I like to live my life solving problems rather than looking for them. Perhaps this is because I find that peoples’ problems have a way of appearing, come what may.

I’d like, therefore, to start a thread on a different issue than “what would a mixter sale do to the site?”.

I’d like to instead begin a collective daydream about mixter’s “next level”.

The original Lessig weblog post, the RFP, and the announcements about the potential sale of ccmixter speak of mixter going to the “next level”. The notion is that ccmixter needs to go to some mythical next step.

I am always impressed by the way that science fiction presaged so much science, as if an understanding of the imaginative possibilities created an inspiration for the lunar lander or
radio satellite, e.g., to be created.

Let’s share visions for where mixter could go. Let me hasten to say that I love where mixter is now, and I’m not saying “there’s something wrong” or some such. I get bored of people trying to find dysfunction where things basically function very well.

Let me start with my visions:

I tend to worry less about whether mixter commercializes, although I am perfectly happy and hopeful that artists here who wish to find more commercial opportunities should do so. I am concerned that mixter fulfill its role as a velvet revolutionary in the music sharing culture. If ccmixter fulfills this role, it is in the vanguard of a miracle. I advocate for that miracle.

My wish list includes the following:

A. I’d like to see ccmixter expand its own sample pool, with an emphasis on BY and PD works. I’d like to see a set of loops and individual notes that are more remix-able.

B. I’d like to see ccmixter make its sample pool readily available to sites like jamendo and simuze and splice, so that artists there can get mixter samples as easily as we can get magnatune or freesound samples.

C. I’d like to see ccmixter focus on expanding its synchronicity with the netlabel movement. A lot of great labels like aerotone or statisfield or earth monkey or monotonik exist out there on a volunteer or small grant basis. These labels are creating a new listener base who is attuned to the CC/GNU/open source mindset.Archive.org helped this group of labels “take off” with hosting, and now they’re outgrown that venue into hundreds of venues.
CCmixter is often, in my view, a “reaching out” into the mainstream community—but I’d like to see a bit more reaching “to the left” into the free music community. Mixter compilations could be promoted at phlow.de. Mixter artist albums could be released at simuze or jamendo. We could do that now, of course, but a focused interplay among sites will benefit all. A new buyer can grow membership by focusing on the viral CC explosion, and not on merely how to tinker with CCmixter so that the slot machine pays.

D. One key ingredient—a focus on much more BY material and much less BY NC material. I’m one of those “follow the rules” guys, who has from time to time said to people “license NC rather than just BY, because you’re a professional”. But the reality is that we can create a more vibrant music culture if the source materials function more in the BY. A commercial or large non-profit purchaser could commission a massive BY library, featuring cool instrumentalists—imagine a Fred Frith sample pack or an Ornette Coleman sample pack.

E. Pella Contests. I came here because of the Lisa DeBenedictis contest. However, the site-cultural negative effect of the overwhelming Fort Minor contest convinced me that a “remix a star” contest was not ideal to our community. I’d love to see instead a ‘pella contest. Singers post on youtube their ‘pella songs. The mixter community in some form or fashion chooses the best of them. The winner posts here BY, and gets a contest winning. Sort of like the Van Cliburn Foundation just did on youtube with pianists, but with a goal of finding real, original singers and songwriters. We’ve been fortunate with the high quality of our ‘pellas in the past year or two, but a Calendar Girl does not arrive every month. A new owner could do innovative things to attract ‘pellas cheaply,simply, and without affecting our site culture.

E. A “mixter plus” could provide add-on artist services for those who wish to DIY their work. CDbaby and Tunecore offer moral, workable alternatives to labels—by not trying to be labels at all. Unbundled services on a purely optional basis through a “mixter plus” might be a working revenue model. This “mixter plus” could be a click-away site with advertising, permitting ccmixter to remain ad-free while creating an ad-based revenue model, using free print and video content to draw in users.

F. A “mixter plus”, through a connected portal, could offer home recording videos and print. I personally would love to see a “how I did it” replaced by a tutorial by one of our resident mixter geniuses in a short video. This could be win-win-win, revenue to the artist, BY NC content for the mixter plus owner, and a portal for advertising without sullying mixter proper with ads. Net impact? A world of music creators, and a desirable user base for instrument and software salespeople.

G. CCmixter’s would-be professionals would, I believe, like to license more works to paying media outlets. This has happened thus far in a modest way off-board. As the RFP and the Lessig blog advises, CCmixter should never become a commission agent or artist representation. But I can imagine a magnatune-like quote model, in which the artists who sign up allow people to “click through” into a fairly user-friendly “here’s how much it costs to license this song”. I don’t mean license everything, of course. I mean to license NC works to commercial outlets.

I had a frustration a few weeks ago. I am creating some creative output for a small project, which, while probably NC, was close enough I wanted to ask/license a permission. We had decided to use one of my songs in it from here. It featured a mixter remix which had two samples which were NC from a label which worked with the mixter. I sent a long mixter message, explaining my use and asking for a quote. Response? None. I am reasonably sophisticated, and know I could have written a proper business letterhead on my proper business stationery and gotten the job done over time. But it was just easier (though not as much fun) to resequence the song with freesound and home-created samples. A mixter plus could have made this easier, just as magnatune does, with a completely optional separate site with a simple bit of software. It’s not as easy as I am making it sound, but it could be done.

My final wish may be one that is granted already. Wouldn’t that be amazing if I’m just out of touch rather than dreaming?

My final question is:
did anyone ever win the Crammed Discs contest :)?

I know I have written these quickly, and I know I left a lot of ambiguities here, but I hope I have started the ball rolling for you to post your visions for ccmixter’s future.

Quote: GurdonarkI tend to worry less about whether mixter commercializes, although I am perfectly happy and hopeful that artists here who wish to find more commercial opportunities should do so. I am concerned that mixter fulfill its role as a velvet revolutionary in the music sharing culture. If ccmixter fulfills this role, it is in the vaguard of a miracle. I advocate for that miracle.


this in a nutshell very eloquently expresses how i feel.

i still need to finish reading but once i read that, it so perfectly summed up how i feel i had to say that. and i know you meant “vanguard”

there. i feel so much better. :)

Some quick “next level” thoughts:

Non-Commercial
Pretty much keep going and gradually improving ccM along the lines as it is currently headed, concentrating on
- productivity gains for music makers
- productivity gains for users of the music made here
- continued community building and buzz building

However a non commercial undertaking like ccM does have financial - and thus evolutionary) boundaries. Even the Mozilla organization (of Firefox fame) ended up creating a commercial construct to facilitate the further non-commercial evolution of the its free and open source software.

Commercial
This is more tricky. What’s the business case for acquiring ccMixter? What kind of business models could be crafted around ccMixter’s non commercial nature? I can think of some possibilities, but I’m not sure, if revenue and expenses would stand a chance of balancing any time soon. Would any of those business models be really inherently depending on ccMixter, or would they be possible just as well without it? If a business model doesn’t really need ccM to succeed, ccM would need the generosity and principled vision of the holder(s) of the purse strings to flourish. This is not impossible, but it’s also not guaranteed (post acquisition).

Some business model ideas
* highly automated and dead easy to use commercial licensing construct for subset of ccM artists, who choose to sign up for that.
— not entirely unique, and questionable if ccM would really be needed for such a business

* alternative to traditional contracting for jingles, movie music, and similar. essentially a jingle could be made into a remix contest. jingle customer provides some content (e.g. voice-over, video) and remixers compete to be the winning entry and the winners get paid a nice fee. crazy example: what if Coca Cola gave “I’d like to teach the world” to ccM for a highly prized remix contest to revitalize it for a global advertising campaign? There could even be many national winners or winners by language, or by musical genre. That might be cool. Or the music for the next 007 flick. John Williams is probably rich enough - or he might just have to join us here :-)

— advantage for customer: doesn’t get stuck with a single studio who may or may not come up with a great spot, but gets to pick the best from presumably many entries.
— advantage for music makers: low barrier to entry, global reach
— but again: does such a business model really need ccM?



Where does the money come from?
If there’s no business model”, then does ccM fundamentally need a “patron” (individual or organization) to further flourish? Then what’s the difference to CC owning it? Of course, if a patron (or organization) is a total music lover, they might be more inclined to invest resources into ccM specifically rather than the CC in general. That’s always an issue with general vs. specific charities / non-profits.


Clearly I have many more questions than answers, but isn’t that always the way it goes? ;-)

A few of the things that concern me that I haven’t really read anything about (with regards to the RFP or “privatization” of the mixter) are things such as deaing with legal issues, which in the past Victor has typically shied away from and referred back to the mother brand. You can bet a private, profit-based company will take a much more proactive stance on things such as IP, and with ccmixter being such a free and open platform and environment, that concerns me.

For me, seeing ccmixter grow from a beta site to what it is now is testament to alot of hard work by a number of individuals, from the various admins to ccmixter ambassador-to-the-world (teru), and they should be rewarded for their hard work in building the site. At a minimum, I would love to see either Victor or Eric sitting on either an advisory board or the board of directors of any such company that buys ccmixter.

I have had the good fortune of creating a large body of work from this site at no cost to me, and frankly, that’s what brings me back. It’s free. It’s effective in giving me a valuable resource and I in return giving something free back for this. I’m just saying if money is to be made, it shouldn’t be made off the artist’s backs.