[Minutes Overview] [Workshop Home] [Previous:social-legal] [Next:Architecture/Infrastructure]
Please refer to the position-papers and slides for authoritative answers. The following minutes are only a snapshot of Presentations and Discussions
See also the [Slides (ppt)] and the Position Paper
There is no transcript of his speech. Please see slides and Position Paper. He especially focused on DRM in a B2B relationsship.
David Parrot started by presenting Reuters activities (please see the slides for more information.)
Concerning DRM, he said, that Permissions at fine granularity are needed because:
Parrot emphasized, that Machines are customers too. As an illustration, he imagined a DRM control of communications with a bank that uses software to maintain stock positions automatically. Customers write applications that are very proprietary and will not disclose them to the data suppliers; Reuters wants to be able to declare the rights in Reuter's data without having to see these applications.
Reuters has found problems with today's DRM, that it is oriented to eyes and ears, not machines. Parrot stated a total lack of interoperability. He said, that there is a need for rights markup language. Today there is a concentration on prevention, but systems omit two other needed features:
Typical system today is a closed system that hangs together, has no interoperability and uses proprietary rights markup. I am glad to see ODRL (Open Digital Rights Language) and XrML ("rights" XML) appear. The current systems still need to allow for fair use, generalized contract negotiation or credential management (tokens, attributes).
Interoperability is difficult: In a system with several players, a network of trust is needed. What part will PKI play? It might support interoperability of DRM. Detection or action may depend on watermarking some transactions. The rules in XML will be important. We think there may be a place for smart cards, trust would reside in the card.
See also the [Slides (ppt)] and the Position Paper
Like David Parrot, Jeff Honious focused on the B2B - Relationsships, that publishers have with other businesses. He wanted to see also support for B2B, not only B2C. A B2B- buyer is often a single entity purchasing rights for multiple individuals in an organization.
Jeff Honious mentioned the following requirements from the standpoint of Reed-Elsevier towards DRM:
Jeff Honious closed by asking, what the value proposition for the consumer is? Is it access to more content? But Reed Elsevier has already found ways to provide access to more content without DRM. Is it a better price? But pricing is very complicated anyway. Is it new functionality? He closed by stating that he hasen't seen anything in DRM that actually gives the user new functions.
Question: is Reed Elsevier primarily engaged in text
distribution?
Answer: yes, today. But we have plans for the future
See also the [Slides (ppt)] and the Position Paper
Over the past year, the AAP has defined a strategy for ebook market success and has now established standards in targeted areas to help build a mass market. AAP has ongoing work in the area of numbering and metadata.
Bollick first emphasized on the role numbering and metadata. DRM won't work without a solid numbering and metadata standard. Since there are many providers/publishers, we need standards.Open eBook started with trade books and is moving now to education books. Currently, there is support for DOI for numbering and for ONIX and <indecs>. Our development of numbering and metadata are more fully realized than anything in the DRM realm. We view the publisher as in the middle. From the input side, authors need compensation, and on the output side, users need authentication of the integrity of the work and protection of their privacy.
For the numbering, which can also be named identifiers in this context, he pointed out the following categories:
| Category | Description | Usage |
|---|---|---|
| Unique | Identifies a given digital object uniquely and unambiguously | Required to locate digital content accurately |
| Persistent | Permanent regardless of its location or the information associated with it | Supports distributed information so important to Internet businesses |
| Granular | Allows identification of objects nested within other objects | Enables creation of new products based on combinations of digital objects |
| Infinite | Provides for the generation of an unlimited number of identifiers | Eliminates limitations inherent in earlier numbering systems |
| Extensible | Allows for the addition of new features or uses at a later date | Encourages innovation within the ebook market |
The DRM is spread over the following domains: legal, technical, social and business. The current eBook community is active in EBX (Electronic Book Exchange) and the Open eBook forum.
On metadata the AAP sees the following categories:
| Type | Description |
|---|---|
| Discovery Metadata | Provides the information necessary to help consumers
locate and purchase desired titles Includes information such as: title, author, cover image, ebook description, author bibliography Located in e-tailer catalogs, and intended for public consumption |
| Core Metadata | Kerneldata that is part of the ebook package Enhances consumers' experience by supporting features such as cataloging and digital libraries Intended for public consumption by users of ebook reading devices |
| Private Metadata | Private data not intended for public consumption, but
necessary to enable the book selling process Includes rights specification, format information and return metadata |
Bollick tried to explain the interests involved in DRM by giving the
following triangle. In fact, he sees DRM in the relationship between
intiatives with social, legal and technical background:
Having given an overview over the initiatives currently under way (see slides), M. Bollick required a future DRM-Standard to work with different business-models:
DRM is not there yet, so we are working in a mode we call simulated
interoperability.
Our publishers provide content that is rendered in many
parallel formats, e.g., PDF and also HTML
What could be the next steps?
No slides available; see also the Position Paper
About his background, included work on Secure Digital Music Initiative (SDMI). Today, Versaware is both a technology provider and publisher.
We should learn from the past. Systems have not been interoperable. This caused all kinds of issues. Hahn also said, that any action in the area of DRM should not forget streaming data.
Hahn suggested to separate piracy protection from digital rights management. While piracy protection deals only with theft, DRM recognizes additional operations on the objects. He talked about the same triangle of social - technological - legal issues and implications, that Robert Bollick showed. Where in this triangle, is business represented? Where are users represented? Open eBook folks are just beginning to gather requirements for DRM through volunteer working groups. We are trying to navigate between possible conflicting requirements, e.g., protect content but allowing fair use. Actually, it is very hard to get feedback from users. Hahn wants to get more requirements from consumers
Chris Barlas: In the Imprimateur project over four years we invited consumer participation without getting very much. Propose organizing a meeting of consumers organization. He told some experience he had with a group who protested a cutoff of funds to the BBC.
Weitzner: the W3C experience in privacy was that if you care about consumer input you have to pursuade them that they might actually have some effect on the outcome. You can just ask the question; you have to invite them into the process.
Vaughn Iverson: better to use the word 'individual' rather than 'consumer'. Individuals play other roles; as voters, ...
Peter Rodgers [HP]: enforcement of a bundle of rights is not the same as an expression of those rights. The presentations so far suggest that the W3C's role is to focus on the expression of rights, not on the enforcement.
Philippa Morrell (IFPI):
(International organization for the music recording industry; US Recording
Industry Association of America [RIAA] is an associate)
Remarks from the point of view of IFPI:
Maxmilian Herberger (University of Saarland): Example: The map we were handed to attend this workshop has inscribed on it "reproduction not allowed". For map's their is an exception in Droit d'Auteur and copyright law. The xerox is not allowed without permission. But the Restaurant of the social event was marked: Was this an exception for fair use employed here, was the version we were handed a derivative work as it had additional information? Would a DRM system have prevented its use?
David Parrott (Reuters): It is Important to standardize in the implementation space as well as in the language. This will provide the seamless user experience that is our goal. Encryption seems to be a requirement; no better approach at the moment.
Danny Weitzner (W3C): How do the publishers think about fair use?
David Parrott (Reuters): We consider it. Plain text news as an example -- we don't want others tapping into this feed and redistributing it as their own. We don't mind individuals taking portions and passing it to others. We don't mind linking. Deep linking is a concern, if it is abusing our content. Fair use is a grey area.
Philipp Hoschka (W3C): what mechanisms for enforcement are used?
Jeff Honious (Reed-Elsevier): content is provided today through secure Web sites via SSL. We don't currently have control once the content has been downloaded, though in some circumstances we would like to have it. Depending on what they do with the content, we can cut them off later.
[Minutes Overview] [Workshop Home] [Previous:social-legal] [Next:Architecture/Infrastructure]
Created by Rigo Wenning February 2001
Last update $Date: 2001/04/20 08:47:45 $ by $Author: rigo $