Slashdot Mirror


Sir Mix-A-Lot Using Weed To Distribute Music

An anonymous reader writes "Hip-hop musician Sir Mix-A-Lot has made his new CD Daddy's Home available for download using Weed technology. Weed is a relatively new file sharing system based principles of shareware and referrals. You download the DRM WMA weed file and can listen to it 3 times on any computer before deciding to purchase it or not. If you do purchase it (at a price set by the artist), you will receive referral fees (20%, 10%, 5%) for the next 3 generations of people that purchase your copy. The artist always receives 50% of the price. Certainly an interesting approach to distributing music in a world of p2p and iTunes."

36 of 295 comments (clear)

  1. Weed? by e+r+i+k+0 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Ain't that what the RIAA uses too? ;)

  2. I'm getting high by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    Download rates... really fast! It's great!

  3. First Big Butt Post by CptChipJew · · Score: 5, Funny

    I like DRM and I cannot lie
    You other brothers cant deny
    When a girl walks in with an itty bitty waist
    And p2p in yo face
    You get sprung
    Wanna pull out ya gun
    Cuz the RIAA aint tough

    --
    Vonal Declosion
    1. Re:First Big Butt Post by weeboo0104 · · Score: 5, Funny

      I don't-want-none unless you got a T-1 hun!

      --
      It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  4. Weed technology by ZeekWatson · · Score: 5, Funny

    We had weed back in my day, but I had to *pay* for it. None of this referral paybacks. :)

    1. Re:Weed technology by SomeoneGotMyNick · · Score: 4, Funny

      What about the second hand smoke around you when you finished up your stash? You can still get your residuals.....

    2. Re:Weed technology by cdemon6 · · Score: 3, Funny

      In soviet russia, weed uses musicians to sell itself to YOU!

  5. People won't pay for DRM in the long run by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You download the DRM WMA weed file and can listen to it 3 times on any computer before deciding to purchase
    it or not.


    Sure - it's a free tril so I won't complain about the format.

    If you do purchase it... ...then I get the song in a lossless format, complete with digitized cover art and free of any DRM, right? Because as a paying customer, I'd expect to get at least the sound quality and format versatility that the pirates are getting.

    Yes, I did RTFA - the format is no surprise. When the only option for online buying is DRM, it only encourages piracy because regardless of whether you're prepared to pay for the content, it's the only way to get the music without funny restriction.

    1. Re:People won't pay for DRM in the long run by Fnkmaster · · Score: 4, Informative
      I recommend MagnaTune if you are into non-DRM, lossless format music. They also are starting to get digitized cover art for their music. They have non-major label music that actually doesn't suck (unlike an MP3.com or similar, submissions must be approved and they are apparently at least somewhat selective), and their service basically encourages you to explore new songs and albums, listen to high bitrate MP3 streams and then buy at a price (of your choosing - between 5 and 18 dollars I think, with 8 dollars being the "recommended" price).


      About the only thing "Weed" has going for it as a music distribution system as far as I can tell is the pyramid scheme payment system. Kinda cool that if you get friends to try and buy a new song you get rewarded with a small cut, but I'm not sure how much of a factor that would be for most casual users.

    2. Re:People won't pay for DRM in the long run by clifyt · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "If you do purchase it... ...then I get the song in a lossless format..."

      You know this arguement always pisses me off.

      What makes MP3s any less lossless than CDA. Its another format and thats it. As a musician (and more to the point, an engineer and tech for real musicians), I don't think I've recorded anything in the last 2 years where the master wasn't at 24bit 96Khz...that means any CD ya listen to is VERY lossy.

      Then again, most of the musicians I've worked with ask me to burn it down to MP3 so they can listen to it on their pods and don't care about the difference -- and neither do it...its not like I'm sitting around a listening room smoking a pipe pontificating about the clean lows and the crisp upper range of the latest f'n Sir Mix-A-Lot cd...

      I would like to see digital music come with liner notes though (cover art bores me...the liner is where its at).

    3. Re:People won't pay for DRM in the long run by seanadams.com · · Score: 4, Insightful

      What makes MP3s any less lossless than CDA.

      It's inferior sound quality.

      Its another format and thats it.

      It's a different kind of format. CD audio is not a lossy compression scheme, it's a way of storing samples. But you knew that.

      Look, it costs a couple cents to transmit a 650MB CD across the internet - half that if it's losslessly compressed. As far as I'm concerned, if I'm paying $$ for the songs, I should get them in the best possible format within accepted standards. I.e. I wouldn't expect 96KHz/24bit, but I wouldn't complain.

    4. Re:People won't pay for DRM in the long run by damiam · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Ideally, there would be a set of standard formats (Speex, Vorbis, and FLAC would be one such set) supported by all devices and used by all users. Since that's not the case, sometimes we have to encode existing material into new forms. A lossless original allows you to create a Vorbis, WMA, or AAC file of ideal quality (the best that that format can achieve at that bitrate). A lossy original means that your newly transcoded lossy file provides lower quality at a higher bitrate (or significantly lower quality at a lower bitrate) than the ideal. Therefore, lossless originals are better.

      --
      It's hard to be religious when certain people are never incinerated by bolts of lightning.
  6. Maybe In Certain Circles by Oculus+Habent · · Score: 4, Insightful
    While this has potential in large groups of same-age individuals - schools, universities - I don't see this making significant headway in "the real world". I purchase most of my music, and I occasionally burn CDs for friends.

    The biggest difficulties I see it facing are:

    • Selection: If there isn't much there, people aren't as likely to use it.
    • Price: Artist-set prices could mean big variations. Hopefully it'll be consistent, but who knows.
    • Convenience: When three plays are up, how much more difficult is it to download the song on the p2p-network-du-jour?
    --
    That what was all this school was for... to teach us how to solve our own problems. -- janeowit
  7. Interesting approach by MikeXpop · · Score: 5, Funny

    Even more interesting name. I can see the advertisements now. "Weed, the legal alternative to KaZaA"

    --
    Etiquette is etiquette. He kills his mother but he can't wear grey trousers.
  8. Baby Got DRM by linux_user_31337 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    While I'm disappointed that they're distributing DRM'ed WMA files (non-Windows users will certainly be out of luck), I don't want to be too quick to dismiss this. Any distribution channel that gives the artist 50% of the sale is already better than almost anything else out there.

    Can anyone think of a better system that gives the artist this much or more of the sale?

    1. Re:Baby Got DRM by segvio · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The artist still isn't getting "50%." Whoever owns the rights to the copyright gets "50%." If you signed a record contract, it's probably your label that now owns the copyrights. Thus, of that "50%", you get whatever your contract said. A fringe-case however would be the completely independent artist, receiving all "50%."

  9. Sure . . . by RPI+Geek · · Score: 4, Funny

    . . . isn't the first time always free??
    In this case it's the first 3 times, but close enough ;-)

    --

    - "Nobody came out that night, not one was ever seen. But Old Man Stauf is waiting there, crazy sick and mean!"
  10. Where's the crack? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    For the Weed DRM?

    1. Re:Where's the crack? by sofakingl · · Score: 4, Funny

      When you use weed regularly, the side effects are minimal. When laced with crack, it's addictive. It's nice to see technology imitating life. :)

  11. Nothing New by lawpoop · · Score: 4, Funny
    I remember back in the 70s, we used to get together with our old buddy weed and put on some tunes... Your friends would have some great album and then you'd go out and buy it.

    So weed has been making music-sharing happen for several decades, at least. Hmph. Internet.

    --
    Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
    -- Pablo Picasso
  12. MLM is not illegal by tepples · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Can anybody show me something in the U.S. Code, the Code of Federal Regulations, or interstate commerce case law that makes multi-level marketing unlawful in general across the United States? For instance, AllAdvantage.com's payouts used a pyramid structure. It died not because of its MLM structure or because of any FTC action relating to its structure but merely because the bottom fell out of the banner market, which in turned happened once advertisers realized the effects of banner blindness.

    In a pyramid scheme after the style of Ponzi, on the other hand, participants get little for their investments, and they make money only when somebody else has signed up under them. Once saturation has set in, nobody signs up anymore, and the bottom rung of the pyramid gets shafted. But in this pyramid scheme, every participant at every rung receives at least a license to listen to a Sir Mix-A-Lot recording. Therefore, it's legitimate MLM and not a Ponzi scheme.

    1. Re:MLM is not illegal by An+Onerous+Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Technically, a Ponzi scheme is any scheme where you promise a bunch of people a huge return on an investment, and use later investors' money to pay off earlier investors.

      Ponzi schemes aren't always pyramidal, though the two techniques often overlap. Ponzi schemes may or may not involve an actual product, but are most definitely illegal.

      If I recall, it is possible for a MLM to have a product and still be classified as an illegal pyramid scheme. However, I don't remember the criteria.

      --

      You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!

  13. yeah, but... by jeffehobbs · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...have you ever heard Sir Mix-a-lot's album... on weed?

    ~jeff
    (red team go, red team go)

  14. Re:First Big Butt Post:NO MAKE IT STOP!!! by t0qer · · Score: 5, Funny

    My fri/sat night fun job is doorman for a SJ karaoke bar...

    I swear to god if I hear that song being sung by a group of sorority girls screaming into the mics at the top of their lungs one more time i'm going to shoot myself.

  15. Re:Mini Pyramid Scheme? by t0ny · · Score: 5, Funny

    Its technically not a Ponzi Scheme. Its more like the red-headed step child of an iPod and Amway.

    --

    Manipulate the moderator system! Mod someone as "overrated" today.

  16. The artist does NOT get half... by skizrule · · Score: 5, Informative
    50% of every sale always goes to the artist or publisher who owns the song.

    Even with Weed, the record industry still stands a very good chance of taking half the profits, unless the song was never released on a major label.

  17. Re:original hip hop ? by Lispy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That's actually an interesting point. There is a german hiphop band called "Die fantastischen Vier" wich use excessive samples from StarWars IV: "A new hope" on their first album ("Jetzt geht's ab") from 1988. If they recorded the album today they would have to pay a huge amount of money to George Lucas. It really isn't easy to determine where exactly an original work of art begins. After all we are all standing on the shoulders of giants (see also SCOs-Copyright trouble).

    Personally I feel that while things get more and more restrictive less of original ideas arise (same with TV shows, Movies, and so on...).
    Or is this just me gettnig old? ;-)

  18. Actually by Scrameustache · · Score: 4, Funny

    You download the DRM WMA weed file

    No, no I don't.

    --

    You can't take the sky from me...

  19. Thinking about the costs of doing it by rcastro0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    How can this be less expensive as a means of distribution than simply setting up a server and sell direct, like Apple did ? I mean, don't think about only bandwidth costs but:
    1) Costs of paying people down the pyramid
    2) Fraud Management
    3) "CRM" with the huge mass of "distribution partners"

    Unless they have some brilliant marketing concept hidden in there, which I may have missed, it seems like just a more expensive way of doing the same thing Itunes does.

    --
    Quem a paca cara compra, paca cara pagará.
  20. I was going to collect a lot of referral money... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    ...but then I got high.

  21. Poor marketing foresight. by jhobbs · · Score: 5, Funny
    Mastercard - Sept 9 - Oct 8

    $4.99..................Weed

    Deja Vu man. This will be like when I called the hints line at Virgin Interactive. Took forever to explain to my parents that $3.99 to a 900 line called Virgin Entertainment was not a phone sex line.

    Honestly though, I wonder if anyone has though about what a tough sell this will be, not to the target demographic, teenagers (they'll love it), but the source of their disposable income, their very uncool parents.

    My crystal ball keeps showing me a Chevy Nova.

  22. Coopting the term "Weed" -- Live music distro by oboylet · · Score: 5, Informative

    The term weed has frequently been used in live music trading circles to refer to a method of distributing your favorite phish/dead/moe./sci show quickly. Out of generosity on person seeds the show to two people absolutely free, no blanks, no postage, etc. The only string attached are that each recipient in turn gives it to two more people for free. And so on, like rabbits. peace.

  23. Re:If you're avoiding all patents... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful
    All of these are transitory, a storage format on the other hand is, by its nature, a permanent element for which control over the technology implies control over the work.

    This becomes especially important when we're looking at areas where revenue shouldn't necessarily be an element of distribution, at a time when technologies are advancing to the point that these controlled technologies aren't even open - even when patented. It's one thing for PCM-based CDs to be patented and subject to payments and controls by Philips et al, it's another for the layout of works on a computer to be, in a way that turns the entire motive of patents on its head - to be controlled and subject to arbitrary limits with the data therein locked away.

  24. Apples and xeroxes of apples. by 0x20 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think you understand what "lossless" means.

    Using lossless compression, any digital audio file can be duplicated for infinite generations and still be a perfect copy of the original. If you make a FLAC copy of an APE copy of a CDA file (all lossless compression methods), the 3rd generation is identical to the first. No audio information is removed. If you make an MP3 of an OGG of a WMA (lossy methods), the file will change and the sound quality will deteriorate with each successive generation, as more information is irretrievably tossed out each time.

  25. Re:original hip hop ? by ebbomega · · Score: 4, Insightful

    First of all, I wouldn't call P. Diddy (or whatever his name of the week is) or 50 cent pioneers of hip hop. And hip hop has NOT always been based on that. Sugarhill Gang was really the first to do it and they did it rather well, so much so that Rapper's Delight was a VERY different song from Good Times. And I dare you to find anybody who isn't a Run DMC afficianado realize that It's Tricky borrowed guitar lines from My Sharona.

    Hip Hop evolved off the streets with what instruments they had, namely records and their voices. So they'd write poetry, and "rap" it overtop their favourite beats. Funk was big in Black culture, as well as useful for rapping as it was a lot of bassline and not so much lyrics, in the 70s and as such was used frequently. And eventually the DJs started manipulating their turntables to do little tricks, like varying the electrical input to change pitch and using their hands to backspin and play with little samples of music, known as "scratching".

    Now, I'm not disagreeing with you that most modern hip hop is blatant plagiarism of other people's work, regardless of whether or not it's authorized. But to outright disclaim the entire genre just because of some people who achieve market prominence in the last 10 years who happen to be talentless hacks seems about as silly as to say that Punk is stupid because you dislike Sum 41. Or that Rock sucks because you dislike Linkin Park.

    --
    Karma: Non-Heinous
  26. Looks like by The+Tyro · · Score: 5, Funny

    Sir Mix-a-lot is taking some lessons from Cypress Hill...

    Heh... They've been using weed to sell their music for years.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.