that page is just for judges. That's why it's ugly (both the URL ad the page itself). Mike will get the judge bios up once he gets them. That's a due date that needs to be added to that page though. It's May 30.
I do think there needs to be more public-facing info. I asked for access and Mike said he wanted to get something more dynamic up first. I assume he's going to get a CMS going and give me access there. He was rather cryptic. I know he has a lot going on, so I didn't press for more info.
As a genre, it probably suffers for some for being too simple from a melody and guitar work. I think this is probably why some don't like metalcore, but I love punk, so it works for me.
The way Bradley Kuhn explained it to me when I was on the Johns Hopkins legal team was that the idea was that the All Rights Reserved applied to the copyright notice itself, but I still don't think that's the intent, since I don't think anyone would mind if they created a different license for a new project. Really, what's needed is a definition of the license, and then you can reference it. I don't think the current text is ambiguous, but I think that would be best practice to eliminate the doubt.
I don't remember any such magic from law school. This sentiment likely stems from the US pre-Berne. The whole Berne thing is super-complex because the bill was in '76 if memory serves. Started in '78. We didn't "fully" go in until '88 (or '89), and really didn't go in until Golan v Holder...in 2012. And I think VARA was '94. What a complete and utter mess.
@strypey@quitter.se I've been seeing your name a bit more, but not anything in regards to !ccmusic. Am I just not seeing them? Are you still interested in CC Music? I'm looking for a replacement judge for our rock category. Let me know if you're interested. I think the other judge has a fair amount of picks, but I don't know the details of where he's at. There's a month and a half to figure it out, if you're interested.