this time. I am pleased with the decision personally for the reasons stated above....if you don't agree with my reasoning, that's fine with me. I prefer to believe in the mystery of music and the blues roots of Led Zeppelin....so there...

If you would like to reply nah uh, I can reply uh uh all day long...which is sort of how this expensive litigation went. So pick up you rattle and go home...wait did I get that last idea from an obscure band named Fleetwood Mac???

I realize Mr. Love that you are merely pointing out what the legal part of the argument should be...but I truly feel that the entire case was a waste of time and money...that there are plenty of songs with similar chording that could merit such a suit and tie up courts forever. I think there should be a law against frivolous trials brought against defendants. If a lawyer or law group that files a suit, and if that said suit found to be frivolous, then that legal group, or lawyer should have severe sanctions, including losing the license to practice for a period of time...using language or action ambiguity to harm innocent parties should be criminal, especially if found by jury that someone didn't do what is charged. Some lawyers and legals mine society to steal cash from defendants. I guess that is why there are so many negative lawyer jokes.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LAWYER JOKES?

LAWYERS DON'T THINK THEY ARE FUNNY, AND PEOPLE DON'T THINK THEY ARE JOKES.

I tried to take a picture of Malofiy when I was down there, but my camera recoiled in terror.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: mr_dja ()
Date: June 24, 2016 17:27

Quote
Long John Stoner
Quote
mr_dja
Quote
DeanGoodman
Quote
hopkins


Also I wonder how much the legal fees were for both parties, and how in the world could Wolfe's estate afford this? Are both parties responsible for only their own legal fees and/or court costs?

At $900 an hour, it must be pushing a million when all expenses are tallied up. I assume Malofiy was working on spec in hopes of a career-saving win. If he knew in advance that the jury would never get to hear the Taurus sound recording, why did he proceed and why is he crying victim now?

The estate doesn't even own the copyright, so probably blew its annual income on parking fees at the courthouse.

Jimmy and Robert paid dearly, though these things are relative. Maybe Atlantic chipped in as the owner of the recordings? I believe in England that the losing party is often obliged to pay the victor's costs; but that does not happen here.

Does anyone remember reading somewhere that Malofiy is actually also the trustee of the estate? Somehow I thought I saw that somewhere.

Peace,
Mr DJA

He's not. He represents the trustee, Michael Skidmore.

Thanks for the clarification, LJS. My mistake/confusion.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: stanlove ()
Date: June 24, 2016 19:51

Quote
onestep
Quote
stanlove
Quote
onestep
Good .... Zeppelin created a great song that is played all over the world for decades, and they shouldn't have to share their composition with the estate of someone who has passed on, and never thought to bring suit against them in the first place.

What does any of this have to do with anything. And he did talk about suing them.

If they stole it they should have lost, if they didn't they should win. Its really simple.


The jury finds they didn't steal it, so they won...what logic the jury used to make that decision is not known at this time. I am pleased with the decision personally for the reasons stated above....if you don't agree with my reasoning, that's fine with me. I prefer to believe in the mystery of music and the blues roots of Led Zeppelin....so there...

If you would like to reply nah uh, I can reply uh uh all day long...which is sort of how this expensive litigation went. So pick up you rattle and go home...wait did I get that last idea from an obscure band named Fleetwood Mac???

I realize Mr. Love that you are merely pointing out what the legal part of the argument should be...but I truly feel that the entire case was a waste of time and money...that there are plenty of songs with similar chording that could merit such a suit and tie up courts forever. I think there should be a law against frivolous trials brought against defendants. If a lawyer or law group that files a suit, and if that said suit found to be frivolous, then that legal group, or lawyer should have severe sanctions, including losing the license to practice for a period of time...using language or action ambiguity to harm innocent parties should be criminal, especially if found by jury that someone didn't do what is charged. Some lawyers and legals mine society to steal cash from defendants. I guess that is why there are so many negative lawyer jokes.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LAWYER JOKES?

LAWYERS DON'T THINK THEY ARE FUNNY, AND PEOPLE DON'T THINK THEY ARE JOKES.

So there you have it. You don't think they stole it. Thats all that needs to be said or makes sense.

Wjat does your previous post of they created a song that is played all over thw world have to do with anything? Nothing. Thats my point. Unless you are making the case that if you are a successful and popular musician then you can take and steal anything you want.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: NICOS ()
Date: June 24, 2016 20:52

If this is not plagiarism........it make no sense to sue new plagiarism in the future..........

__________________________

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Wolfsbane ()
Date: June 24, 2016 21:48

Is this verdict subject to an appeal? Or is this the definitive end to it?

I'm a big Led Zeppelin fan, they were the soundtrack for high school and college for me, but the sheer number of material they lifted from other people boggles the mind that they thought they could get away with it.

It's always highly entertaining on Youtube to watch all the mewling rabid fanboys making excuses for their actions. In any case, they'll always be the world's greatest cover band.

In honor of all the bluesmen whose work crossed Plant and Page's turntables.

Woke up this morning,
turned my radio on to the greet the day
woke up this morning,
turned my radio on to greet the day
was then I found out Led Zeppelin
done stole my blues away
done stole my blues away



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-06-24 22:07 by Wolfsbane.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: June 24, 2016 23:59



THE AUSTRALIAN -- 25 June 2016



ROCKMAN

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: wonderboy ()
Date: June 25, 2016 00:13

Maybe the estate of some 10th Century English poet could sue Plant for stealing the lyrical ideas.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: June 25, 2016 00:34


Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: jambay ()
Date: June 25, 2016 01:32

Quote
wonderboy
Maybe the estate of some 10th Century English poet could sue Plant for stealing the lyrical ideas.
Yup

And the birds singing in the trees (the heirs of those birds) could sue that 10th Century English poet.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: onestep ()
Date: June 25, 2016 03:42

Quote
stanlove


So there you have it. You don't think they stole it. Thats all that needs to be said or makes sense.

Wjat does your previous post of they created a song that is played all over thw world have to do with anything? Nothing. Thats my point. Unless you are making the case that if you are a successful and popular musician then you can take and steal anything you want.

uh-uh

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: onestep ()
Date: June 25, 2016 03:47

Quote
roller99
Quote
onestep
Quote
stanlove
Quote
onestep
Good .... Zeppelin created a great song that is played all over the world for decades, and they shouldn't have to share their composition with the estate of someone who has passed on, and never thought to bring suit against them in the first place.

What does any of this have to do with anything. And he did talk about suing them.

If they stole it they should have lost, if they didn't they should win. Its really simple.


The jury finds they didn't steal it, so they won...what logic the jury used to make that decision is not known at this time. I am pleased with the decision personally for the reasons stated above....if you don't agree with my reasoning, that's fine with me. I prefer to believe in the mystery of music and the blues roots of Led Zeppelin....so there...

If you would like to reply nah uh, I can reply uh uh all day long...which is sort of how this expensive litigation went. So pick up you rattle and go home...wait did I get that last idea from an obscure band named Fleetwood Mac???

I realize Mr. Love that you are merely pointing out what the legal part of the argument should be...but I truly feel that the entire case was a waste of time and money...that there are plenty of songs with similar chording that could merit such a suit and tie up courts forever. I think there should be a law against frivolous trials brought against defendants. If a lawyer or law group that files a suit, and if that said suit found to be frivolous, then that legal group, or lawyer should have severe sanctions, including losing the license to practice for a period of time...using language or action ambiguity to harm innocent parties should be criminal, especially if found by jury that someone didn't do what is charged. Some lawyers and legals mine society to steal cash from defendants. I guess that is why there are so many negative lawyer jokes.

WHAT IS WRONG WITH LAWYER JOKES?

LAWYERS DON'T THINK THEY ARE FUNNY, AND PEOPLE DON'T THINK THEY ARE JOKES.

I tried to take a picture of Malofiy when I was down there, but my camera recoiled in terror.

No doubt....hopefully this is over for now, of course lawyers get paid no matter what...so he will gladly file an appeal....

HOW CAN YOU TELL WHEN A LAWYER IS LYING?

WHEN HIS LIPS MOVE.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: J.J.Flash ()
Date: June 25, 2016 04:41

well,that's one song they got! on a roll!

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: ab ()
Date: June 25, 2016 05:38

FYI: The Wolfe estate's lawyers would not get paid in this case if they took the case on contingency. If they were taking the case on contingency, they would have gotten a percentage (usually 25-33 per cent) of any settlement or jury award. But since they went to trial and lost, they'd get bupkis.

Zep's lawyers most certainly got paid. But Page and Plant are each worth nine figures; they can afford to pay for top-shelf legal talent.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Wry Cooter ()
Date: June 25, 2016 06:07

Much bigger Spirit fan than Led Zep here ("12 Dreams of Dr. Sardonicus" is more than a psych masterpiece, and there is greatness all over their 1st 3 records). I feel Zep in their heyday were bloated and disgusting (figure they're not so awful anymore) and I share Keith's dismissive musical summary. Just not for me. And as much as I would have liked some of Randy California's heirs to get some of that major bread, I think it is basically the right call. Rock and Roll is built on the appropriation of riffs and licks. Then you do something to make it your own. Short of egregious copying, I think you let it go.

However, their stated ignorance of the song "Taurus" and Spirit in general is utter horses*%t. They opened for Spirit. Page definitely had an eye on California, a great guitarist. Plant seems to be well versed in West Coast rock bands of that period, and Spirit was quite prominent back in the day.

Anyway, I hope this got some kids to go buy some Spirit albums.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-06-25 06:08 by Wry Cooter.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: RollingFreak ()
Date: June 25, 2016 06:45

I agree that Zep's assertions they barely knew who Spirit were was ridiculous. Not saying you gotta remember everyone that opened for you, but you're in the music business at that time. If Spirit has a fanbase, you know who Spirit is.

I also agree 12 Dreams Of Dr. Sardonicis is an incredible album. Maybe not better than my favorite Zep album, but Zep also never made something quite as masterful as 12 Dreams.

I don't believe Zep suck (I think they're great just too overplayed and forced down people's throats) and I don't believe Spirit deserved to win this case. But that was a dumb statement on Zep's part during the trial and if they were in any possible way being serious, they should go out and buy themselves 12 Dreams.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Wry Cooter ()
Date: June 25, 2016 06:52

Quote
RollingFreak
I agree that Zep's assertions they barely knew who Spirit were was ridiculous. Not saying you gotta remember everyone that opened for you, but you're in the music business at that time. If Spirit has a fanbase, you know who Spirit is.

I also agree 12 Dreams Of Dr. Sardonicis is an incredible album. Maybe not better than my favorite Zep album, but Zep also never made something quite as masterful as 12 Dreams.

I don't believe Zep suck (I think they're great just too overplayed and forced down people's throats) and I don't believe Spirit deserved to win this case. But that was a dumb statement on Zep's part during the trial and if they were in any possible way being serious, they should go out and buy themselves 12 Dreams.

My comments about Zep had more to do with their attitude and behavior (think mud shark) -- their musicianship is unquestioned. Not always my cup of tea but there is plenty there for me to dig. But yeah, not up 12 dreams for me.

Appreciate anyone who appreciates that album! Just one correction -- they opened for Spirit, not the other way around. What band isn't keeping an eye on the headliner?

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: 1cdog ()
Date: June 27, 2016 17:25

Glad Page/Plant beat it. IMO this case was BS all the way.

As I said earlier in this thread they (P/P) have left themselves vulnerable to this type of thing by clearly not giving credit where credit was due on a few songs in the past.

This though looked like a case of rank opportunism by a shady lawyer and cohorts.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: JohnnyBGoode ()
Date: July 7, 2016 20:13

Has anyone heard Train's cover album of Led Zeppelin II? Train is one of my guilty pleasures, haven't heard the album yet.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: nightskyman ()
Date: July 7, 2016 21:04

Maybe I should give Spirit's '12 Dreams of Dr. Sardonicis' a listen. With a title like that there's bound to be some surreal moments.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: 2000 LYFH ()
Date: July 7, 2016 21:29

Quote
JohnnyBGoode
Has anyone heard Train's cover album of Led Zeppelin II? Train is one of my guilty pleasures, haven't heard the album yet.

Always thought Pat Monahan should get together with Page/Jones and do something since Plant keeps saying NO...

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: Hairball ()
Date: July 9, 2016 04:56


Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: stanlove ()
Date: July 9, 2016 06:28

Quote
jambay



I would bet money right now that this is already a done deal. I would bet that rigged judge is going to rule the song was rip off and Page/Plant will have to pay 100 Million++ and eventually the judge will get his cut of the lawsuit money in a paper bag... probably 5-10 Million... and that will be BS.

.

Talk about a breakroom loudmouth moment.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: jambay ()
Date: July 9, 2016 07:37

Quote
stanlove
Quote
jambay



I would bet money right now that this is already a done deal. I would bet that rigged judge is going to rule the song was rip off and Page/Plant will have to pay 100 Million++ and eventually the judge will get his cut of the lawsuit money in a paper bag... probably 5-10 Million... and that will be BS.

.

Talk about a breakroom loudmouth moment.
Poor stanley, always crying out for attention.
Going back weeks looking for posts to troll? Really?

I would have bet, I said I would... you should taken it, but you are too much of a wimp.
Money up or stfu stanley. Ya got nuthin.

Re: OT: Led Zeppelin's Plagiarism
Posted by: JohnnyBGoode ()
Date: July 11, 2016 03:54

Anyone know which Page and Plant bootleg is the best? Thanks!

Goto Page: PreviousFirst...1314151617181920212223...LastNext
Current Page: 18 of 57


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1285
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home