Klebe, Comply and Use: Future of Usage and Compliance
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
0 gefällt mir•70 views
This presentation was provided by Skott Klebe, Manager of Special Initiatives, Copyright Clearance Center, at the NISO/BISG 6th Annual Forum: The Changing Standards Landscape, held on June 22, 2012.
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Ähnlich wie Klebe, Comply and Use: Future of Usage and Compliance
Ähnlich wie Klebe, Comply and Use: Future of Usage and Compliance (20)
Mehr von National Information Standards Organization (NISO)
Mehr von National Information Standards Organization (NISO) (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Klebe, Comply and Use: Future of Usage and Compliance
- 1. Comply and Use Futures of Usage and Compliance Skott Klebe Manager, Special Initiatives Copyright Clearance Center sklebe@copyright.com @skottk NISO/BISG 6th Annual Forum: The Changing Standards Landscape
- 11. • Lightweight Content Protection • Standards for Copyright Licensing • Copyright and the Linked Content Coalition
- 13. Sharing in the Physical World
- 14. Sharing in the Digital World
- 15. DRM (digital rights management) • Technology that tries to: – Make copying hard – Make movement easy* – Make digital objects act like physical objects *in some cases 12/10/201815 Proprietary Kindle Fairplay Acrobat Standard Blueray
- 16. Lightweight Content Protection for EPUB • “Lightweight” – No specific hardware required – No key revocation – No usage tracking • Features – Use on multiple devices – Share with friend – Library lend 12/10/201816
- 17. Why should you care? • Most publishers continue to require DRM on eBooks • No vendor ebook implementation supports library lending or share with a friend • Opportunity to influence at an early stage of spec 12/10/201817
- 18. Status • Request for Comment on Requirements – Ends June 29 • IDPF may issue RFP for implementation – Given sufficient interest 12/10/201818
- 19. Standards in the Work of Licensing
- 20. 12/10/201820 RRO’s Around the world
- 21. 12/10/201821 RRO’s and Data Exchange VG Wort CCC Corporation Other RRO’s Publisher Library Author
- 22. Data Exchange Types RRO Repertoire Usage Distributions RRO Publisher Author Licensing Usage Distributions Library RRO Permissions Usage Bibliographic
- 23. Data Contains Format Maturity Bibliographic Book metadata Journal metadata Article metadata Standard #’s MARC RDA ONIX High to low Repertoire Bibliographic Rights Rightsholders CSV ONIX-RP Low to experimental Distributions Bibliographic Rights Rightsholder Payment CSV ONIX-DS Low to experimental Rights Rightsholders Bibliographic Terms Proprietary CSV ONIX-PL MPEG-21 REL Low to experimental Rightsholders Organizational Individual Bibliographic Rights ISNI ORCID Proprietary Experimental
- 24. Copyright and the Linked Content Coalition
- 25. 12/10/201825 RRO’s Around the world
- 26. Linked Content Coalition • 12-month project of the European Publishers Council • LCC seeks to create a standardized “communication layer” for transmitting – Metadata – Identifiers – Messages around rights and transactions 12/10/201826
- 27. 12/10/201827 Voice Communication Land line POTS phone network VOIP provider VOIP Cell phone Caller
- 28. 12/10/201828 Rights Communication Publisher National rights exchange Regional rights exchange Library 1 Library 2 Patron
- 30. Plans Standards Codifications Hinders change Never adopted Future
Hinweis der Redaktion
- Hi! I’m Skott Klebe. I’ve worked for Copyright Clearance Center for more than twelve years, leading the design of some of the largest rights management and licensing systems in the world. I’ve designed, implemented, and patented DRM software – although I don’t do that anymore – and I’ve also worked on copyright-related standards efforts like the Automated Content Access Protocol. In fact, I come to you directly from the first plenary session of the Linked Content Coalition, a new international rights standard initiative I’ll be talking about. I’d like to thank Todd and his team for this opportunity to talk to you all today about the futures of compliance and usage.
- I grew up in and around two wonderful libraries.
- This was one of them. My father was an analyst for the Congressional Research Service. Some of my oldest memories are of climbing around in the leftover stacks outside his office, which I know was somewhere around here, Because at one end of the hall was a stained glass window through which I used to look down at …
- This. But his office was cramped and small, and there wasn’t enough room in the Jefferson Building for all of the people they needed in the CRS. So they moved into another building….
- Which came from the future. The inside and outside were featureless and clean – there was even a team responsible for making sure that the staff didn’t decorate any of the perfect surfaces of the blank white interior walls. All of my memories of this building are of wide hallways so long that you literally couldn’t focus your eyes on the far end.
- The other library of my childhood doesn’t exist anymore. I grew up in Reston, which was one of the first completely planned communities in the US, built out of almost nothing in the 60’s, a time of amazing and rapid change. Every street, every park and playground, every commercial and residential zone, was planned in advance. There were even a number of artificial lakes, artfully arranged about the landscape. However, there weren’t any libraries. So some enterprising soul opened one in a storefront in what was essentially a strip mall. It grew rapidly, taking over the four neighboring retail spaces, even as the rest of the strip largely failed. That library is gone – in fact, the whole mall was torn down in the 90’s. Even the street it was on is gone, replaced with new houses and offices.
- These days, Reston does have nice-looking library, with its own building and everything, but the one I grew up with, where I checked out my first computer books – over and over again – is gone. And all of that was before the internet. We’re again in a time of incredibly rapid change, but this time it’s focused not on the land, but on the material we hold so dear – the content. And what a bland word that is.
- Books, music, letters, maps….
- Content. Now I said I was talking about libraries, but I was actually talking about future planning. The plan for the Library of Congress building was effective for nearly a hundred years. The planning for the Reston library – or lack thereof – lasted less than ten, and every temporary fix fell apart within a few years. When we make plans without looking far enough ahead, we run into problems.
- You could classify standards into two kinds - If you’re the kind of person who classifies things into different kinds of things, well, you might be a librarian. Or someone who works on standards! The two kinds I’m thinking of are codifications and plans. Codifications are when we place definitions and boundaries around the things we’re already doing, Plans are when we’re trying to foster new activities – collaborative activities – together. Incidentally, these practices have their characteristic failure modes, and we’re all familiar with both. And actually, they probably aren’t mutually exclusive, either. Our work in standards
- The characteristic of physical objects is that they can be moved. So we can share a book with someone else in one of two ways: we can transfer the object, Or make a copy of it. The first way is why we have libraries, the second is why we have copyright. It’s important that making a copy tends to involve some kind of expense in labor and or materials, Although that expense has been falling dramatically in recent years.
- The characteristic of digital objects is that they can be copied. And they do get copied whenever they’re delivered from source to target over and over again. Moving them is actually tricky. You can put a digital object onto a device, and hand the device around. Or you can try to enforce some kind of protocol that simulates moving by making a copy somewhere else, then making the old copy unusable by deleting or maybe locking it.
- Some projects in early stages using ONIX-RRO format with publishers and some of our peer organizations. RRO contains rights information ONIX-PL – we have worked on Working with BISG Rights subcommittee on a standard for the encoding of rights for creator contracts.
- CCC is one of a large number of collective rights organizations called, somewhat unbelievably, “Reproduction Rights Organizations.” Each of these organizations performs some kind of copyright licensing activity on textual work within its geographical and legal jurisdictions, working with a large set of copyright holders and an even larger set of licensees.
- The interactions of RRO’s, rightsholders, and licensees are complex and involve transfers of a number of kinds of data in a number of different formats. This is just a small sample of some of those relationships – again – there are dozens of Some of these are well-specified formats, and some of these are informal and quite ad hoc. When I first worked at CCC, we still received boxes full of photocopied title pages, and sometimes the occasional physical book.
- RRO’s exchange different data with different parties. Bibliographic metadata is pretty much the coin of the realm, but it needs to be sliced in a number of different ways. Repertoire is the catalog of rights and work a collecting society is able to license. Usage generally covers counts of reproduction, not original sales or reading activity – not what we normally might consider usage. Distributions covers aggregate royalties by work – RRO’s transfer licensing fees across national boundaries, and within those boundaries have to reallocate the funds by rightsholder. And so on.
- For most of these data exchanges, there’s no standard in heavy use. CCC participates in pilot projects for ONIX for repertory and for distributions, and also works with IDPF and the BISG rights subcommittee on specifications for new standards. The amount of time we spend reformatting, crosswalking, and normalizing the data files we get from organizations around the world is significant, so it’s really worthwhile to participate in efforts to codify these longstanding processes.
- But codifying existing practices is only one way to pursue improvement through standardization. When we talk about file formats, we’re talking about refining processes that have been in use for decades. Let’s take a long leap forward and consider a model based on the interconnected digital content era.
- Suppose you want to get permission to reuse a piece of content If you know who the rightsholder is, you can contact that organization – levels of service may vary! It’s also not always clear who the rightsholder is. Otherwise, different countries have different sets of collective rights organizations. CCC handles rights on text-based content in the United States, but we don’t handle music. Depending on what you’re doing with music, the answer may be BMI, ASCPA, or Harry Fox. In Germany, for text content you might need to talk to VG Wort, but for music it’s probably GEMA. Spain, CEDRO for text. UK, it’s NLA for news content, CLA for other kinds of text. In increasingly global organizations, it can be a lot of work just to figure out whom to contact.
- Let’s make an analogy. Today we can make a voice conference call across continents that includes multiple participants who are using Voice over IP, plain old telephone service, Skype, cellphones, and even satellite phones. The quality varies, and AT&T service is spotty in New York and San Francisco, things like that, but end to end it works nearly all the time. We’re not shocked when it works, we’re shocked when it doesn’t. The fact that this all works so well is the result of decades, more than a century, in fact, of hard work in defining global standards for how telecommunications technologies interact. I’ve heard it said that the global telecommunications network is the most complicated thing ever built by human beings, and I can’t think of any way to contest that point.
- However, we’re nowhere near filling out the analogous picture for communication of rights inventories and permission requests. When you’re making an international request for copyright permission, at some point that request is going to turn into human beings talking to each other over that aforementioned global telecommunications network. Different collecting societies may be more or less capable of acting as endpoints. As we’ve just discussed, there’s real opportunity for standards to help codify these processes, some of which may be undertaken by sister projects to the Linked Content Coalition. So this is amazing, very visionary stuff. And it’s still very early days. We just kicked it off Wednesday, remember? If it never comes to pass, does that mean it wasn’t important?
- But remember this chart? It’s incomplete
- When our most ambitious plans fail to materialize, we learn from that, and take the knowledge we gain forward with us. When our successful plans age and constrain us, we learn from that, and take the experience we’ve acquired forward with us. And when the need is great, and the desire persistent..
- We can create solutions to our problems. What those solutions look like depend a lot on the work we do in defining the plans for those solutions, and in adopting them. Who wants what, and how hard we work to get it. And that’s what I find exciting about these projects -
- It’s the work of creating the future. And it’s something that we can all take part in.