You haven't looked up the definition of plagiarism, have you?

I can steal your car and admit to doing it, it's still stealing.

Nice try, but it's a little different when you're not dealing with material objects.

If you cover a song, so long as you give the original artist credit, it's not stealing, K? Simple as that. Similarly, if you sample a song, so long as the original artist is given some sort of credit, it's not stealing. Sure, some might argue that a writing credit should be required, but I don't see how taking at most one bar of music from another song and turning it into something that hardly resembles the original song at all could necessitate a writing credit. I haven't heard anything about any P-Funk artists complaining about NWA or whoever else, so I'm pretty sure it's fine.

But sampling is not covering a song, Zeppelin have songs that did just that, sampling, and yet idiots wont do their research and they'll call anything an uncredited cover. And even the covers they did are radically different from the originals, do a little research, Youtube is your friend.

Thats not the goddamn point, people use the whole plagiarism thing to try and discredit Zeppelins music completely, and if they're gonna do that why stop there?

Hmm.... Like Stairway to Heaven?

Yeah and I haven't heard Randy California complain about Stairway either, in fact he even said he didn't consider Stairway to be a ripoff.

Oh my God.

This has nothing to do with Led Zeppelin, you ****ing mongoloid. Get the **** over it. I never said Stairway To Heaven was a rip-off, I said the intro might've been lifted, and considering their history of plagiarizing songs (as in covering a song and giving no credit to the original artist), it probably had been.

As far as Randy California goes, sure, he didn't have much to say about Zeppelin's supposed plagiarism, but a handful of other artists did.

I don't even understand what the hell your argument is, to be honest. You say that Led Zeppelin weren't plagiarists, though they did "sample" songs, yet hip-hop producers are plagiarists because they utilize samples?

Could you please refrain from name calling?

Sure, could you come up with a coherent argument and stop spewing on about Led Zeppelin like it's a ****ing verbal tic?

My argument is not that it's (Sampling) immoral or wrong, just that it means you don't get any credit for "writing" the song.

If I write a book and the most memorable two chapters are word for word "The Idiot" or any literary classic, I did not write the book. Even if Dostoevsky's Lawyers gave me the okay.

It doesn't mean they should be punished or the music shouldn't have an audience, it just simply means to me, I will not take the song serious as a notable work of art or music achievement.

P.S. Wayfarer, be less serious...everyone's friends here

Why? As I've said, most often the song doesn't even sound anything like the original. It's not like they just take a song, remove the vocals and rap over it. A lot of producers will get up to seven or eight different songs, take little snippets from each, and put them together to create something new. Sure, sometimes an entire bassline is used, but even then, it rarely (if ever) sounds much like the original song due to other samples being used, different vocal melodies, etc.

Of course the original artists deserve credit, but to say the producers/rappers deserve none is ****ing ridiculous.

The hell? Yes you did. You just didn't write those two chapters.

I'm not as serious as it seems, trust me, lol. Just a bit grating, having to type out the same post out over and over again because people keep saying you're wrong but aren't even defeating your argument.

Sigh

How many times do I have to say it?

Oh the irony.

Oh the irony.

And you are taking this a bit seriously, you're being overly defensive and aggressive already.