At what point does being influenced by something become copying - or worse - [i]stealing[/i]? Where and when is the proverbial line drawn? Why is it okay some times, but not others? Don't worry, these questions will be given some context with a few paragraphs... [spoiler]A few months ago, I was sitting in my mom's car listening to the radio. At that time, a segment called [i]Nights with Alice Cooper[/i] was on. I've always enjoyed this particular segment as Alice usually plays stuff that differs a bit from what typically airs and also talks a bit between songs and commercials. During this, Alice started mentioning something about a soundclip (and some sort of website that it was relevant to iirc) to an old song that sounds pretty similar to Led Zeppelin's [i]Stairway to Heaven[/i] (the song in question being [i]Taurus[/i] by a band called Spirit). I was surprised to say the least at how similar they sounded, but after a few minutes, gave it no thought and just started flipping through different stations. Today, however, I was perusing about on bing and came across something saying that Led Zeppelin is in court for plagiarism. Here's a few links to some of the articles: [url=http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/led-zeppelins-stairway-to-heaven-targeted-for-plagiarism-20140519]Rolling Stones[/url] [url=http://www.contactmusic.com/story/led-zeppelin-plagiarism-case-to-be-heard-in-pennsylvania_4420699]Contact Music[/url] [url=http://2paragraphs.com/2014/10/tragic-story-behind-led-zeppelin-stairway-to-heaven-lawsuit/]2 Paragraphs[/url] [url=http://www.deathandtaxesmag.com/229808/led-zeppelin-loses-first-round-of-stairway-to-heaven-plagiarism-lawsuit/]Death and Taxes Magazine[/url] So, the members of Led Zepp are being dragged to court for something that - and lets be honest here - tons of musicians, artists, bands and groups do. Am I saying the large amount of people that do it makes it okay? No. Overall I'm sort of on the fence about this sort of thing. It seems as though shit is thrown and legal action is taken when the musician(s) in question is/are very popular and well known or when a slight bias is present. I'll use a friend of mine for example. We were talking about bands and the discussion eventually lead to us talking about songs or parts of songs that sound similar or like a note for note copy. We started talking about Metallica's [i]Seek and Destroy[/i] and Saxon's [i]Princess of the Night[/i] - a song which many say Kirk "[i]stole[/i] riffs from." and others say was simply "[i]influenced[/i] by." - my friend shares the later opinion, I myself am on the fence. The conversation then shifted to guitar playing in general and my friend was saying he was bored and didn't know what song he should learn... A conversation I've always hated having with him 'cause he always turns his nose up at the idea of playing something that isn't by Metallica when he definitely has the skill to do so. During these conversations I'd always suggest Megadeth, to which he'd say there's nothing he really wants to try 'cause their songs are either too easy or too hard. I mentioned something about Sweating Bullets. He said no one silly reason... Some crap about Dave ripping off Deep Purple... After trying to figure out what the hell he was on about, the conversation went back to what we were talking about before as I wanted to know how a riff that is blatantly similar if not the same, is just considered Kirk being influenced by another while a riff that I still can't hear any similarities to is considered Dave copying. Sorry for the great wall of text, but if you've come along this far, just know it's almost over... Anyway, this goes back to two of my earlier points. It seems like it's only a big deal when a band is very well known and there's clearly some personal bias involved. I mean, just look at this [url=http://www.cracked.com/article_18500_the-5-most-famous-musicians-who-are-thieving-bastards.html]article[/url] on Cracked (yeah I know it's old). All those people getting shit for something others do just as well if not more, albeit they aren't being sued... I'll admit, I'm a bit biased myself as I usually give Avenged Sevenfold shit for copying other bands and theirs songs. The most recent example being their album [i]Hail to the King[/i], which Robb Flynn from Machine Head comically calls a "cover album" [url=http://www.metalinjection.net/latest-news/feuds/machine-heads-robb-flynn-congratulates-avenged-sevenfold-covers-album-hail-king-going-1]linky[/url]. All this goes back to my questions from the start of my post. Why is it okay in some situations, but not in others? Or is it just a simple matter of wanting credit where credit is due in the form of cash? If that is the case, damn near every payed musician should probably be in court...[/spoiler] [spoiler]There's a reason this was tagged with Shitpost and blog and put in a spoiler... I was literally typing all of that nonsense as it came to me...[/spoiler]