“microlicensing”: towards more effective mechanisms to support copyright compliance on the...
TRANSCRIPT
“Microlicensing”:towards more effective mechanisms to
support copyright compliance on the network
A workshop session for UKSG 2009 – TorquayMark Bide, Executive Director, EDItEUR
Agenda1. Standards for permissions communication
Creative Commons PLUS ACAP ONIX-PL
2. Services RightsLink iCopyright OZMO
3. Registries The Book Rights Registry ARROW
4. Drawing it all together – what have we got, what do we need to manage copyright effectively on the network?
Standards developments
3
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from…*
4
* Andrew S. Tanenbaum
FRBR
Handle
Multimedia
ISRC
ISAN
ISMN CIS
Dublin Core
IMS
DOI
IIM
ISWC
url
urnSICI
Books
Audiovisual
Libraries
Copyright
Journals
Magazines
Newspapers
STANDARDS
Education
MARC
CAE
ISBN
ISSN
Music
Texts
EAN
Technology
Archives Museums
UPC
ISO codes
today1980s mid 90’s
ERMIIPI
UMID ISTCSMPTE
DMCS
ONIX
LOM
abc
<indecs>
MPEG7
MPEG21
ISO11179
RDFXML schema
IPDA
PRISM
eBooksIDPF
NITFCIDOC
CrossRef
P/META
XrML
uri
DDEX
SCORMNewsML
GRid MPid
MWLI
SAN
V-ISAN
ERMIACAP
ONIX-PL
PLUS
Photographs
CC
5
The nice thing about standards is that there are so many of them to choose from…
6
A major task for the standards community in 2009 and beyond….
Creative Commons A not for profit, founded in the US in 2001
Lawrence Lessig (a lawyer) “Some Rights Reserved” – a more appropriate model for the network?
A movement as much as a standardisation organisation Committed to a vision of how content should be made available for reuse
An adjunct to, and to some extent a challenge to, conventional commercial thinking about copyright
Supported by volunteers and well as paid staff Can be applied to any type of resource
Text, music, photographs
http://creativecommons.org/
7
The Creative Commons licences Standard licences in 3 formats
Commons Deed (human-readable code) Legal Code (“lawyer-readable code”) Metadata (machine-readable code).
Different variants for different jurisdictions Local Creative Commons organisations in many different countries including the UK.
8
Creative Commons symbology
9
10
CC+
11
An extension to the original Creative Commons concept Expressing permissions which go beyond the basic CC licence eg providing terms paid-for permission for commercial use for a CC “nc” licence
A syntactic standard, not a semantic standard
Being used by the Copyright Clearance Center for is OZMO service
http://www.ozmo.com/
The PLUS Coalition US-based not for profit, founded in 2004
UK based company too, but currently dormant “To simplify and facilitate the communication and management of image rights” Photography poorly served by standards Licensing very complex Easy for works to be orphaned online
Broad based coalition Photographers and photo libraries Users of photographs (publishers, advertising agencies etc)
Relevant technology companies
http://www.useplus.com
PLUS Standardisation Licence format
A model for what a licence should contain “PLUS Packs” – model licences for specific applications
A “licence generator” Glossary
Definitions of terms to be used in licences 1000 terms, but not (yet?) formally structured
Media matrix Standard encoding system for licence terms |PLUS|V0120|U001|1IAK1UNA2EBF3PRS4SJB5VUG6QEE7DWE8RCE8IAL8LAF9EIN|
Machine readable – machine interpretable?
PLUS implementation Some large (book) publishers have adopted PLUS approach for licensing photographs PLUS licences PLUS terminology
Implementations of Media Matrix for microlicensing not yet identified
Recognition of requirement for identity; planning for registries For parties (buyers and sellers) For photographic works
ACAP –Automated Content Access Protocol Launched as a project in 2007 Funded and led by three trade associations World Association of Newspapers European Publishers Council International Publishers Association
Participation from all types of publishing Newspapers, magazines, books, scientific journals
Very broad membership Currently substantially focused on influencing the political debate
www.the-acap.org
15
ACAP – Origins Concern about “the search engine problem”
Considerable confusion in publishing, particularly news, about the role of the search engines: Positive: driving online traffic Negative: becoming major “media businesses”
Only response – law suits Status quo unsustainable
Online presence impossible in absence of sustainable business model
Cost of infringement actions too high Difficulties of inconsistency in international law, jurisprudence
Not anti-search or anti-search-engine …in favour of allowing content owners to make choices
16
An “internet scale” solution to an “internet scale” problem
17
A method of communicating publishers’ policies which …is machine readable – and machine interpretable
…is standard (not proprietary) …is universally applicable …has the lowest possible barriers to use …has the widest possible stakeholder engagement …is not simply about dealing with an immediate challenge, but also provides a platform to enable the future of commerce in content …is flexible and extensible …supports any business model
To the extent ACAP can develop into an enabler of content flow…and not become an inhibitor like some failed experiments with digital rights management, it has the potential to be an important element of more vibrant business models for publishers in the future.
Thomas C. Rubin: Chief Counsel forIntellectual Property Strategy, Microsoft
CorporationNovember 2008
ACAP as an enabler
18
EDItEUR’s family of ONIX standards Book trade standards organisation with its origins in developing EDI messages for use internationally Established 1991 90+ members in 40+ countries: publishing, supply chain, libraries
The ONIX family can trace its origins to the requirement for “rich product metadata” created by online book retail The purchase experience wholly dependent on metadata
Now a family of XML messages, covering both books and serial publications
Related (but separate) standards for XML-EDI, RFID
www.editeur.org
19
ONIX-PL: origins Institutions facing a number of issues:
Managing an ever increasing number of resources/licences
Correct interpretation of licences Exploiting negotiated licence terms and conditions Populating licence elements in ERM systems Communicating licence terms to users
Goals Express licence terms in machine-readable form Communicate electronically, typically from licensor to licensee
Enable licence terms to be loaded into computer systems
Not for purposes of “control” (DRM), but to provide accurate information at the point of use
Better management of licence templates and individual agreements?
20
ONIX-PL Structure
ONIX-PL enables both model licences (templates) and individual licence agreements to be expressed
ONIX-PL expression has a preamble, definitions, supply terms, usage terms, payment terms, and general terms
Usage terms more highly structured than supply or general terms
Flexibility ONIX-PL is intended to enable the whole of a publications licence to be expressed, with a level of structuring that is appropriate to the type of term
The dictionary is extensible, so that new terms can be added without structural change, by adding new controlled values
Essentially a toolkit: the market will decide how best to apply it
21
22
23
Why all these different developments?
24
Common threads Firmly rooted in copyright Communication of licence terms/permissions, not their enforcement
Recognition of need for standardisation, particularly of semantics
Differences Sectoral (ONIX-PL, PLUS) or general (ACAP, CC – perhaps ONIX)
Primarily machine to person (ONIX-PL, CC, PLUS) or primarily machine to machine (ACAP, perhaps PLUS)
Commercial (ONIX-PL, ACAP, PLUS) or non-commercial (CC)
Full licences (ONIX-PL, PLUS) or simpler permissions (ACAP, CC)
Some copyright clearance services
25
31
Next steps – Registries
33
Registry projects The Book Rights Registry
To be established to support Google settlement Identifies books and their rightsholders (or the absence of rightsholders)
ARROW Accessible Registries of Rights Information and Orphan Works towards Europeana
European project, led by AIE; publishers, rights management organisations (including CLA, ALCS, PLS), libraries (including the British Library)
Network of distributed registries PLUS registries
And now its over to you…
The question That’s what we’ve got (or what we are getting)…
…what do we still need to develop to manage copyright on the network?
