Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Sparks From En Banc Arguments In Song Suit Against Led Zeppelin

By Scott Graham
November 01, 2019

There was much harmony along with a few discordant notes as an en banc panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit took up the copyright case involving Led Zeppelin's "Stairway to Heaven." All the judges who spoke during oral arguments in Skidmore v. Led Zeppelin, 16-56057, seemed to agree that sheet music deposited with the U.S. Copyright Office, not a sound recording of it, defines the scope of copyright for a musical work governed by the 1909 Copyright Act. That prompted bitter protests from Francis Malofiy, the attorney representing the estate of Randy Wolfe (p/k/a Randy California), which alleges that Led Zeppelin copied Wolfe's 1967 song "Taurus" when the group wrote "Stairway to Heaven."

Malofiy argued that the sheet music was transcribed by a third party and Led Zeppelin didn't read it. Rather, Zeppelin guitarist Jimmy Page had access to "Taurus" from watching Wolfe's shows in the psychedelic rock group Spirit and from owning five of that band's records. That created "an Orwellian world" at trial where the parties were "comparing something that Randy didn't write and that Jimmy Page didn't read," Malofiy said. The result was a verdict that "promotes form over substance," Malofiy insisted. (The en banc court turned down attorney Malofiy's request to play portions of "Taurus" and "Stairway to Heaven" on his cellphone for the judges during the oral arguments.)

In 2016, jurors found no substantial similarity between the two songs. Central District of California federal Judge R. Gary Klausner had instructed jurors that "common musical elements, such as descending chromatic scales [which appear in both 'Taurus' and "Stairway to Heaven'], arpeggios or short sequences of three notes" are not protected by copyright. Last year, a Ninth Circuit three-judge panel threw out the trial verdict and ordered a new trial. The jurors should have been told that even a limited number of notes can be copyrighted if selected and arranged in an original way, the panel held. But the panel backed District Judge Klausner's decision not to play a recording of "Taurus" for the jury.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Anti-Assignment Override Provisions Image

UCC Sections 9406(d) and 9408(a) are one of the most powerful, yet least understood, sections of the Uniform Commercial Code. On their face, they appear to override anti-assignment provisions in agreements that would limit the grant of a security interest. But do these sections really work?