Quick question for Led Zep fans

Off_it said:

PragueAddick said:

Henry Irving said:

PragueAddick said:

Henry Irving said:

SoundAsa£ said:

Was just thinking how dear old Addickted would have reacted to HI’s opinion of Zeppelin……having been a huge fan he would have gone apoplectic.
A good few haircuts back, he actually met Robert Plant, quite by accident, at London Bridge Market and struck up a very friendly conversation with him.
Being a huge fan, it must have been one of the most memorable moments of his life.
Addickted old son, a top fella, one of the very best posters ever on CL and a much missed pal to many.

Don't worry  Nick and I had that discussion.

Still can't stand Plant's screaming, the endless drum solos, the cod mystical lyrics and the blatent stealing of riffs and even whole songs from mainly Black artists.

Thank gawd we have the Velvet Underground.

Well various notable Black artists get prominent exposure in that film as key early influencers on the band members. (although the film does not try to address the accusations you make, which may or may not have merit). 

"May or may not have merit" @PragueAddick you must be joking

Their rip offs even have their own wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Led_Zeppelin_songs_written_or_inspired_by_others

So out of curiosity I read that page. I note that it is a catalogue of instances, only some of which involved court cases, and some of them went against the "plaintiffs". Some consist of little more than critic's opinions.

But I've always been highly suspicious of such claims, based on what I learnt my career in an adjacent industry which also involved the development of creative ideas. There were legal cases there too. Most were dismissed. It was legally established early on, that there is no legal copyright on ideas, nor on phrases of common language. At the same time I saw many examples of creative ideas where the creators genuinely thought they were original, and were crestfallen to find the same idea had already been used elsewhere. I think much the same thing happens in the creation of music. But of course it didn't stop a legion of usually American lawyers cynically trying it on. I agree that if a musician knowingly lifts a well known line, as Plant admits he once did, it's nowadays asking for trouble if it is done without permission, and not to acknowledge it on the track's credits lacks class. But all this legal shit lacks class too. Take the case of Bitter Sweet Symphony, which I only recently learned about. It turns out that the Verve had actually sought and received permission to sample that. But subsequently the American (see the pattern here) record company which worked with the Stones came after them because "they had used too much of it" and as a result Ashcroft and gang got no royalties from that globally successful song - and saw it used without their permission in ads by Nike among others, because they had lost the rights to their own song. That is until 2019 when Richards and Jagger themselves- in an act of class - decided to right a wrong and return the rights and credits to Ashcroft.  Chat GPT provided me with the full detail here, it is well worth reading. 

Hmmmmm. Have you ever heard the track The Verve sampled?

Yes, they added bits and pieces on around it, but the bit they sampled is essentially the whole of the tune used in Bitter Sweet Symphony. They don't just use a small sample like in some songs, but it's the same sample over and over again in a loop. It IS the tune that everyone knows.

So when you hear it you realise that, as good as Bitter Sweet Symphony may be, the whole tune has basically been lifted from somewhere else. Richard Ashcroft did write the lyrics, but he didn't write the tune. Lyrics are great, but without a tune they're just poetry.

And it's not strictly correct to say that "the American record company that worked with the Stones came after them". That same record company - or rather Allen Klein, the owner of the company - had also fucked the Stones over by more or less "stealing" the bulk of the rights to a large chuck of their earlier songs and trousering the royalties himself - which included The Last Time, which was the Stones song that was reworked into an orchestral version which The Verve then nicked the tune from.

So the Stones got a lot of stick over the whole episode, but they weren't the ones enforcing any rights and the rights weren't theirs to give to Richard Ashcroft, until Klein died and his son took a less aggressive approach.

It's an interesting and cautionary tale and is just one example of many occasions where the creators and artistes of a piece of work have been royally fucked over by the people who were supposed to be looking after their interests, but instead feathered their own nests.

I completely agree with your final sentence and diagnosis of who is to blame for all this nonsense (plus the lawyers), and I did not suggest that the Stones initiated the action against the Verve themselves. I also can't disagree when you say that the tune is basically lifted from the orchestral version of "The Last Time". But then I'd ask you, Ok, what material damage has been caused to the creators of the original? None, that I can think of. OK but what about compensation for their role in helping to create a global hit? That's trickier. Certainly they deserved something. What I can say with confidence is that a British court would never have decided that the answer should be "100% of revenues, in perpetuity" and whatever amount the court did decide on, would have been influenced downwards by the fact that the Verve actively sought, and received, permission to use that sample.

BTW to answer your initial question, the first time I heard the Verve track I recognised the sample, as a sample, but I could not place where from. Living in Prague at the time I didn't pick up  much background info about the music I was hearing, but at some stage I was reminded that it came from a Stones track. Just now I tried to find that version. On Tidal it comes up as by the Andrew Oldham Orchestra. I can't find an orchestral  version credited to the Stones themselves. I reckon few  listeners would connect the Stones original to the Verve track unless you played them back to back and some might say, "weeelll, now you mention it, I suppose there is a similarity." 

Have you heard Ashcroft's recent single, "Lover"? He's basically done the same thing again, this time using Joan Armatrading's "Love and Affection" . Apparently he sought and received her agreement. Seems to me that he's sending a message with that song.