Originally Posted by Wayfarer

Covering a song and taking credit for writing it, however, is plagiarism, regardless of how different from the original it may sound.

And what's with this "oh, it's just the lyrics" shite? Plagiarizing lyrics is still plagiarizing.

Oh, and I'm not a "Zep hater", if that's what it seems like. I think they're sometimes given more credit than they deserve and I never really listen to them anymore seeing as I've heard virtually their entire discography on the radio at least 75 times (and I hardly even listen to the radio), but I don't "hate" them. I think some of the criticism they receive is ridiculous. For instance, "Jimmy Page was such a sloppy guitarist." Who ****ing cares? Tons of blues guitarists had sloppy technique, including, oh, what's that one guy...oh yeah, Jimi Hendrix. Being sloppy doesn't inherently mean that you're a bad guitar player.

However, I don't understand what's so horribly wrong with the plagiarism accusations. I can't even see why people try to defend the band. It's fairly obvious to me that they did steal a good bit of material. I mean, hell, were they not successfully sued a couple of times for it? The avid LZ fans who can't seem to admit that the band ever did any wrong try to justify it with bullshit like, "Oh, well everyone was stealing riffs in the '60s," but that's not true at all. I'm sure a handful of other '60s bands did lift a riff or two, but I can't think of anyone who plagiarized to the extent that Led Zeppelin did. Things like the intro to Stairway To Heaven are arguable, sure, but on several occasions the band covered songs and took full credit for writing them, and that's plagiarism. It's not even debatable.