Wink wink, it's not Zep

[Jim Berry <jberry@xxxxxxxx>]

<wink, wink>

Yeah, sure. Claiming the tapes are a Zeppelin sound alike is gonna fool 'em!
I know that some of our law enforcement people in many different countries
are not hip to all of the tape trading stuff but, c'mon, they aren't that
stupid.

>>I think that maybe the idea to Atlantic is not what you
>>believe so much as what you claim. I've come across odd imports I believed
>>were Zeppelin, cause it sounded like them to me, but I'm certainly not
>>going to claim they are Zeppelin.

Forgeries have always existed. In painting, for instance, many great works
have been discovered to be forgeries. The main reason they get so far is
because of complete lack of corroborating evidence. I certainly am wary of
anything claiming to be Zeppelin that is unknown, the acoustic version of
Black Dog for instance. But in many cases there is evidence from other
attendees, news paper reviews, ticket stubs, Robert's banter, videos, band
member recollections, etc.  These accounts don't document my personal
experience but those of others. Taken as a whole they do add up to a truth.
Is there room for doubt? Certainly, but it is very small.

In many cases you can put "for sure" on it as well. John Paul Jones
confirmed his unusual organ solo in Japan. He said he didn't do that much.
So in at least that case you can safely label your tape at the real deal. I
can list other cases where the tape matches recollections from the band
members. The '71 BBC sessions can also be verified. I think the audience
recordings from MSG '73 can also be labeled genuine as they are confirmed by
a release from the band itself. How about Earls Court? The video backs up
the fact it is Zep (or is that a faked video too?). How about Sydney,
Seattle, LA Forum, and all the other videos that exist to corroborate the
audio tapes. The Sydney tape is known news reel footage and it matches up
with the audience tape. Something similar can be said for Texas Pop 8/69. I
could list others too. My point is your doubt on authenticity is maybe a
little too high, don't be so cynical.

>>Jim can believe whatever he wants to as well. 

Thanks, wow, I'll tell that to my wife :-)

>>In situations of a possible federal violation of copyright authentication
>>of a work needs to be proven beyond any reasonable doubt and with more a
>>more reasonable certainty that circumstantial evidence can provide.

It is all over the map on this one. There are cases where only
circumstantial evidence exists. The courts have not been consistent on how
much proof is required. They have used their own judgment. That in the end
is what it all comes down to; judgment. 

If your judgment is such that the doubt leads you to label many/all your Zep
recordings and "maybe" so be it. I and many others would not be deem it so. 

>>Otherwise there's a possibility at least ten percent of the Zep influenced
>>artists that have come out since Zeppelin might get charged with copyright
>>violation based on circumstantial evidence.

Bollicks. Derivative works are another issue entirely.

Jim