[Odrl-version2] contracts/tickets and downstream rights

[Stephane van Hardeveld]

> Stephane!
>
> Thanks for your useful remarks. You are addressing crucial points.
>
> After discussing this with Renato your issue probably falls into two
> requirement categories 1.5 and 1.1:

Thank you!

<snip>

> Maybe, here it is important to note that we have to distinguish between
> different stages in a contract life cycle (please refer to "Toward a
> Conceptual Framework for Digital Contract Composition and Fulfillment"
> http://wi.wu-wien.ac.at/people/Guth/toward_contract_frmwrk.pdf). The
> contract itself can be stated in an ODRL instance (Lifecycle phase:
contract
> conclusion) and tickets which are issued for consumption of rights
> (Lifecycle phase: execution of rights) can also be issued as ODRL
instances.
> This probably does not require a new version of ODRL. Keeping track of how
> many tickets have already been issued and executed would need the logic
and
> database of a DRM system.

This is exactly what I meant. It seems appropriate to include some formal
notion of
the lifecycle to ODRL. Maybe even with an (optional) tag which reflects the
state this
agreement is meant for (e.g. contract proposal, contract conclusion,
fulfillment, consumption, downstream transfer), maybe as part of a Usage
Scenario
specialization.
This could of course be left to the DRM system without a reflection in the
ODRL,
since it has to keep track of the life-cycle anyway.


<snip>
>     <o-ex:party party-type="consumer">
>       <o-ex:context>
>         <o-dd:uid>urn.ssp.user#shardeveld</o-dd:uid>
>       </o-ex:context>
>     </o-ex:party>

I suppose the uid of the consumer may relate this party to the consumer
Stephane van H.
of your example? Could this also be a beneficiary party, which has a
seperate agreement with the
consumer party in the original contract?

>
> Amongst other cases, with Requirement 1.1 (Provide improved next rights
> (downstream rights)), we want to give the ODRL community a clear way of
> dealing with rights that are passed along the value chain. Is your
question
> addressing this topic(, too)? (In your example, do you see the
beneficiaries
> as customers of the paying party, where the paying party is the consumer
of
> the content creator?)

Might be. It should be possible, for example, to offer a contract where one
buys an (anonymous?) ticket for an un-identified piece of music from a large
supplier of music, and pass this on to another party (the beneficiary). This
latter party may then exchange this ticket for a piece of music, providing
the
value of this ticket covers the value of this piece of music. (An electronic
coupon, so to speak).

> So long
> Susanne
>
> P.S. I did not run the examples in a validator, please excuse typ-os.
>
Regards,
Stephane
> > Furthermore, I believe we also discussed the different approach between
> > contracts/agreements and
> > a kind of ticketing system, where a contract is negotiated (maybe with a
> > paying party?) and the
> > rights are consumed by others (the beneficiaries) in the form of
tickets.
> > Or where a subscription is necotiated in the form of a contract, which
> > contains the right to open
> > 15 e-books in a year, and the actual choosing of one book to read is
> > constructed as a ticket.
> > Does point 1.5 cover this?
> >
> > Stephane van Hardeveld
> > VirtuosoMedia
> >
>
> -- 
> Susanne Guth
> susanne at odrl.net
> ODRL Initiative
> http://odrl.net/S
>
> +++ GMX DSL Premiumtarife 3 Monate gratis* + WLAN-Router 0,- EUR* +++
> Clevere DSL-Nutzer wechseln jetzt zu GMX: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
>
> _______________________________________________
> ODRL-Version2 mailing list
> ODRL-Version2 at odrl.net
> http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2
>