Originally Posted by Michael Zaneski
Originally Posted by Fdemetrio


I think true original music is rare, but I think without copyright protection, why create anything?



This is a question only modern (Westernized) people could ask.

Creativity in and of itself is part of what it means to be human. Certainly it's at the top of the Maslovian hierarchy of needs and is only a concern after food, shelter, etc. have been met.*

http://austinhillshaw.com/creativit...-leap-from-lack-to-creative-fulfillment/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow%27s_hierarchy_of_needs


But still, in this our modern age, without SOME outlet for creativity, suicide rates would more than likely skyrocket, with a "loss of (life's meaning" at the center and the recurring pattern in the suicides.

And in non-Western cultures, music is less ego driven and more driven by community and spirituality.

But in ours and European societies, and all cultures transformed by The Internet and social media, we have "designated receptacles" for our creativity like music, art, literature, and moving visuals, that can be copyrighted but also have "natural" protection from theft. Meaning that if you can prove you wrote the damn thing, that will probably be good enough in a court of law.

Before the modern age, In the world of rural musics, folk, blues, etc..the practice of sharing was commonplace. Rural society at least seemed less ego driven and more about standing on the shoulders of elders and building something, watching something grow and participating in that growth..

Back to Led Zep..

The irony is..

They took advantage of people who were making music at the tail end of this less ego-driven way of doing things, like bluesmen Willie Dixon, Robert Johnson, Sonnyboy Williamson, and folkies like Bert Jansch and Joan Baez.

And as Brian pointed out earlier, the whole process of theft can evolve organically and innocently enough, simply by getting together with bandmates and jamming. "What'll we play" "I dunno..I learned this cool new Howlin Wolf lick.." (begins to play lick..exciting the singer to recall another bluesman's words)..and then...MAGIC HAPPENS....and then attempts are made to transform the words and music into something else..but no magic...so....

--I am not excusing this practice, but it's the basic foundation of how bands create, when they get together without an agenda..


Mike



I have always maintained that music stemmed from a basic human need. And that it was never supposed to be a business. So your right in saying its a question only asked by modern people cerca 1500 and there on. SLowly when Classical music came about it became more of a business.

Anways, im not defending Led Zep, ive had many many arguments that I always seem to lose with my Led Zepplin friends. The debate of which was the better band The WHO or ZEP, i always seemed to lose, but couldnt understand why. Best rock drummer, Moon, Best rock bassist ever, Entwhistle, Best front man ever Daltry, next to Jaggar, and one of the best howls in rock, and one of the greatest songwriters in rock history in Pete, the songs were songs not just riffs.

And no copyright infringements! The Who still blow my mind more than Zep ever could, but I do love zep as well.

But Zep followed the blues tradition, you become unique by the way you interpret whats already there. SO maybe they felt they were entitled to borrow, and or steal.

They didnt have to do all that, some of their ballad and folk stuff was strong enough so as to never be accused of stealing.

But I will say that Jimmy Page might be the greatest riff writer of all time. Its hard to find another, possibly Keith RIchards but not quite as extensive