I'm aware of that, but the difference with led zep is that they took songwriting credits for these songs, and made lots of money from it (i'm sorry to come across like i'm shitting on this thread - but i find it interesting).
The stones, the animals, the yardbirds, the kinks, the beatles - whoever - played songs by american r'n'b acts, but they didnt claim to have written them, they gave the songwriters their fair dues (and royalties).
Which might sound be a bit "so what" - until you take into account that most of the blues artists in question worked their arses off touring the chitlin circuit or whatever, and never made money. Lots of them lived and died in abject poverty, or doing manual labour, while a bunch of white rock stars nicked their songs and became mega rich.
Influence is one thing - i'm not talking about "white people stealing black culture" or some cultural appropriation rant.
Frankly that's a whole different discussion, and not what i'm referring to.
The thing with led zeppelin though is that they literally plagiarised other people's work, and claimed it as their own.
Songwriting credits, royalties, etc etc.
Covers are a different story - you record them and disclose the songwriter's name(s). Then the songwrite(s) get royalties.
Look at a Beatles or Stones record and the Chuck Berry/Bo Diddley/Buddy Holly numbers are acknowledged as such.
Led Zeppelin managed to get away with a lot because they used obscure songs by people who didn't have the wealth or record industry backing to legally challenge them.
Or
in the case of the intro to "Stairway to Heaven" well, i don't know how they got away with that, but it bears a striking resemblance to another song. Maybe i'm a pedant, but it
has totally spoiled their music for me.
Sorry.
I'm a killjoy. I'll shut up now, and piss off back to NEMD.