Why do dad rock faggots continue to deny Led Zeppelin's plagiarism?
>>65712297
who gives le shit rite?
>>65712318
this
dad rock is irrelevant as fuck
>>65712351
it's less about the shitty dad rock and more about the dozens of blues/folk artists they ripped off and who never got proper credit
>Modern artist makes a song around a sample
No talent, stealing other people's work
>Led Zeppelin take a whole song and claim it as their own
It's part of the tradition, they're still the greatest band of all time
Dads will defend this
>>65712394
What's more, at least the sampled artists get paid for their work. How much are you betting Jake Holmes didn't receive a penny from Dazed and Confused?
>>65712297
All blues is massively derivative. Anyone who claims Led Zep stole from them just took it from someone else in the first place.
Led Zeppelin are a bunch of faggots but I doubt Clapton and the trillion other shitty blues rock bands got permission from the people they ripped off/covered.
>>65712548
kys if you think that way
>>65712574
What, you think The Kinks called up Howlin' Wolf when they ripped off Smokestack Lightning?
>>65712458
>All blues is massively derivative
Yet they still ripped off many of their contemporaries
>>65712297
no one denies it, most people just don't care because they like the Zep versions more anyway
>>65712394
this
>>65712548
Most of those other bands' cover songs were just b-sides, unlike Zeppelin who based their entire career off of """"reworking"""" """blues standards"""
Honestly, I don't really care if they plagiarized, I like them because they sound good and are a little bit nostalgic.
>>65712297
>caring about dad rock or blues
They're both shit and irrelevant.
>>65712297
I'm not denying that Led Zeppelin ripped people off.
But have you heard Dazed And Confused or Stairway To Heaven? Those rip offs are amazing.
>>65712394
I support sampling. It's all about the end result, not the means.
>dad rock
