Slashdot Mirror
Weird Al Says 'Don't Download This Song'
Kazzahdrane writes "Known geek and comedy singer/songwriter Weird Al Yankovic has released the first song from his new album 'Straight Outta Lynwood' for free on his MySpace page. The track is entitled 'Don't Download This Song' and tells of the dangers of illegally downloading music from filesharing sites." His MySpace page is most excellent. "Hi. Al here. No, really, it's Al. Seriously. What, you don't believe me? Go ahead, check weirdal.com. Hit the MySpace link. See if it brings you right back to this page. Go ahead. I'll wait. See? It's really me. I should point out... this means that conversely, all those other people on MySpace who are claiming to be me or implying that they are me... are definitely NOT me. I'm sure they're very nice people... they're just not 'Weird Al' Yankovic. I assure you."
I look forward to the music video that is supposed to air on Yahoo music at 10:00 PM Pacific Time tonight (August 22nd).
Enjoy one of the last artists that is still concerned about his fans and music no matter how hilarious and campy it may be. He has the sense to realize that he's very well off compared to his fans and jokes about solid gold humvees and diamond studded pools.
My work here is dung.
Joke: ->
/|\
You: O
/ \
EVERYDAY IS CATURDAY
Weird Al and MC Lars should have a rap battle about music piracy. They'd sell millions of records. Or have millions of downloads. Or soemthing.
Really if you don't like Weird Al then you must have been unloved as a child.
His MySpace page is most excellent.
Was this summary written by Keanu Reeves?
The theory of relativity doesn't work right in Arkansas.
What do you mean his song? We're talking about SCO here. The real question is "Has Weird Al paid the license fee SCO demanded for his use of their song?"
Pfft, yeah. He only has 6 platinum records, and 3 gold. You told him!
Basically, James Blunt approved the parody, so Weird Al went ahead and did the track, but then James Blunt's record label objected - so Weird Al released it for free on his website.
"I have a long-standing history of respecting artists' wishes," Yankovic writes. "So if James Blunt himself were objecting, I wouldn't even offer my parody for free on my Web site. But since it's a bunch of suits -- who are actually going against their own artist's wishes -- I have absolutely no problem with it."
like the other commenters, i too had no trouble with Poodle Hat.
in addition, as for Al's supposed anti-downloading stance, it should be mentioned that he is in a somewhat unique position: literally hundreds of songs that AREN'T his are constantly attributed to him on file sharing systems, just because they're (ostensibly) "funny". Al maintains a relatively innocent, upbeat personna, but many of the songs misattributed to him are stupid, mean spirited, or far raunchier than anything Al would want to be associated with. it's a significant problem for the guy that goes much deeper than simple lost royalties.
that said, every time i've heard him asked about file sharing, that is how he has framed his response. he doesn't want people to think he wrote "smoke a bowla"
i could live a little longer in this prison
For those without flash: http://www.dontdownloadthissong.com/tracks/DDTS.mp 3
Weird Al is distributed under a faux independent label, Volcano Records, which is owned by Sony BMG, who brought us intrusive DRM and is a proud part of the RIAA intellectual "property" lawsuit cartel. Now I have to get a new goddamned movement for my irony meter!
I too have felt the cold finger of injustice.
Our story begins with a skim over the day's Slashdot headlines. The regulars are all present: Government X adopts OSS/ODF, Mr. Nobody gives a loose overview of security problem Y, and SCO does transparently underhanded deed Z. Yet one topic in particular grabs my attention...
Being a Weird Al fan, and well-aware of the problems he has collecting from his label, my mind registers the topic both as a must-Read-More and as another chapter to take note of in the long saga of digital music rights. With significant anticipation, I add it to my other fifteen or so open tabs and proceed to work my way through my article reading queue.
I (grudgingly) visit myspace, but something's amiss. There is no download link! Nothing in the navigation menu, the news posts, or the comments make mention of where I can obtain the song, yet visitors proceed to comment on how much they enjoyed it. Looking for an alternate link, I return to Slashdot, only to find more reactions without mention of any download difficulties. And so I begin to worry irrationally: "I'm the only one in the world who can't listen to Weird Al!" I've had usability issues with myspace before, but normally after a minute or so of misguided clicking I'm able to stumble upon something that hints at actual content. I try two other domains, weirdal.com and dontdownloadthissong.com, only to find the former hopelessly slashdotted and the latter unusable. My frustration continues to build.
I reflect that perhaps it is a browser compatability issue - I am using Konqueror after all - and try my luck with firefox. After configuring it to *not* attempt DNS queries over IPv6, that I might reach the content I so desperately seek this century, I find that myspace persists to mock me. It is as if some divine administrative force knows my IP address and has modified the web server specifically to torment me.
I search for torrent files - first through links from kind slashdotters looking to boost their karma, and when that fails, via KTorrent's integrated search plugin. Bittorrent.com? No matches. Isohunt.com? Nada. Mininova? Bytenova? Torrentspy?! My heart races as I continue to exhaust the list of built-in known search engines, until... Aha! The Pirate Bay has found one match, uploaded a mere twenty-two minutes ago.
But to use a torrent from the most infamous peer-to-peer site in existence, what would that make me? Is the torrent legal? Just because Weird Al chooses to distribute it on his webpage doesn't mean he releases that right to others. I'm sure under these circumstances he couldn't possibly mind, but not having heard of the song's existence prior to reading Slashdot, I simply do not know the record label's stance on the matter, or whether they even have partial rights over this particular mp3. But it does not matter - I must have the song!
The irony - that I am bittorrenting a free-as-in-beer song that possesses a satirical name mocking filesharing litigation, and am potentially committing a copyright violation in the process - is not lost on me. My idealistic side taunts the RIAA, "I just DARE you to try to sue me over this, my only infringement!" My pessimistically pragmatic side notes that the unusual circumstances would make no difference, as I would be forced to settle, and never see my day in court anyway.
I emerge from my digression to the present.
No peers or seeders. For the moment, the music industry and other enemies of Peer-to-Peer breathe a sigh of relief.
Then it occurs to me that the song might be unreachable to those who have not installed the dreaded Flash Plugin. But why? A slashdot commenter mentions that the song is indeed in the mp3 format, so it is not as if my lack of such a player could possibly prevent me from obtaining this song. For what kind of sick madman would consign a publically-downloadable mp3 to the clutches of a proprietary system and that system alone?
As a rule, I have abstained from using Flash on my desktop's Gentoo installation. This self-denial is due to a combination of fac
Evidently, the key to understanding recursion is to begin by understanding recursion. The rest is easy.