BOC: Lyric discussions

[Paul Mather]

On Tue, 5 Oct 1999, Ted Jackson jr. s2h2 wrote:

=> > From:          DASLUD at AOL.COM
=>
=> > In a message dated 10/5/99 8:43:14 AM, jswartz at MITRE.ORG writes:
=> >
=> > << I do know, of course, that the
=> > first few Led Zeppelin albums had a very heavy blues slant to them.>>
=> > ====
=> > oh i'm such a bastard...
=> > "very heavy blues slant" is a polite way of saying  they were absolutely the
=> > biggest =thieves= of all time, as borne out by royalties subsequently being
=> > paid to willie dixon. etc.
=> > and then there's always randy california's "taurus" off the first spirit
=> > lp....say no more.
=>
=> You are so right!  Rolling Stones being perhaps the biggest thieves
=> of all time--and the least talented.  Pains me to say it, but ZZ Top
=> are plagiarizing bastards too.  Weren't they the band that Willie
=> Dixon sued?  I always figured that had something to do with the
=> absence of a ZZT boxed set...

No, Willie Dixon successfully sued Led Zeppelin.  Listen to his "You
Need Love" (e.g., as performed by Muddy Waters) and their huge hit
"Whole Lotta Love" from _Led Zeppelin II_ and tell me he doesn't have
a cast-iron case. :-)

The big difference between Led Zeppelin and the like of the Rolling
Stones is that the Rolling Stones were explicitly doing blues covers
(at least in their early days) and were crediting them as such.  But,
with Led Zeppelin, they took the heinous step of crediting themselves
as the authors of the tunes.  (Subsequent to the lawsuits, I believe
the original authors also are credited---rightly so!)

Even "trad., arr. Led Zeppelin" would've been better than what they
did.  I like their music, but stealing other people's credit fairly
stinks.

Cheers,

Paul.

NP: Willie Dixon, _The Chess Box, Disc 2_

e-mail: paul at gromit.dlib.vt.edu

"I don't live today; maybe tomorrow..."
        --- James Marshall Hendrix