Jump to content

OverClocked ReMix Content Policy - Final Enacted 6/12/2007


Recommended Posts

I'm bringing this up because of the wording. The word "most" sounds redundant after "generally". Perhaps something like:

Generally, OverClocked ReMix will not agree to removal requests. Such requests will be evaluated with regards to the best interests of the community.

I agree with andy.

I still don't see this is the right way to do this, and as much as you repeat "YOU" and "ownership" all over the document, the fact that OCR still retains the right to keep distributing a remix without an artist's approval still seems contradictory and not very.. nice.

However, seeing as the posibility is at least left open (not a complete denial as before), and that some measures have been taken in consideration to prevent retards from waking up one day feeling like they hate ocr and removing their mixes only to come crawling back the day after, I see this draft as passable.

Congrats for all the work invested in this, and for letting us voice our opinions, bests of lucks.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 284
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The Third Draft looks a lot better, it's seems more balanced than the previous two. I still don't like the removal aspect of it, but I'm obviously in the minority here. You have absolute power here, Dave, and if you honestly feel that that is the most fair and equitable way to go about it, it's up to you.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't know if this has come up yet:

What about projects? I'm particularly interested in this because i'm on like loads of the newer ones. Do those apply to this draft? We never really officially submit them unless we do it seperately or they're showcased, so how do they fit into the policy?

Link to post
Share on other sites
The Third Draft looks a lot better, it's seems more balanced than the previous two. I still don't like the removal aspect of it, but I'm obviously in the minority here. You have absolute power here, Dave, and if you honestly feel that that is the most fair and equitable way to go about it, it's up to you.

Indeed, I've learned from experience that you never really win in an argument with djp, but you can usually reach a mutual understanding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm bringing this up because of the wording. The word "most" sounds redundant after "generally". Perhaps something like:

Generally, OverClocked ReMix will not agree to removal requests. Such requests will be evaluated with regards to the best interests of the community.

Just pointing out a spelling mistake in section A of the Terms of Use.

I think this new version is much more solid. Most of my issues have been addressed either through the topic or in the new draft.

Thanks; I like your wording better, and have also fixed the spelling error.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Please refer to my initial post, which I have updated. While discussing the policy ad infinitum might have continued to yield beneficial feedback, at some point we need to move on with a living, breathing document. We've decided to enact the policy in its present form, which represents feedback from mixers and listeners, lawyers and laymen (and women), and which I think is a step in the right direction.

It may need further revision. We may find that it leaves certain territory too vague, or is too restrictive elsewhere. It's difficult to get something 100% right the first time, and by enacting the policy in its present form we're not claiming we have, we just feel we've reached a comfort level with many and are ready to take things to the next level.

Without implying any cessation of feedback, I'd still like to thank those of you who offered your thoughts. Given that this is the type of thing that often gets people up in arms and makes even the most rational among us very passionate, sometimes irrationally so, I think we did a pretty fantastic job of taking an initial draft that admittedly had some gaping holes and coming up with something that better realizes the original intent.

Link to post
Share on other sites
However, seeing as the posibility is at least left open (not a complete denial as before)...
It was left open before. "Reserves the right to" is a VERY common bit of legalese that grants the ability to do something, but does NOT indicate that it will always be done. For example, most restaurants have signs that say, "we reserve the right to refuse service." This means that if they don't want to, for whatever reason, they can tell someone that he (or she) isn't allowed to eat there. Obviously, restaurants don't automatically enact this policy, because if they did then they wouldn't have any customers. It simply means that if there's a reason for them to not serve someone (or for OCR to not take down a track), they are within their legal rights to do it.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, I'm a little confused.

# 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.
Does this mean that I can download a song from OCR and then put it on my own website, and that's ok as long as I don't tell people it's from OCR? Why would you not want me to say it's from OCR? :dstrbd: 'm guessing I'm interpreting this thing wrong, but that's what it reads in my mind. If you can't say it's from OCR, you'd have to remove the OC_ReMix suffix and all mentions of it in the tag as well, but then you'd be violating
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.
So, bottom line, you can't distribute OC remixes. But that kinda goes against... oh wait.

This is the submission agreement. Ignore the above part of the post. Sorry...

Anyway, for clarification, I think it should be "not attributed to OverClocked ReMix, and so long as such distribution"... if that's what you mean. Why are legal documents always to difficult to understand anyway? Silly lawyers. :)!!

As for projects, are all remix projects on OCR to be encompassed by this license, or only the ones approved to be "official" OCR remix projects?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...