Did Led Zeppelin Steal Their Music?
Vložit
- čas přidán 1. 06. 2024
- For a limited time (now through April 30, 2023), Skillshare is offering 40% off your first year of membership. One of their best offers out there! skl.sh/polyphonic40
Watch this video ad-free on Nebula: nebula.app/videos/polyphonic-...
If you think this video was worth $3 - ko-fi.com/polyphonic
Merchandise: standard.tv/collections/polyp...
TikTok: / watchpolyphonic
Twitter: / watchpolyphonic
Join the Polyphonic Discord: / discord
Or get started with Skillshare today at: skl.sh/polyphonic04236
Theme Music by Pracs: / pracs
Zeppelin's Inspirations Playlist: open.spotify.com/playlist/79Q...
Everything is a Remix: www.everythingisaremix.info/ - Hudba
"Sure we shouldn't change this up a bit then Jimmy?". "No lads, the songs remains the same".
i love you
LMAOOO
Hahahahahaha
Thank you for this comment
i much prefer Zep to the Stones as a band, but hearing tales of Keif going on trips to find original artists to actually pay them, to record with them, to just talk to them... awesome.
Yeah, I love Zeppelin, but they could have still reached out to include songwriting credits where they were due. They did write most of their own music, but mostly it was Plant singing other blues lines that ended up with all those plagiarism claims.
The stones stole their fare share of music. Lots of uncredited Ry cooder on let it bleed and he was far from the only person they ripped off . Maybe keef had a guilty conscience
@@adamwatson6916 is ‘keef’ Keith Richards? Lol
@@jordan11752 yes that’s how people from south England pronounce ‘th’
That’s cuz keef is a real fan. Or at least fan first artist second
HEADS UP FOR EVERYONE - PLEASE WATCH THE WHOLE VIDEO
Do not dislike then leave halfway through. Wait for points to be covered in the video first.
It's one of those "He had us in the first half - not gonna lie" types.
Well… his next video is going to be dedicated to that “thing” that made people want to click out of this video.
I don’t think the kind of idiots that tend to dislike a video on the basis of half of said video’s commentary, when it has been bringing up new things to discuss every minute and clearly will continue to do so, are going to be convinced otherwise.
Some people are just close-minded, and the concept of “point, counterpoint, point counterpoint, conclusion” is lost on them.
It’s clickbait, that’s what it is.
@@mrjohnson281able
In what way? Just curious
@@mrjohnson281able not what clickbait means
A business triangle even in music, but watch out touching on anything Zep on this site is like inviting a horror copyright story to happen to your channel.
The "Tea for One" joke got a knowing LoL from me.
Yeah, this was very interesting. I've been a Zeppelin fan for a very long time now and this issue has always stuck in my craw about them. This breaks things down in ways I've never seen before and illustrates just how complicated an issue this really is. Very much looking forward to the follow up. 👏👏
@@c.a.mproductions9214 whats the worst thing they did?
@Paris Newton Guess the black blues artists who did the same are equally as repugnant to you. Perhaps more so since they didn’t even manage to do so successfully. :P
@@williamhenning4700 this is a very bad take lol
@Paris Newton they made them much better as well. Fuckin deal with it
@@freelance_commie he’s right tho
Honestly, I hope Polyphonic makes a good livin off of these videos. Amazing work
15:30 To classify members of Led Zeppelin (or any other British rock band from the early 60s to late 70s) as “middle-class white kids” is a bit misleading. A lot of these British musicians came from the gutters. They were a part of low British society and they were extremely poor- this is probably WHY the sorrowing and painful blues music of African Americans resonated so strongly with them.
I think Tommy Iommi makes that list as well from what he said on the Gibson Interview
But you have to cram race into it, am I right?
@@juarka2 he didnt cram race , its part of the idea. It needed to be mentioned
@@juarka2 Wow, it's almost like race affects the lives of billions of people every day. I'm being sarcastic, but you're obviously one of those lobotomites that think racism ended after the "I have a dream" speech.
Yeah, Page got into guitar because he found one left behind in the house he moved into as a kid, I’m not sure he could have bought one. He used that to become a well known and well paid studio musician, but he left that because it was stifling his creativity.
Zep fan level: nearly shit my pants with the Tea For One joke. Awesome video, it's nice to put your idols in check for their actions. Makes you see there are humans on top of that pedestal and keeps you from being that mindless fan that acts as if those idols can say or do no wrong. Again, great work
Fav song
He said it so nonchalantly I thought he straight up didn't know what he was saying lmao
I shitted and came everywhere. zep level fan
@@robertinogochev3682 I think that just makes you a Robertino Gochev level fan. :P
Lmao accurate
I got into a pretty heated discussion about this recently with a friend of mine who is a mega Led Zep fan. This video does a great job of presenting both sides and provoking thought. Great work.
I'm a mega fan myself so I hated when people lie to themselves about Zep not stealing music and everything else. I understand defending some songs because they might sound similar, but have different notes. It makes people who say they steal look dishonest, but certain songs like Dazed And Confused are definitely stolen. You can't separate a lot of what they done with the music they made either (Sick Again for the things about groupies, Nobody's Fault for drug addiction, Misty Mountain Hop for police raids for weed, etc) what is important is informing people and learning from it to make better music and better musical experiences. Like Sick Again is musically awesome except for maybe the solo, and the lyrics are disgusting knowing that all of the band members are ped0s.
@@bassplayer8815 So how can it be considered "theft" when most of those songs don't have an original author?
Most English bands gave credit (including on albums) to their blues musician legends. Zeppelin didn’t. End of!
@@VegetabIeMan Exactly
@@yeehaw3792 they made millions from the work of poor black blues artists
Also, about the Taurus legal issues: The guy who wrote the Taurus song never said they stole it from him and never pursued legal action. When he died, his family started saying that Zeppelin ripped him off.
This is incorrect. While Randy didn't sue Led Zeppelin over it, and he didn't talk about it much, he actually did comment on it in one of his last interviews, and his stance is quite clear:
_Well, if you listen to the two songs, you can make your own judgment. It’s an exact… I’d say it was a rip-off. And the guys made millions of bucks on it and never said, “Thank you,” never said, “Can we pay you some money for it?” It’s kind of a sore point with me. Maybe some day their conscience will make them do something about it. I don’t know. There are funny business dealings between record companies, managers, publishers, and artists. But when artists do it to other artists, there’s no excuse for that. I’m mad!_
Why did he not sue Led Zeppelin over it then? Maybe because he knew Led Zeppelin might still win the legal battle since they have the money to hire the best lawyers? I mean, their most obvious rip off is Dazed and Confused, and they were only sued over it in 2010. This is over 10 years after Randy California's death. Considering this, it isn't difficult to understand why Randy didn't sue them - if they hadn't been sued over their most obvious rip off yet (that was basically an uncredited cover song), then what's the point trying to sue them over a much less obvious rip off? And I guess that was the correct decision, because Led Zeppelin eventually won the case - it would have been a waste of time and money.
Similarity does not equal infringement. There are several arguments that would negate an infringement claim, which is more likely why they were never sued over that piece. A lawyer who thought there was a solid case would have taken it on a contingency.
Copyright is not intended for musical phrases. That part of Taurus is a very basic musical concept - a minor triad with a chromatic descending bass voice, that existed long before electric music ever did. So there is no claim of ownership there in the first place. Even if their work, Jimmy page developed the idea sufficiently to qualify for fair use, by adding the counterpoint melody (which did not exist before) and changing the final resolution. Add to that the fact that the rest of the song is completely different and there is no case for infringement.
Blood suckers is all they are.
And Jimmy Page already played an opening similar to Stairway back in 1968 before Zeppelin ever went to America and shared a bill with Spirit.
On Ice Cream Dreams by a band called Cartoone, Jimmy was session guitarists and the opening is basically a sped up version of the Stairway opening.
Jimmy stole from....... himself.
@@MaggaraMarine Randy California didn't write that opening arpeggio from Spirit, it's been similarly recorded in other folk songs such as "To Catch a Shad" czcams.com/video/5CehDjP8atY/video.html. Jimmy Page may have copied that part from hearing it in Spirit, but in the same vein Randy copied it from older folk music he heard. He left that part of of his story, so that's why his heirs took up the suit. They didn't know.
Nothing funnier than a Zeppelin fan who tries to knock Hip Hop by saying its unoriginal and just steals from other music
Nothing funnier than a hip hop fan saying that it’s music.
@@richardeast3328 Oh I'm sorry is that suppose to take away from all the time your favorite little band has been sued and later forced to add people to the songwriting credits?
@@richardeast3328 here we go again. There's always someone who tries to dismiss black music as not being real music. This had always been the case throughout history. First there was rhythm and blues, then jazz, then early rock and roll, disco, hiphop, then rap. What the hell are y'all problems with black music man!
Haha lmao
@@jdelacruz14791 nothing to do with hip hop being black.
Heere we go again with assuming everyone is racist
Artists gotta credit their influences, but the legal system must change so that artists don't have to pay an unreasonably high amount of money to the artists inspiring them.
yeah atm if you publicly admit you slightly cribbed an idea from someone, they get like half of the money you make from that song
Zep never paid anywhere near what they owed.
@@duderama6750 and how do you know how much they paid? Most, if not all were out of court settlements, those are not public.
Yeah, copyright credits don’t seem to be able to differentiate between a cover and stealing a few notes
Artist do not have to pay a cent to other artists that inspire them. Only when they provably in a court of law, copy , copy written material.
Does it matter? Well I can answer that with two examples.
1 - When Cream credited I' s so glad to Skip James, the money he received allowed him to pay for his cancer treatment in a high-end clinic in New York. This allowed him to live a few more years, enjoy his new popularity, tour the folk music festivals and record all his late albums. That' s why so many of his songs from that period are about his experience of the hospital and thanking his doctors.
2 - When Led Zepellin didn' t credit Howlin Wolf he was dying of kidney disease. He had to get treated in a veteran hospital and he died of complications from his surgery in 1976.
Worth noting that Led Zeppelin didn't give Howlin Wolf kidney disease, so if Led Zeppelin never recorded their song, Howlin Wolf would be in the exact same place.
@@maximumoccupancy Cool. Tell that to your boss: how he can feel free not to compensate your for your work. He won' t be the one evicting you and making you live on the street, and if he never had given you a job you would be in the exact same place. So he might just as well keep your wage for his enjoyment.
Robert Plant a man from a different country in a different continent used some of howlin wolfs lyrics when he was 20, so this means led zeppelin are responsible for howlin wolf dying of kidney disease
Lmao okay
@@fredgoer7968
I didn't say they were responsible for him dying. I said they could have been responsible for him living by being decent people and responsible artists.
And they did a hard pass on that because they preferred to actively lie so the wouldn't have to share their royalties.
themroc,
Zeppelin never argued against Wolf and paid up right away in 1972. Wolf got one third of a million outright in '72 and subsequent further royalties. Without Zeppelin using bits of his song he wouldn't have gotten any of that. He profited from Zeppelin.
Willie Dixon was given songwriting credit for nearly 1/4 of the first album right from 1969 and yet never even bothered to acknowledge it.
Nice.
Great video!! As a longtime Zep fan, I think you explain the issue(s) perfectly. Is it wrong to incorporate influences in such a blatant manner? No. Is it wrong to not give credit where credit is due? Yes.
As a "black" vs "white" issue per se, It's ironic that things aren't so black and white i.e. *nuance*
I really don't like that term "Theft." Small Faces released You Need Lovin' in 1967 without giving Credit to Dixon or citing him, Zeppelin did the same thing, and guess which band got sued? Zeppelin did what all Blues and Folk artists did before them, took someone's work, and made it theirs.
Inspired, YES, Steal? who didn't steal? Do you think there is an orginal blues song?
@ghost mall I did? I was stating an opinion to those claim theft in music with a specific example. I was not criticizing the video
Tired and stupid take, can't even talk sense into you fanatical boomers
Thank you for pointing something out that many today sadly don't understand
@ghost mall I mean, just look at Jack’s response. Seems pretty necessary to me.
two things killed this issue for me, that Dixon never went after The Small Faces for You Need Loving (probably where Zep got it from as Plant was a HUGE fan) and hearing a Muddy Waters song credited to him that blatantly ripped off an earlier blues track from the 20s/30s (annoyingly I can't remember what the two tracks were)
Because it’s not the same situation. Pretty much every English rock group gave credits (even on albums) and clear respect when performing a a classic blues musician song. Zeppelin were the only exception.
@@VegetabIeMan Small Faces didn't, nor did Muddy Waters - and I'm sure there are plenty of other bluesmen and women who ripped off other blues artists. Now, I'm not saying it's ok, just that everyone makes a big deal of Zeppelin whilst ignoring all the other examples
@@fred166
There was never big money in The Small Faces. A lawsuit would have been a waste of money. Why fish for minnows when you can hunt the big tuna?
@@duderama6750 This. If your song isn't making much money, what would be the point of suing you over it? Copyright laws really only apply to songs that make a lot of money. Nobody cares if you only write songs that sound like total rip offs - if those songs never become big hits, it's simply not worth anyone's time and money to sue you over it.
Honestly, I think this discussion on copyright laws limiting artists is a bit blown out of proportion. It only really affects the biggest artists out there. I mean, sure, it's still an issue (and some of the lawsuits are a bit ridiculous), but it really isn't something smaller artists need to be that concerned about, because no one really cares about it unless your song becomes hugely popular. (Well, I guess arguing against it out of principle is still good, since maybe one day the laws will start affecting smaller artists more? But I honestly don't think it's as big of an issue as a lot of people are making it seem.)
The discussion about CZcams copyrights on the other hand is more relevant, but I think that's a different topic. It has more to do with CZcams being overly cautious, because if they weren't, they would get sued. It really isn't about copyright laws - it's simply about CZcams not wanting to risk getting sued, so they will block a lot of videos, even if the use of music in those videos would legally fall under fair use.
Also, I don't think whataboutism is a good argument any way. I think the similarities between Whole Lotta Love and You Need Loving are so clear that the lawsuit was definitely warranted.
If you read Buddy Guys autobiography you understand the shady shit Willie Dixon did in the record business. One of the most important and iconic musicians for sure but he ripped off poor uneducated artists and got them into hellish record deals
When I got my first cassette copy of Led Zeppelin II (mid 90s), it came with the additional Willie Dixon writting credit, so I got confused about it. I was dissapointed when I heard the original songs and finding out they sounded nothing like Led Zeppelin. Later, I understood everything this video is talking about.
Thank you for making this.
I grew up on blues before I had even discovered the British blues acts like Zeppelin and always found it baffling how people only villainize LZ specifically.
Covering music and referencing other work is a blues tradition. Blues goes beyond lyricism, it’s about feel and what you bring to it. Virtually all of the British blues-rock bands of the late 60s (Cream, Hendrix, Stones, Peter Green’s FM, Bluesbreakers, etc.) covered material and yes, sometimes without giving credit. Even the second wave blues greats like BB King, Albert King, and Muddy Waters covered music from first wave greats (yes, sometimes without crediting). They weren’t “stealing” they were paying homage to their influences. LZ gets vilified for doing what everyone did because of the proportion of royalties and the reach of their music.
It should be noted that in the Stairway case against Taurus, the arpeggio that starts stairway was proven in court to be baroque and over 300 years old. There are many other songs (including a Beatles tune) that use the same arpeggio sequence). You can’t copyright a basic three note arpeggio. These are the building blocks of music.
I think it’s also worth pointing out Peter Grant’s managerial style and how he vowed to protect the band from the industries history of lowballing past artists. He had a “if they want it, make them ask for it” approach to granting credits on their first two albums. I could be wrong but I believe those were his exact words when discussing the topic. Perhaps he went a little too far by ignoring Holmes. In the end out of their 90 studio tracks, only 10 are covers or have any referenced material and all which is properly credited as of the 80s.
Excellent comment. It's so refreshing to finally hear intelligent & reasonable people speak on this topic. 👍
YT is full of haters that spew accusations without even knowing what the hell they're talking about.
Management was and will always be a bless or a curse. A good management can take your project to higher status and protect your project at all costs. A bad management can stop that
Even on the first album nearly 1/4 of it is credited to Willie Dixon. There was no lawsuit from Dixon for the first album.
This is the perfect argument, 100% agree.
@@lyndoncmp5751 what about How Many More Times? It’s 3 ripoffs in that 1 song.
I think the issue relates to the conversation of generational wealth, and how that has disproportionately affected communities of color. I agree with all you said: Zeppelin didn't steal and shouldn't be "canceled". They did something unique and frankly quite valuable by bringing in the conversation of Black folks to such a large scale. But it would be better to give credit where credit is due financially, in a reasonable way imo.
I completely agree. It's less a matter of legality and more of ethics.
It wasnt even a possibility and it doesnt make sense to give money to Robert Johnson for what he took from 5 people that originated in a cottonfield. The value comes from it being reworked, recorded, and released. Billy Eilish can make a million dollars off of "Camptown Lady" today without owing Stepen Foster (or the guy he ripped it off from) a dime. Eilish will still be ripped off by the record industry when she goes to get her album/streaming royalties. None of this is Elvis or Eminem's fault.
Who gets the financial credit?... There's likely thousands of people (famous and not famous) who have contributed to the creation of those songs.
@@yeehaw3792 @
Gekokujo76 at this point, it's really a futile request, agreed. if say, there was a Led Zeppelin today "stealing"/reworking old folk/blues etc. tunes from black communities, it'd be beneficial to have some sort of organization, new or established (like the NAACP) that people could hold record companies' feet to the fire to donate a share to. there's been lots of improvement just from the worldwide protests with representation, allowing black voices to be heard and slogans against racism etc. So I think that's something that would have a possibility, but, you know, no one cares about black music enough, curently, for that really to be an issue.. and there's probably not enough voices to shout at Atlantic (zep's label) or other bands' labels to fork over at least something to an organization that supports the rights' of people of color
That’s generalizing communities of color as all somehow being in need of zeppelins compensation. I understand the artists themselves but to label a whole enitire group of people in such a way is very simplistic
I think one of the main issues is Page would take the original influence and elevate it, make it different, but Plant would keep the same exact lyrics.
As educational as this was, I'm still giggling about She Squeezed My Lemon. Ah, totally-not-subtle old euphemistic songs , how I love 'em. (If I Can't Sell It, I'll Keep Sittin' On It by Ruth Brown being a personal fave!)
The “Tea for one “ Joke…Polyphonic’s got jokes
Most of the music they’ve derived themselves from is blues, partly because it’s a blues band. Mostly because many blues players were ripped off from their labels, or faded into oblivion. It’s easier to steal from artists when they don’t have the power to fight back.
The level of depth and work put into researching and creating this video is truly inspiring/unbelievably good.
My view is that Zeppelin was primarily a folk band, and just playing whatever you heard and calling it your own was normal for many of the people they grew up listening to, so they were continuing that, but the way money worked for that had changed, so they started right as it was no longer appropriate to operate in that way.
In addition, many of the cases cited are original music that Robert Plant initially improvised over by singing whatever came into his head, and then never changed it. To me, the song is the music, not the lyrics.
All in all, they definitely did some things wrong here, and that should be acknowledged, as well as the implications that we understand better now than they would have then. But I do think that the whole "they stole everything" and "they're nothing but thieves" is so overblown. They're not an exceptional case.
So why are they the only ones getting sued all the time? The Stones are just as big as Zeppelin and they've never had a lawsuit over one of their songs
@@southsider3542 The Stones have been sued over their songs.
They stole so cry about it.
@@godloveszaza such immaturity, wonder if you even read the entire comment
@@godloveszaza are you this critical with every creative thief?
I loved the animated bit with the square that turns rounded and then into a circle. Great little visual for creative process
Love your multiple episode project on Zep and how you're not afraid to cut as deeply as you must; as a big fan I appreciate. Also, just came here to comment, while watching your stuff on Nebula.
Tipping the algorithm scale all the while sh*#ting on YT
This video was awesomely put together, already loving this series!
“Chances are all the music you listen to fall’s under the Pop category”
Me: *laughs in prog*
Prog can still be considered pop by this definition. Most prog bands release music to be bought and consumed, they play shows to sell tickets, they sell merchandise and generally like making money from their music. Unless prog bands release free music and shows and only make music for the art they could be all under the pop branch.
Led Zep could be pretty boundary pushing, reggae rock, funk rock, post-rock, jazzy elegies. Spirit might've done jazz and blues fusion first but Zep's no slouch. Golden Earring were also like Spirit/Zep in their variety of influences, and their pop stuff charted.
Great video, and a thoughtful examination of the issue of plagiarism and copyright/intellectual property. I think Zeppelin thought of themselves akin to the Folk category as you describe. While they were popular, they felt they were a continuation of the Folk/Blues artists that came before them. Nice work!
@ghost mall Agreed. I was trying to say by aligning themselves with the Folk traditions, they felt they had license to do as others had done (with "borrowing"/theft). I don't mean to say it was right, or that they shouldn't have done more to credit those before them.
@@absea7918 Great points. Their desire to fit in with a scene (the Laurel Canyon crowd in 1970, San Francisco in 1968/1969) or be part of a thing, and the lack of acceptance by the scenes they sought, created an environment where they were stealing ideas. Those scenes saw them for what they were (outsiders) and shunned them, all the while as Led Zeppelin profited wildly. The real odd part: their audience was typically teens and youths, when Led Zeppelin wanted to fit in with the folk/blues crowd and be seen as “artists,” not a band for kids
@@manzelli1981 if people want to pay some other people for playing a song they like then thats fine... people shouldnt be restricted from playing someone elses song... copyright is an odd mess
@@fattyjaybird7505 Absolutely. When I watched this, I wondered how much of an influence their manager Peter Grant had here. My internet-paranoia is keeping me from going into details about his reputation, but this is one of those "where there's smoke, there's fire" kind of scenarios. It felt to me like his fingerprints were all over this continued behavior.
@@manzelli1981 lol, yea, Peter was a ruthless asshole
Please make a “what makes Jimmy page such a good guitarist” video
Yes!! I also vote for a Jimmy vid!
I'd vote for a "what makes Jimmy Page a mediocre guitarist in live performance" video
@@deluxe67x12 you obviously don't know anything about guitar
@@deluxe67x12 I've seen Jimmy play live and the guy is a God.
I reckon that if Led Zep had at least credited those old blues guys on those 'questionable' songs that they got sued for, then they would have probably avoided all those lawsuits 🤷♂️
What's really criminal about the whole thing is the amount of millions that the lawyers and record companies made from all those court cases, and I'd bet my bollocks that Howlin Wolf, Sonny Boy Williamson and all those guys never saw a penny from any of them.
You reckon wrong. Soon as you call the dogs come sniffing around. If I paint a house do I have to pay royalties to other house painters that painted before me? I'm stealing their art! Music is a craft. You practice the craft well and you get paid for your services.
“This video has been kept in 4:3 to preserve the creative vision of Polyphonic”
lmaoo
I always like that when The Who would play covers live (at least in the recordings I've seen/heard), Pete or Rog would often list exactly where the song came from.
Also this video was truly fantastic, really covered a lot of the ground I think needs to be covered on art and copyright.
Im so grateful for this video. It's so nice to see you engage with these topics and I am excited for the next one
i saw this and your other lz videos,as i love classic rock and researching it so I am definitely subscribing ! You're doing amazing and I hope you keep up the amazing work.
Okay, I'm only part way through as of now, but ugh! The animation at 7:21 is just the perfect visual metaphor for what was being discussed.
During an interview, Vanilla Ice (of all people) pointed out something to the effect of: everyone can be said to be ripping off someone, but only the people that are making big money get sued for it.”
Best modern example is “Uptown Funk” where the song credits went from just Mark Ronson, Bruno Mars, and two other people, to now include over a half dozen names of people that sued for copyright since the song sounds like pretty much any funk/Minneapolis sound song (since it was supposed to be an homage to those styles).
Vanilla Ice is a great example of "song theft" too. People didnt understand the time that Vanilla Ice was sampling Queen and playing stupid. It was only a small time in music history where you had the tech to sample songs, and the wild west laws that could allow you to use them without paying royalties. Vanilla Ice wasnt stupid, he was playing stupid. MC Hammer sampled Superfreak...nobody cared. Nowadays, rappers can sample a whole song (check out Lupe Fiasco's use of Float On by Modest Mouse in "the Show Goes On") and nobody bats an eye. Uninformed music fans still clown Vanilla for "not knowing" Queen or lying when he was creative for sampling the song and lying to keep from losing all of his money. The Beastie Boys "Paul's Boutique" album is chock full of illegal samples...it's probably their best album and would have been impossible (technologically) a few years before and illegal to make a few years later. "Borrowing" is a part of every kind of music.
Great video!, and really good point at the end I appreciate that you covered privilege and conversation with all the intersections that were mentioned that's probably the most complex
Alternative title: Led Zeppelin and their music (jokes aside LZ is GOAT and the fact that half of their early stuff is “heavily inspired” doesn’t make them any less great)
Exactly, I can’t see any other group of musicians pulling this off ever. The original music in these songs are absolutely mind blowing even with the stolen lyrics… Their individual talents, live improvisation work, and diversity of sound while always pushing the envelope makes them the greatest band of all time!
@@jbojoify That's a massive cop out answer
Beatles and Floyd are greater. The true goats.
@Grim Graven Cemetery neither can I, I never said I don’t love them. Just Floyd and Beatles are greater.
Absolutely loved this conversation! Totally agree with you all the way until the end. I don't think it's right to exclude people simply because of where they were born or the color of their skin. I think these old blues guys would agree
This is outstanding. I love the lense you look through and share here.
Well.. copyright does make space for pieces borrowing from a zeitgeist (theoretically). Copyright never protects an idea, but the manifestation of it (this fact is accepted Internationally). So derivative pieces of work are indeed allowed under copyright. So what could be the issue is not a lacunae of law but a lack of understanding in the legal community of what "stealing" truly means in a musical context and how it's necessary. Although, The law itself makes enough space to "steal from your idol".
Oscar Wilde is often credited with the most condensed version of that quote - “Talent borrows, Genius steals”
Might have been scratched into the run-off groove of a Smiths single if my memory has not completely gone….
I thought Dali said that. A little bit ironic, probably all those geniuses stole that quote.
Honestly this seems to be a capitalism issue. Artists taking from other artists (or labels ripping off artists) and getting the credit and riches others deserve as well (someone always gets the raw deal historically). If there was an equal playing field that didn't involve investors (labels) who can decide what's popular and getting in the way of close communities then credit wouldn't matter as much. It reminds me of internet creators making horror characters and it being more effective for them to have no copyright or origin (adds mystery). But other people want to make games without consent then making a killing in the process.
Lest we forget that Robert Plant also knew “You Need Love” from his time as an errand boy for the Small Faces and later on while it is true he didn’t really reach out to Willie Dixon, who we did reach out to was Steve Marriott because it was the small faces version “You Need Lovin’” that AHLL was based on and Robert asked for Marriott’s blessing To do it the way he heard the small faces play it.
And The Small Faces didn't reach out to Dixon either. They didnt credit him at all.
@@lyndoncmp5751 At that stage for the small faces it was understandable because they were still occult van for the mods and never got to make it to America to ask for Willie’s blessing. We can thank Sharon Osbourne‘s bitch ass father Don Arden for that.
I credit Zeppelin and The Stones for getting into the blues artists that inspired them, I would not have been exposed to Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters and others if I hadn't first been exposed to Zeppelin and The Rolling Stones. I have just as much love for the blues and blues artists as I do for the rock bands they inspired.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂BS
We truly can not and should not conflate copyright law with artistic integrity. Music perhaps more than any other art form is iterative in nature. Copyright law is to protect the monetization of music with very arbitrary definitions, it is not a measure of originality or integrity.
The Satch quote is truth: "They were breaking ground, not copying." None of the "borrowed," elements of LZ songs sound like the originals. It's a whole new music style: Blues influenced Hard Rock. This video really gets it right concerning the many ignorant accusations of Art Theft concerning LZ, the Stones, ect. Although the many English blues based ROCK bands can be credited for reviving interest in the original American Blues artist who were largely forgotten in their home country, it would have been better if they had simply shared songwriting credits with those artist and avoided this whole unnecessary brouhaha. And yes folks, Stairway blows Taurus out of the water musically. Sorry Spirit fans, it's not even close.
You hit the nail on the head and you can add Jimi to that list too. Paul McCartney tells you exactly how he sped up a Chuck Berry riff or ripped off a bass run from a classical piece. That's how all of this works...and LZ wasnt any different than The Beatles, Stones, or other British Invasion bands. They took American Blues and filled in the gap when American Music "died" (Holly, Bopper, Valens....the last of whom Page ripped off WITH LOVE).
@@Gekokujo76 Yeah, Hendrix is a great example of taking blues influences and transforming them into something different: a more funkified hard rock with psychedelic colors. He borrowed blues riffs, but made them into his own unique style. All these musicians, like the Beatles, were using blues as a foundation to build something new off of. The old blues guys did it too. The transformation of influences is not copying. And now, back to some old imitation blues classics like, Kashmir, Achilles Last Stand, and the Rain Song.
@@Bsmiley333 Amen and well said. In fairness, Polyphonic mentions that point...that the newer artists took it and ran with it...or even that the Spirit/Taurus riff on Stairway is a small part of a long/strange/unique bustling hedgerow of a song. To label Led Zeppelin song thieves (even for that blatant and admitted theft) is short selling them. Borrowing previously borrowed blues riffs and making them TIMELESS AND EXQUISITE is most definitely NOT song theft and it's ridiculous to hear that argument. Robert Johnson deserves to be seen as the pioneer and forerunner that he is...but he didnt have John Paul Jones arranging orchestras for his songs. Led Zeppelin was as prone to borrowing a riff as any other band you could name, but was just as transformative and unique as well. Glad you get it.
Yup, the descending line cliché in Stairway has existed for centuries to begin with, and you have to listen really hard to find any obvious similarities between it and Tarus, possibly because they're not there. I find far more to be outraged about in the behaviour of Page around underage girls than the music. The only tune I was surprised with, in regards to it's similarity to the original, was Dazed and Confused.
Love your videos! Zeppelin is my all time favorite band so this is amazing. Keep it up!🙏🏼
These video remainded me about the movie about the McDonald's guy ("The Founder"). If I take something that you created and I carry it far beyond you ever dream it would go it's still yours? There isn't a right or wrong answer, it's an ideology question. In my opinion if you make it your own, it is your own
That sounds like an excuse for slavery.
What a great video. The best dealing with this delicate issue so far.
And yes, copyright is lucrative for the industry. It only makes sense to discuss artistic rights and freedom if we take that into consideration.
You knew polyphonic was about to spit some facts as soon as you saw that title
So glad you’re doing this series!
hi man, love ur videos, especially your ways of telling stories by using different kind of clips and animation. I'm just wondering, do you take clips of youtube videos and add filters and effect. The reason i am asking is i am going to make a video talking about ''fools gold'' by the stone roses.
An eighteenth century composer and artist wouldn’t think once about interpolating or wholesale lifting entire movements from other artists. It was deemed a form of a compliment then and copywrite laws were nonexistent
It's different though when that artist uses a bulk of your work, taking writing credit when it doesn't belong and claims it theirs
Great video! I do have a couple of issues with the presumption that Zeppelin stole their music. The first is applying todays standards to a very different time. Cultural appropriation is a fairly new concept. The songs off the first two albums were made 60 years ago. Second, back in the 50s and 60s song writers often assumed that if they made their work vastly different than the original, they could consider it theirs. Lastly, of the over 90+ songs titles in the Zeppelin catalog, maybe 25% of them could be considered stolen. Did Zeppelin steal some music? Yes. However, the super majority of their stuff is either original or influenced, but their own. Still, great video and I enjoyed it very much.
This was an interesting and informative presentation -- although I found the film grain/leader/noise overlay used throughout the video extremely distracting. This seems to be a trend among some YT creators, to the point where it detracts from the content imo. I think the effect is best applied sparingly, rather than across the entire video. Other than that, I really enjoy the high-quality content this channel provides!
I don’t know. If it hadn’t been for Zeppelin’s version of “When The Levee Breaks”, I would have never heard of Memphis Minnie or Charley Patton, who recorded earlier versions of the song.
Awesome and insightfull video!
Authorship has always been communal so long as concepts stay within the culture of Folk, but once content financially transcends into the privileged classes of Pop and Folk, authorship is paramount so as to stave off the colonialization of intellectual-property by those who have no interest or stake in the original folk-culture.
Your work with this videos is amazing! You bring me so much joy dedicating this month's videos to Led Zeppelin, thank you!
Congrats on a great moderate and considered look at the subject, I am impressed!
I'm old enough to have bought Led Zep I when it came out. At the time I knew about Folk music and its borrowings as it was already an old trend by then, and I was familiar with artists introducing a number as "I'd like to do X, something I learned from Y".
Within a year I was living with guys who had lots of old (to me; only ten or twenty years mostly) Blues records. I heard the same numbers appearing on different artists' records, and recognised the same process as in the Folk world. When Led Zep II came out I was primed and ready to understand that LZ were just doing the same thing, and I thought it was just obvious. But time has made me think they should have continued that old tradition of acknowledgement.
I haven’t watched this entire vid yet, but I just feel like I must point out that blues as a genre is more or less a shared music. Considering the fact that easily 85%+ of blues songs are covers, I don’t really think it’s a fair accusation that Zep “stole” that music.
I mean, if covering a blues song is considered to be stealing, then we gotta lock up pretty much every blues player that has ever lived.
Blues is meant to be passed along, covered, and injected with the artistic spirit of its different coverers. I could name a million blues songs where the covers are better than the original songs, but I think we all pretty much understand my point here.
Hell, SRV even basically covered himself by releasing songs like “I’m Cryin’,” which is quite literally the exact same song as Pride and Joy, down to almost every single little guitar fill and solo done by Stevie.
I just do not count blues song covers as stealing at all. Not even close. There may be an argument about other non-blues songs whose parts Zep took and incorporated into their own sound, but that is really just the nature of the style of music they played.
They may have not been the first group to do a particular thing, but they obviously were able to take that thing to its highest level and potential. Because of that, I don’t consider Zep’s so-called “stealing” to be anything more than just improving on ideas that had come before them. And doing a damn fine job at it, I might add.
They were truly a blues band deep down, and their own personal touches were able to take an already awesome genre and bring it to the mainstream in a more polished and widely-acceptable way.
That ain’t a bad thing as far as I’m concerned. If you don’t agree, I would love to hear what you have to say!
As a Zeppelin fan I agree
Didn't classical composers always steal licks from each other 😅
The Thieving Magpie
7:21
LOVE that visual illustration of change through iteration.
The late great Ray Manzarek openly says in a Classic albums episode "we stole from everybody" and then goes on to show how he borrowed from Ray Charles a lot. In the same episode, Robbie shows how he came up with the riff for "Break On Through" by basically stealing the exact riff from "The Paul Butterfield Blues Band." I can't remember which song it was that he stole it from, but when he played riff by Paul Butterfield, and then played the riff from Break On Through, they were pretty well identical. There are also plenty of rappers and R&B that 'Borrow" from old country songs. Shaggy borrowed from Juice Newton's "Queen Of Hearts" and then there is Ghetto Superstar that was originally a Kenny/Dolly song. Cypress Hill's "Hits from the bong" borrowed from Dusty Springfield's "Son of a preacher man", I say big deal. Led Zeppelin ROCK!!!!
"Famous antisemite T.S Elliot", really? That's the appropriate way to namedrop a famous poet? I suppose we should remember Wagner for being an antisemite and Woody Guthrie for being a communist as well then, rather than their actual work?
If you've seen this channel, that remark was honestly to be expected. And would he insult Wagner? Absolutely. Woody Guthrie on the grounds of communism? *LOLNO*
Nobody would care about Led Zeppelin doing this, if they had given the other artists credit and said that those songs were covers.
It’s not like it was uncommon, Creedence Clear Water Revival had many covers.
Every artist has stolen without giving credit for something. You cannot write music without taking from what already exists. Find me a blues artist who didn’t steal, or any musician for that matter
@@bilabong4257 Most people don't get that. Every blues player were taught licks from the ones that came before them. But that's not as exciting as pointing fingers and accusing others. Which is their main interest in the first place, not music.
Your design and video work is outstanding. Where do you get your fonts?
As always you make your point clearly , and concisely. Thank you!
Yes, they took “inspiration” from other artists and shined up the antique - but they just about always brought something new to the table. “Whole lotta love” took more from the Small Faces version of “You need loving” than Willie Dixon’s original song. But outside The United Kingdom no one cared about the Small Faces.
It’s that old expression - where there’s a hit there’s a writ (lawsuit). Led Zeppelin made millions and people got jealous, pure and simple. They eventually paid (almost) everyone off.
Led Zeppelin made great art.
Compare the original “When the levee breaks” to what LZ did with it - there is no denying that they did something great with it. The music business is a dirty business. Jimmy Page started a great band where all 4 members brought something new to the table and they had Peter Grant fighting their corner, without whom they would never have achieved what they did.
Money (or the lack of) does strange things to people.
Long story short - Led Zeppelin rule.
What a load of Rubbish, I'm outside the UK and loved The Small Faces.
@@wayneelliott7011
I'm happy for you! lol
@@edwardmulholland7912 As you should be. 😂
@@wayneelliott7011
I love The Small Faces too.
It's about time someone somewhat defends these guys. The amount of hate they get for "stealing" music is unbearable, you can find it on threads all over the internet. Next time someone says they're thieves, tell them that means Robert Johnson is also a thief. They're victims of their own success. They get picked on and bullied because everyone loves to take down the top dog. We see it in sports as well as music.
Everyone in music youtube seems to have had a crack at this topic recently, and I gotta say this was my favourite take
All of your videos are edited so beautifully
The opening of your video about artists and theft in general made me think of the likes of Johnny Cash and Jimi Hendrix. The former did a cover of a song from Nine Inch Nails that is arguably more recognizable than the original, the song being "Hurt", so much so that Trent Reznor himself has actually said that it's not his song anymore, it's Johnny Cash's song.
Bob Dylan is actually very well known for having his songs "stolen". One of the most famous examples is "All Along the Watch Tower". Jimi Hendrix took that song and made it...something completely new from the original. As with the example of Trent Reznor, Bob Dylan also apparently considers Hendrix's version as the definitive version.
Those were not stolen because the original was always credited from the initial release. Cash's Hurt always credited Trent Reznor as the songwriter. Hendrix always credited Bob Dylan. These are simple covers.
What a Dumb comment, neither of those Songs were stolen, they were credited to the original authors.
American everything was craved by Europeans in that era and it is easy to understand the affection of young musicians over there toward the music they enjoyed and which would launch their success and make them rich and famous, especially when relatively few people were familiar with the source material. It was probably akin to being a prospector tipped off to a good place to pan for gold. You have to work for it and you get a lot to show for it, but you aren't revealing where you got it. Something like that. Just that, ultimately, with all that money on the table, it does seem that it'd be better and easier to share than not, such as in regard to Dazed and Confused.
If there were no copyright laws it wouldn’t matter, and since there are the vultures of copyright laws, it matters very much. And the tolerances are getting narrower and narrower. Single bass sounds, sampled snippets, short melody fragments… there’s a lawsuit around every corner.
And don’t forget cryptomnesia where you can get sued not knowing why.
hey, I love your videos! And I try to always watch them on Nebula :)
can you please put the actual description of the video into Nebula instead of a generic one? I went to check it out and had to come find this video instead because the description just has your general links.
Outstanding video as always. So few YT channels produce work this consistently excellent. I have long been and still remain an ardent fan of Led Zeppelin, and it’s important to understand and acknowledge how they and nearly all bands are influenced by, borrow from, and sometimes copy the work of others. It doesn’t diminish for me the excellence of Led Zeppelin’s execution of these ideas, including the ideas of others; it just helps me see it in a more complete light.
What about Sabbath and Purple did they not give credit? The Stones were a r&b and blues cover band for their first couple of albums. I love Zeppelin too but the plagiarism is so obvious it’s hard to ignore.
Hell,when beastie boys had copied from whole lotta love they had chosen not to sue.
And I like how the blues history has been covered here.
this is actually a well thought out commentary, without hype. looks like we have us a musical anthropologist on our hands! well done!
I'm sort of a folk music and folklore buff, and also a longtime Zeppelin fan. I've been saying this for years, and thought I was the only one. I do, however, see the problem when a band makes a lot of money from songs borrowed and reworked from other artists and the earlier artists don't get the credit they deserve.
To be honest, it was Zeppelin that awakened my interest in the earlier blues and folk music they drew from. I was in high school when I heard somebody on the radio tell how "When the Levee Breaks" was a song about a historic flood on the Mississippi River in the 1920s and recorded soon after that catastrophe. Would I, a white girl in small-town Kansas in the 1980s, have ever given Memphis Minnie and Kansas Joe a moment of thought if not for Zeppelin's version? I doubt it very much.
Seriously good video man!
I literally turned to my girlfriend and said "come watch the best video essayist on CZcams with me"
You've done it again. And that Tea For One joke - 10/10.
Artists spent the next two decades drawing inspiration from Zeppelin? They still inspire us and many other musicians to this day!
KILLER. I like what you're adding to the conversation around this topic.
Hey what video editing software do you use? And what effects/assets? Those 8mm filters are incredible, and am in need of some video software
I edit using mostly Adobe After effects, and I've got a subscription to motionarray.com/ for most of my assets. A lot of the filter work is stuff that I do myself too. DM me on twitter if you want design tips, I love talking about this stuff.
@@Polyphonic Thank you my good sir.
I was apprehensive to watch this because I am extremely bias when comes to zeppelin but this is an issue with them and I'm conflicted as a lover of blues and being a black man .but I think this was well put together and made valid points
So the real argument is not about theft but rather cultural appropriation.
Cultural appropriation is a ridiculous american idea. Other cultures laugh at it
@@ileutur6863 lmao to bad victim
Amazing video, amazing argumentation. Thanks for sharing you thoughts!
Well done, well researched and very una video as always
I mean every song they ripped off was arguably better than the original, so I dont think their greatness wouldve been downplayed if they just cited their sources.
I understand what you’re trying to come at but I think you’re missing why a lot of people of color don’t enjoy when people outside their culture and circles try to imitate, participate, and profit off of their inventions and struggles.
We all know the long history of blues being from times of slavery, it has a lot of personal and historical context to the genre, so it’s very much questionable and off putting when big bands who are not of the same culture, racial background, and etc imitate and take aspects they like. Being inspired, yes, but there’s deeper meanings and history completely lost and profited for personal gain, along side not giving credit until they’re put under the fire.
Also aside from that…we shouldn’t be giving our time to people who’ve had sexual relationships with minors (12-16 year olds) it’s just enabling that in the rock industry as well.
This comment is from someone who doesn't understand blues music or the history of American music in general. Black people largely shunned blues in the 50s in favor or R&B and soul as blues reminded them off a backwards past they wanted to forget. If you asked any bluesman from that era Muddy, BB King, Howlin Wolf, Otis Rush, Spann, ect.. theyd tell you and have said that white rock artists gave them new careers and took their career to new heights. Clapton, the Stones, Led Zeppelin, Mike Bloomfield and all of them would constantly tell their hippie white fans to listen to the real blues
Blues songs are folk music their is no "credit" to be given really. They are passed down generation to generation being changed and altered. Blues is a musical tradition a tradition that has largely been abandoned by the people that came up with it.
Also don't say we should listen to bands/artists who had relations with teenage girls. It's gross but if we cut out everyone who did that we couldn't listen to 75% of the music recorded in the last 75 years
Check out the follow-up episode to this, I think you'll find it interesting.
Wow bruh you hate white people , what do you think white people have never been enslaved? White people have no concept of hard times or something. Lol. What a bigot. Also you mentioned "people of color" don't like being imitated by white people. Ha , dude who do you think invented the electric guitar all the black blues guys were playing. Those black blues musicians aren't even singing in their own language , they're using White people's language , playing chords figured out by white men on guitars made by white men in a nation made by white men. Literally every part of African American cultural is an appropriation of White American Culture.
Really well put, great video
that scene you made at the beginning was badass
Yeah, yeah, yeah except they were hella quick to sue the Beastie Boys over She's Crafty...
simple answer, reason why blues is ripped off is many of those artists are tiny, on tiny record labels, if not obscure, so 1. this means when you play it, your fans and critics will likely have never heard the original and lavish you with all the praise for the song. Then most importantly, 2. if the real original blues artist or their label finds out and files a lawsuit, you can make them disappear and settle with them for pennies on the dollar, as you know the artist nor their obscure label have the resources to take you and your team of lawyers on in court, so it's in their best interest to take a small out of court settlement and walk away..
If it’s not able to be easily proven in court that might say something about the validity of the claim.
With the state of music today, you cannot justify copyright claims. It's either everyone gets sued or no one. Music is a monument that is constantly being added onto, none of it would be structurally sound if it weren't for the artists who came before.
fantastic vid as always! i will say that you could've done with 1-2 fewer variations of the "good artists borrow, great artists steal" quote. intro went on juuuust too long