Led Zeppelin is Going to Court, The Uniqueness of Plagiarism in Music

It may be the most famous song of the 20th century, and now it is looking like the people who wrote it are about to go court over accusations of plagiarism.  And it looks like they're going to lose.

Yes, over 40 years after "Stairway to Heaven" was first released, Led Zeppelin is being sued for Copyright Infringement by the band Spirit for ripping off their song "Taurus" for Stairway's opening riff.  (The part in question starts at the 44 seconds mark)

The two guitar parts are nearly identical, Zeppelin had toured with Spirit in 1968 (4 years before the release of Satirway), and after ruled to not throw out the case yesterday it is looking like Zeppelin will be forced to acknowledge the aping.

Considering that Spirit is only looking for a writing credit with consideration for future royalties (and not back pay on the 550 million dollars the song is estimated to have made since its release) it is a bit odd to see Zeppelin so opposed to acknowledging an obvious influence.  What's worse is that Zeppelin's initial defense has nothing to do with songwriting but rather that the case should have been thrown out because it was brought against them in a Pennsylvania court, somewhere they see as having no jurisdiction over the band.  Lame.

The whole case seems pretty cut and dry.  If a school teacher can nail Men at Work for sampling the "Kookaburra" song in their 80s hit "Down Under", Zeppelin really doesn't have much a chance here.  What is interesting is the standard to which music is held on issues of copyright compared to other mediums.

Not one original story ever came from this guy's head.

All artists are constantly stealing from each other.  If Shakespeare had lived today he'd probably spend more time in the courtroom than the Globe Theatre.  In film, knock off pictures (known at "mockbusters") are released every year to try and cash in on projected blockbusters.  The Asylum film production company has made it their sole business.  In literature, stylistic and character thievery is so common it is both encouraged and necessary.  In music, you can't do these things.  

If the notes match, you've got a problem.  Even if the two songs are stylistically miles apart.  It doesn't matter if one song is about the vietnam war and the other is about eating ice cream, if they have a similar chord progression you can expect a law suit.  Just ask Robin Thicke.

Why?  

NOT copyright infringement.

There is a movie out there called Atlantic Rim right now, that is so much like Pacific Rim in every way there is no way you could watch it without thinking of the latter.  But its just different enough.  Maybe it has to do with the idea that music is a one dimensional art form, you can only experience it through sound so similarities are harder to ignore.

Maybe it has to do with the personal level at which most songs are created.  It takes dozens if not hundreds of people to make most films.  Books are rarely released without multiple rounds with an editor and story changes.  But a song is typically written by one person.

Or maybe it is the lack of copyright-able aspects within a song.  You can have a story about a tomb raiding archeologist fighting nazi's just as long as you don't name him Indiana Jones.  Try writing a protest song about growing up in a poor factory down in which your narrator is drafted into military service and then comes back home and is unable to get a job called "Born in Ontario".  Count the minutes it takes before you get sued.

I don't know why it is.  All I know for sure, is that "Stairway to Heaven" is more than likely soon to have an additional songwriter in its liner notes.