Led zeppelin won a 9-2 decision in a case brought against the band, claiming parts of Stairway to Heaven were copied from the song Taurus, by the band Spirit. I only mention this here because the case raises several questions about copyright protections that could easily spill over into literature. Such as the who, what, and when. The suit contends Jimmy Paige stole a piece of guitar work, which became the opening progression of Stairway to Heaven, from a song written by Randy Wolfe- Taurus. The suit argues that Zeppelin and Spirit toured together between the time Taurus was released, and the subsequent four years before Stairway was released, and Paige would have been familiar with the song. So question one is, where is the line drawn between influence and plagiarism, and how similar do the two have to be? Next is when. The suit was filed only five years ago. If it was such a blatant use of protected material, why was nothing file sooner- like before Wolfe died in 1997. Which leads into who. Randy Wolfe took no actions while he was alive, I won't speculate as to why. The suit was brought by a representative of Wolfe's estate. The other entanglement with who was who do they sue? The suit sought monies from both Zeppelin and their record label, for 'knowingly releasing the song.'
Just an attempted money grab, I think. I read that the jury in the case didn't hear the music in question.
Looks like some dingbats were just trying to get paid, what, 50 years after the song was released? And what would Paige have ripped off? An A minor chord progression? Bach and Mozart should lawyer up, too.
I believe the court found that the Copyright Act in effect at the time (the 1909 Act) limited the scope of copyright to the sheet music on deposit. During trial, a guitarist was brought in to play what was on the sheet music. The copyright didn't extend to the separate sound recordings of the two songs, so they judge didn't allow those to be played.
Does seem like it was a money grab. The significant part of the court's ruling, from my point of view, is that the Ninth Circuit abandoned the inverse ratio rule (and explicitly overruled its own prior precedent relating to use of that rule) in the copyright infringement analysis. Under the inverse ratio rule, if you could prove a high level of access to the prior work, then you didn't have to prove as much similarity between the works to provide infringement. Conversely, the less access you could show, the more you had to show substantial similarity. That rule is now gone in the Ninth Circuit, bringing it into line with some other circuits including, importantly, the Second Circuit.
Did the jury played it backwards? Are now all blues musicians going to sue the hell of each other in some cosmic, eternal case with no beginning or end?
As far as music goes, at least in terms of chord progressions and modal structure, Black Sabbath could sue every hard rock that followed them for pedalling power chords off the open E string.
Given Robert Plant and Jimmy Page ripped off a number of blues artists, putting their name on the works, I think it's too bad they didn't lose. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/led-zeppelins-10-boldest-rip-offs-223419/ The Lemon Song Whole Lotta Love And a slew of others they simply stole the songs, jazzed them up and put their names on them. https://www.digitalmusicnews.com/2016/04/19/robert-plant-and-jimmy-page-blatantly-admit-to-stealing-their-music-led-zeppelin/ Robert Plant and Jimmy Page Openly Admit to Stealing Music
