Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

OverClocked ReMix Content Policy - 2nd Draft Poll, closes 5/24/07


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
85 replies to this topic

Poll: If this draft were finalized and enacted in its current form... (80 member(s) have cast votes)

If this draft were finalized and enacted in its current form...

  1. I would agree with its terms (67 votes [83.75%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 83.75%

  2. I would not agree with its terms (13 votes [16.25%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 16.25%

Vote

#1 djpretzel

djpretzel

    Administrator

  • Administrators
  • 8,679 posts
  • LocationFairfax, Virginia, USA

Posted 21 May 2007 - 08:24 PM

  • This poll is being conducted to gauge current feedback on the second, revised draft of the OverClocked ReMix Content Policy.
  • All votes are public.
  • A thread discussing this draft is available at http://www.ocremix.o...read.php?t=9628.
  • The final vote tally will be closed Thursday, 5/24/07, midnight EST.
  • "Disagree" votes will only be counted if an explanation is provided. We will tally the number of explanations and reconcile this with the number of votes.
  • The draft will not be edited until this poll has been closed.
  • The draft may still be edited after this poll has concluded; we are primarily interested in feedback on the core issues, which will likely remain the same, but smaller issues may still need clarification.
Currently, this draft reads:

OverClocked ReMix Content Policy 2nd DRAFT

Submission Agreement


You retain ownership and copyright of all material submitted to OverClocked ReMix. By submitting material You are granting OverClocked ReMix a non-exclusive, perpetual, irrevocable, sub-licensable, worldwide right and license to use, distribute, perform, and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media or technology now known or hereafter developed. This license applies to any material you may have submitted prior to the effect of this agreement. This license explicitly prohibits OverClocked ReMix from distributing submitted materials for profit. All revenue generated by advertising presented in the context of submitted materials will be used for costs directly associated with the operation and promotion of OverClocked ReMix. Evaluation and acceptance or rejection of submitted materials is under the sole discretion of OverClocked ReMix. OverClocked ReMix in no way indemnifies You from legal action on the part of copyright holders.

You are free to distribute and/or license these materials elsewhere, so long as they are not attributed to OverClocked ReMix, and such distribution or licensing does not conflict with the terms of this agreement. OverClocked ReMix maintains sole control of the distribution of materials under its name, as designated by "OC ReMix" in track titles, the "OC_ReMix" file suffix, or other indicators clearly establishing attribution of works to OverClocked ReMix.

This license may be terminated at any time if both You and OverClocked ReMix agree to the termination. OverClocked ReMix reserves the right to refuse license termination. OverClocked ReMix reserves the right to remove submitted materials at any time, for reasons including but not limited to violation of submission standards and DMCA violations.

Terms of Use

OverClocked ReMix grants all parties a limited, non-exclusive, non-transferable, worldwide license to use, redistribute, incorporate into other works, and publicly perform OverClocked ReMixes as long as the following criteria are met:

A.) No profit is made from the exercise of this license. This includes but is not limited to incorporation of OverClocked ReMixes into commercial works, charging more than the cost of the delivery means for redistributing OverClocked ReMixes, or redistributing OverClocked ReMixes in the context of commercial advertisments. Live performance or playback of OverClocked ReMixes may occur in commercial, for-profit spaces such as stores, private clubs, or other gatherings, so long as no cost is explicitly associated with listening to them and no endorsement of the commercial entity by OverClocked ReMix can be inferred.

B.) If OverClocked ReMixes are being redistributed, performed, or incorporated into other works, materials used must be clearly attributed both to the ReMixer(s) who created them and to OverClocked ReMix. This accreditation must be in the form of the ReMixer name(s) followed by "OverClocked ReMix (www.ocremix.org)". In applicable contexts where user interactivity is possible, such as websites, the site name and URL must be linked to http://www.ocremix.org. Accreditation must be presented as close to the utilized material as possible; if OverClocked ReMixes are used in a video, accreditation can be included in credits at the end, but if displayed on a website, accreditation must be prominently displayed in context with the utilized material.

C.) If OverClocked ReMixes are being redistributed, they may not be modified in any way from the MP3 versions made available on http://www.ocremix.org. This includes but is not limited to any modifications to ID3 tagging. Modifications for personal use not involving redistribution, such as burning personal mix CDs or reformatting files for other devices, is acceptable.

OverClocked ReMix reserves the right to terminate this license at any time. In such instances where OverClocked ReMixes have been incorporated into other works or are being redistributed or performed, the original artist may be contacted to obtain a separate license for the material in question, so long as all references and attribution to OverClocked ReMix are removed. OverClocked ReMix maintains sole control of the distribution of materials under its name, as designated by "OC ReMix" in track titles, the "OC_ReMix" file suffix, or other indicators clearly establishing attribution of works to OverClocked ReMix. OverClocked ReMix in no way indemnifies those utilizing OverClocked ReMixes from legal action on the part of copyright holders.

#2 DragonFireKai

DragonFireKai

    Strider Hiryu (+2100)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • LocationOregon State University

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:16 PM

Well, I guess I'll be the first voice of the loyal opposition here.

I applaud the effort taking place here, but I don't think the one sided termination rights in favor of the site are morally correct, or needed. It's close, but I can't in good conscience give it the go ahead with that clause attached.
Posted Image
Sig by Doulifée
Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!

#3 Mustin

Mustin

    Tanooki Mario (+2000)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,000 posts
  • LocationArkansas

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:26 PM

much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much much better.

Kid Tested, Mustin Approved.™
Posted Image

#4 Fishy

Fishy

    Judge, Worlds Apart Director

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,353 posts
  • LocationHertfordshire, UK

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:30 PM

I can see where you're coming from, but it's not something I would personally have a problem with. A vg remix isn't exactly something that I would be bothered about someone else distributing, because its not as personal as an original composition or something like that.

Posted Image
Posted Image


#5 DragonFireKai

DragonFireKai

    Strider Hiryu (+2100)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • LocationOregon State University

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:34 PM

I can see where you're coming from, but it's not something I would personally have a problem with. A vg remix isn't exactly something that I would be bothered about someone else distributing, because its not as personal as an original composition or something like that.


But someone else might, personally, I really don't have a whole lot at stake here. I don't have a lick of musical talent in my body, so I don't have to worry about other people distributing my songs, because no one would want to. But it's a moral point to me. I just don't think that it's right for one side to have all the power in this context. It's not something I'm going to quit the site over, but if the site staff is going to ask, I'm going to voice my reservations.
Posted Image
Sig by Doulifée
Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!

#6 Bahamut

Bahamut

    Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,857 posts
  • LocationMountain View, CA, United States

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:42 PM

But someone else might, personally, I really don't have a whole lot at stake here. I don't have a lick of musical talent in my body, so I don't have to worry about other people distributing my songs, because no one would want to. But it's a moral point to me. I just don't think that it's right for one side to have all the power in this context. It's not something I'm going to quit the site over, but if the site staff is going to ask, I'm going to voice my reservations.


If there was little known about OCR as a commercial entity (if it was a random no-name organization), I would agree with your POV, but as OCR has defined itself as a non-profit organization in the draft, I see no reason why such a moral qualm would still hold.
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE

#7 DragonFireKai

DragonFireKai

    Strider Hiryu (+2100)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • LocationOregon State University

Posted 21 May 2007 - 09:55 PM

If there was little known about OCR as a commercial entity (if it was a random no-name organization), I would agree with your POV, but as OCR has defined itself as a non-profit organization in the draft, I see no reason why such a moral qualm would still hold.


It's the fact that I don't expect people I don't know well to hold to good intentions. And to be honest, I don't know a single person on this website beyond what they present on the site. So when I look over an agreement I see being set up to be legaly binding, I hold them to the same standard as I hold everyone else I don't know. I tell all the members of my platoon to look over everything they sign, even if it's from the Army, because while I don't expect the Army to hose me, I really don't know who's sending what down the pipe, so a measure of caution is needed. In God I trust, all others I check.
Posted Image
Sig by Doulifée
Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!

#8 Bahamut

Bahamut

    Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,857 posts
  • LocationMountain View, CA, United States

Posted 21 May 2007 - 10:01 PM

It's the fact that I don't expect people I don't know well to hold to good intentions. And to be honest, I don't know a single person on this website beyond what they present on the site. So when I look over an agreement I see being set up to be legaly binding, I hold them to the same standard as I hold everyone else I don't know. I tell all the members of my platoon to look over everything they sign, even if it's from the Army, because while I don't expect the Army to hose me, I really don't know who's sending what down the pipe, so a measure of caution is needed. In God I trust, all others I check.


But what issue could possibly arise from a non-profit organization, especially when the gesture by the licensor granting the license is a gift of sorts to everyone? I'm probably one of the most meticulous people on this site when it comes to reading contracts & agreements, and I really don't see much of an issue at all possibly arising here.
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE

#9 DragonFireKai

DragonFireKai

    Strider Hiryu (+2100)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • LocationOregon State University

Posted 21 May 2007 - 10:05 PM

But what issue could possibly arise from a non-profit organization, especially when the gesture by the licensor granting the license is a gift of sorts to everyone? I'm probably one of the most meticulous people on this site when it comes to reading contracts & agreements, and I really don't see much of an issue at all possibly arising here.


The way the current draft is structured, the site can sieze a mix that a remixer no longer wishes to have posted on the site. I'm a firm believer in the right to exit, and that's being taken away here. So if something comes up that a remixer doesn't want to be associated with as the site evolves, they're trapped.
Posted Image
Sig by Doulifée
Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!

#10 Bahamut

Bahamut

    Moderator, Maverick Rising/Serious Monkey Business Director

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 17,857 posts
  • LocationMountain View, CA, United States

Posted 21 May 2007 - 10:08 PM

The way the current draft is structured, the site can sieze a mix that a remixer no longer wishes to have posted on the site. I'm a firm believer in the right to exit, and that's being taken away here. So if something comes up that a remixer doesn't want to be associated with as the site evolves, they're trapped.


See draft discussion thread for response.
Liontamer: AND THEY HAVE A PLAYPLACE

#11 Anorak

Anorak

    Goomba (+100)

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 21 May 2007 - 11:07 PM

Well, I'll be the next opposing vote then. Not that it will matter, since I have no mixes on the site and the poll is already heavily tilted in the other direction.

Personally I don't have any problem with drawing up a legal policy to protect Overclocked. It really is a good idea to expand the proceedings beyond a handshake agreement. But like Kai, I can't agree to the termination rights that favour OCRemix. Maybe it's my predisposed nature of assuming that everything will go wrong, but I can't help but imagine a scenario where mixes will be eternally trapped in a glass cage; their makers want them down, but because they once had an altercation with the site staff or their reasons are declared "too selfish", their request denied.

From here on out, god help you if you didn't read that other topic.

I'm guessing that this policy is being put into place because of the exodus, virt, etc.. If so, I can't help but feel that everyone who has ever (and ever will) submit a mix here is being punished for their actions. And consequently it feels like we are all being lumped into that group. Like you're all assuming that as soon as we tire of the site, we'll pull our mixes and be gone. Not all people are like that.

On Wikipedia (wait, I'm going somewhere with this) they have a policy called AGF. If you didn't bother to click the link, it stands for Assume Good Faith. Now, OCRemix and Wiki are completely different sites, with different content, rules, yada yada. But the rule is an interesting one. Summarized, it describes that when a good intentioned edit is made that is incorrect, one should NOT assume it is vandalism. You should assume they are trying to help the site.

The idea of a mix getting removed helping Overclocked is completely bizarre, of course. But take the rest of that policy into account. If I may rephrase it into terms which apply to our current situation:

"Not everyone who is requesting that their remixes be removed is trying to harm Overclocked Remix."

DJP went over a few reasons why someone would want their mixes removed in the other thread. In the same post, he said, concerning remix removal: "The actuality is that we don't make any profit and do this for fun, so "hurting" us per se won't work, and the end result is that fewer people will be exposed to your music." Then why is the one sided termination clause in the contract anyway?

To wrap up, and summarize this wordy mess, I just wish that the site would have some more good faith concerning its mixers. We all aren't plotting a mass exodus on a VBulletin Board somewhere. Having this clause in the agreement is going to keep a lot of remixes on the site, but it's going to drive a lot of mixers away too. I like this site a lot and I just hope there is some reconcilliation between those two numbers. But I'll have to be in the second group.

There, that's my reason. I know nothing about law, but you asked for it, and there it is. I hope you can forgive my emotionally vague, idiotic, embarrassing, and drawn-out ramblings. Now you know why I didn't post before.

P. S. When this passes, please place it where every remixer can see it - right before they submit a mix.

#12 Dhsu

Dhsu

    Ryu (+13000)

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,871 posts
  • LocationDustbowl 24/7

Posted 21 May 2007 - 11:22 PM

This license may be terminated at any time if both You and OverClocked ReMix agree to the termination. OverClocked ReMix reserves the right to refuse license termination.

I still hold that the second sentence is redundant. :P

I'm curious, though...does this mean that a situation could occur in which OCR wants to terminate the license, but the ReMixer doesn't? :D I don't see this EVER happening, as it's a rather silly scenario to be honest, but the implication here is that OCR would be stuck with the distribution rights (ohgnoes!).

Posted ImagePosted Image
<Bleck> Neblix I will punch you in the soul


#13 Tenucha

Tenucha

    Meat Boy (+250)

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 260 posts
  • LocationDeserts of Arizona

Posted 21 May 2007 - 11:32 PM

I would agree to these terms.
They seem fair to me for both the artist and the site.

I have included a couple remixes in a video but gave credit to the artist and (OCReMix) in the credits (I'll get the video online for viewing purposes and then get the attetion of the YouTube group).

The idea of a mix getting removed helping Overclocked is completely bizarre, of course. But take the rest of that policy into account. If I may rephrase it into terms which apply to our current situation:

"Not everyone who is requesting that their remixes be removed is trying to harm Overclocked Remix."



On this note... if a remix is violating any form of applicable laws including copyright infrignment... then it would benefit OCR to remove the conent from the website.
It doesnt mean it will happen or not however this gives the site the right to remove it.
An instance would be if a submitted remix were to pass and get hosted here and, later on down the road, someone from the team or just a listenier realizes that there is too much original work being used (this is just for aguments sake... I know the Judges Panel wouldnt allow a remix thats so obvious like this haha) from the original source.

I dont think this constrans the artists or anything... I think it gives everyone a heads up.
This really is no different from any other "Dont cross our content policy" on any other website or community's Terms of Service.

#14 DragonFireKai

DragonFireKai

    Strider Hiryu (+2100)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,142 posts
  • LocationOregon State University

Posted 21 May 2007 - 11:44 PM

I still hold that the second sentence is redundant. :P

I'm curious, though...does this mean that a situation could occur in which OCR wants to terminate the license, but the ReMixer doesn't? :D I don't see this EVER happening, as it's a rather silly scenario to be honest, but the implication here is that OCR would be stuck with the distribution rights (ohgnoes!).


It is redundant, and I'm fairly sure that some of the remixers who got their mixes ganked during the lockdowns would have prefered to keep them up.
Posted Image
Sig by Doulifée
Stand Tall and Shake the Heavens!

#15 Dhsu

Dhsu

    Ryu (+13000)

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 13,871 posts
  • LocationDustbowl 24/7

Posted 21 May 2007 - 11:57 PM

Nowhere in the license does it imply that OCR is obliged to distribute the ReMixes. And removing a mix doesn't necessarily mean relinquishing the right to distribute it. So I really can't see a situation in which OCR would actually want to terminate the license.

Posted ImagePosted Image
<Bleck> Neblix I will punch you in the soul


#16 Broken

Broken

    Terry Bogard (+1300)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,312 posts
  • LocationRoanoke, VA

Posted 22 May 2007 - 12:05 AM

I like the idea of a quasi-legal document that spells out some of the un-asked questions that I've had about this site for a while. I may or may not ever submit anything here (or I should say, I may or may not ever be accepted here,) but if I ever were to submit something I now have a better idea of what I'd be getting myself into.

And thank you for clarifying some of the more intricate details of this agreement. I'm sure there is still plenty of grey area left and other details that could be covered, but I know that I have no authority or experience with this area of music (ie. rights, legalities) so I'll just leave my opinions as stated.
Posted Image Thanks excousa!

#17 Shadow Wolf

Shadow Wolf

    Yoshi (+1400)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,466 posts
  • LocationSuffolk, VA

Posted 22 May 2007 - 12:13 AM

I think the idea here is this: If I submit a mix to OC ReMix, I am saying to Dave and the judges that I think this mix is good enough to be hosted as an OC ReMix. In turn, if this mix makes it past the judge's panel and onto the site, that mix is officially accepted as good enough material to bear the name of OC ReMix. That is an agreement entered into between the site and the mixer.

Therefore, if a mixer comes back later and simply says "I think my mix should be removed for this and such a reason," the mixer is basically telling Dave and the judges "I think, in retrospect, that it was a mistake on your part to allow this mix to be posted." But if Dave and the judges allow it to be posted, what the mixer personally comes to think of that work later is, to a great extent, irrelevant. Dave and the judges said it was good enough. It will remain so, even if your personal taste and/or musical skills have moved past the style or complexity of the mix.

They're not saying there will be a refusal to remove a mix if, for instance, a mixer wishes to update it with a version they feel is better. I think what they're trying to avoid here is a situation like JD Harding, who (in my understanding of the situation) had 7(?) mixes on the site and consistently requested removals of his own materials because of his personal taste.

As such, I endorse the new policy. Nice work. :nicework:
Posted Image
Click here to download the Gauntlet: Dark Legacy OST!
Posted with permission from DarkeSword and Zircon

#18 Kanthos

Kanthos

    Joe Musashi (+2200)

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2,278 posts
  • LocationNewmarket, Ontario, Canada

Posted 22 May 2007 - 12:18 AM

The only thing I can see that might need changing is that the submission licence implies that mixes can be distributed by OC Remix without using the OC Remix name.

#19 Shael Riley

Shael Riley

    Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix Music Co-Director

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,555 posts
  • LocationNew York

Posted 22 May 2007 - 12:49 AM

Though I'm made uneasy by the irrevocableness of the agreement's terms, this second draft is, at a glance, seemingly comprehensive in its attention to preserving the safety, stability, quality, longevity and expandability of the Overclocked ReMix project; and well-written for clarity. Offsetting my fear, though, is my trust in Dave's, and, (to a slightly lesser extent) the Judges' and Judges-to-bes', intentions to not fuck up my shit, or the shit of others. Considering the afformentioned,

I approve.
Posted Image

#20 DCT

DCT

    Cammy (+850)

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 875 posts
  • LocationSonic Underground

Posted 22 May 2007 - 12:53 AM

Looks a lot better than the original draft. I can rock with this.

-DCT




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users


games | mixes | artists | albums