From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Sun Feb 4 02:30:53 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> Message-ID: <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> Hi Renato, I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the core only in our ODRL V2 Document? Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 15:31:21 +1000 Von: Renato Iannella An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? > > Alapan's email and a recent paper [1] have made me re-think the ODRL > V2.0 path. > > We have a choice of making ODRL V2.0 more complex OR we can make the > CORE language simple > and support extensions for related DRM implementations. > > That is, ODRL has a core REL aspect that does not include all the > associated functions like > Digital Signatures, negotiations, legal stuff etc. All that can be > added with specific profiles. > The idea is we keep the core language "clean" from these additional > features. > > This is just an idea - and I welcome comments from the WG. > > (and happy new year to all!) > > Cheers > > Renato Iannella > ODRL Initiative > http://odrl.net > > [1] id=1179522&jmp=references&coll=GUIDE&dl=GUIDE&CFID=15151515&CFTOKEN=6184 > 618> > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen! Ideal f?r Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer From renato at odrl.net Tue Feb 6 17:11:00 2007 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then > make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation > and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users > to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should > keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the > core only in our ODRL V2 Document? I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document (a cut down version of what we have now). Then we can have the extensions: "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" "ODRL V2 - Payments" etc What do others think? Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Tue Feb 6 21:31:54 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> Message-ID: <20070206103154.85910@gmx.net> Hi Renato, this is a viable alternative for me to the ODRLv2 document structure we currently have. Any other comments of the ODRL community members? Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Tue, 6 Feb 2007 16:11:00 +1000 Von: Renato Iannella An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: Re: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? > > On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > > > I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then > > make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation > > and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users > > to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should > > keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the > > core only in our ODRL V2 Document? > > I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document > (a cut down version of what we have now). > > Then we can have the extensions: > "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" > "ODRL V2 - Payments" > etc > > > What do others think? > > Cheers > > Renato Iannella > ODRL Initiative > http://odrl.net > > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11713T4783a From aarnab at cs.uct.ac.za Tue Feb 6 21:34:31 2007 From: aarnab at cs.uct.ac.za (Alapan Arnab) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> Message-ID: <1170758071.6940.2.camel@iduna> There should be some level of inheritance, with other profiles inheriting from the core set (there is no need for duplicate work!) Alapan On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1000, Renato Iannella wrote: > On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > > > I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then > > make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation > > and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users > > to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should > > keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the > > core only in our ODRL V2 Document? > > I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document > (a cut down version of what we have now). > > Then we can have the extensions: > "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" > "ODRL V2 - Payments" > etc > > > What do others think? > > Cheers > > Renato Iannella > ODRL Initiative > http://odrl.net > > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Alapan Arnab Data Networks Architecture (DNA) Laboratory Department of Computer Science University of Cape Town Rondebosch, 7700 South Africa Tel: +27 21 650 3127 Web: http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~aarnab/ Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com ---------- "You must always believe that you can be the best, but you must never believe you have achieved it". Juan Manuel Fangio From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Tue Feb 6 21:36:17 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <1170758071.6940.2.camel@iduna> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> <1170758071.6940.2.camel@iduna> Message-ID: <20070206103617.85940@gmx.net> Hi Alapan, sure. We would not define the core elements in the profiles again, only the optional - additional elements, and to which core elements they can be related. Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Tue, 06 Feb 2007 12:34:31 +0200 Von: Alapan Arnab An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: Re: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? > There should be some level of inheritance, with other profiles > inheriting from the core set (there is no need for duplicate work!) > > Alapan > On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 16:11 +1000, Renato Iannella wrote: > > On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > > > > > I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then > > > make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation > > > and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users > > > to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should > > > keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the > > > core only in our ODRL V2 Document? > > > > I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document > > (a cut down version of what we have now). > > > > Then we can have the extensions: > > "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" > > "ODRL V2 - Payments" > > etc > > > > > > What do others think? > > > > Cheers > > > > Renato Iannella > > ODRL Initiative > > http://odrl.net > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 > -- > Alapan Arnab > Data Networks Architecture (DNA) Laboratory > Department of Computer Science > University of Cape Town > Rondebosch, 7700 > South Africa > > Tel: +27 21 650 3127 > Web: http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~aarnab/ > Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com > ---------- > "You must always believe that you can be the best, but you must never > believe you have achieved it". > Juan Manuel Fangio > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 10 GB Mailbox, 100 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX TopMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/topmail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11713T4783a From Steven_Rowat at sunshine.net Wed Feb 7 06:03:51 2007 From: Steven_Rowat at sunshine.net (Steven Rowat) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <20070206103154.85910@gmx.net> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> <20070206103154.85910@gmx.net> Message-ID: Hi Susanne wrote: >this is a viable alternative for me to the ODRLv2 document structure >we currently have. Any other comments of the ODRL community members? I agree. The simpler the core is the better. Based on various arguments, it may be that how simple we can make the core will decide whether or not ODRL gets uniformly adopted. As I said in my (ironically) too complex earlier comments, I'd go so far as to make the core be only the required definitions for Party, Asset, and Party's initial Intentions about the use of their Asset (i.e., pre-negotiation). I sent a rewritten detailed explanation of this position to the three authors of the "The Problem with Rights Expression Languages" study, and one of the authors (Greg Heileman) has responded with further comments and a copy of another study they are publishing (which I have yet to read). I won't post my e-mail I sent them here since my suggestions in it are mostly contained within the longer posts I wrote on this subject last week. (However the version I sent them is reordered and more concise, so if anyone is interested please let me know and I'll send backchannel.) I have Greg's permission to quote from his response; these parts seem like they may be of interest: >"...One of the most important issues in [Pramod's] work is precisely >what you mention - how simple should the core be? The trade-offs >between capability and complexity need to be carefully studied, and >how much of the complexity can be pushed into the middleware becomes >an important issue. > >Regarding middleware, I agree with you that it should furnish a lot >of the DRM capabilities. I would also like to point out that many >services that have historically been called middleware are free, >e.g., many messaging services, ODBC, etc. We're also of the opinion >that standards should be defined in this area that are open. The >services that make use of the middleware should be able to operate >according to different business models, but the infrastructure of >the middleware should be freely available - perhaps even an integral >part of the future Internet. > > >It is theoretically possible to "chunk" ODRL or XrML into parts - >some that would be part of a core REL, and others that would be >identified as middleware or even application-level parts. From our >perspective, it seems that ODRL is better suited for this than XrML. > Or perhaps we can define a core, and then show how it maps to >specific parts of ODRL and XrML - this might get around some of the >standards issues you mention. > >In any event, I look forward to continued discussion with you on this topic. " > In a subsequent email Greg said he may join this group; I hope he does! Best Regards, Steven Rowat -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20070206/099eeadc/attachment.html From vickyw at cs.cornell.edu Thu Feb 8 00:43:37 2007 From: vickyw at cs.cornell.edu (Vicky Weissman) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 References: Message-ID: Hi All, Sorry I haven't been around for awhile. I want to comment on Steven's last email. ------- I have Greg [Heileman]'s permission to quote from his response; these parts seem like they may be of interest: It is theoretically possible to "chunk" ODRL or XrML into parts - some that would be part of a core REL, and others that would be identified as middleware or even application-level parts. From our perspective, it seems that ODRL is better suited for this than XrML. Or perhaps we can define a core, and then show how it maps to specific parts of ODRL and XrML - this might get around some of the standards issues you mention. ------ I took a rough stab at this a few years ago by defining a "core" language that I called "Rosetta". I'm currently trying to refine the ideas and would be happy to mail the results to anyone who's interested. (Hopefully I'll have a first draft in time for CCS.) Best, Vicky -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20070207/53695c60/attachment.html From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Thu Feb 8 01:00:51 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20070207140051.75530@gmx.net> Hi Vicky, good to hear from you again. Maybe you can use the basic ODRL language elements to do this approach. I want to avoid another REL development. Core Element of ODRL are in my opinion: - Rights - Asset - Party - Permission - Duty - Prohibition - Constraint - Action (with Transfer Rights) and - Object However, very important are also the relationships between the elements. I you are not sure, why we need the one or other relationship, maybe you'll find answers in our requirements document. So long Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:43:37 -0500 Von: "Vicky Weissman" An: odrl-version2@odrl.net, odrl-version2@odrl.net CC: Betreff: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 > Hi All, > > Sorry I haven't been around for awhile. I want to comment on Steven's > last > email. > > ------- > > > I have Greg [Heileman]'s permission to quote from his response; these > parts > seem like they may be of interest: > > It is theoretically possible to "chunk" ODRL or XrML into parts - some > that > would be part of a core REL, and others that would be identified as > middleware or even application-level parts. From our perspective, it > seems > that ODRL is better suited for this than XrML. Or perhaps we can define a > core, and then show how it maps to specific parts of ODRL and XrML - this > might get around some of the standards issues you mention. > > ------ > > I took a rough stab at this a few years ago by defining a "core" language > that I called "Rosetta". I'm currently trying to refine the ideas and > would > be happy to mail the results to anyone who's interested. (Hopefully I'll > have a first draft in time for CCS.) > > Best, > Vicky > > -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX ProMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11711T4781a From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Thu Feb 8 03:41:13 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] !! NEW Book on Interoperability of DRM Systems !! Message-ID: <20070207164113.158360@gmx.net> Dear DRM community, I am proud to announce that the Book: "Interoperability of DRM Systems" is now ready for sale at amazon.de and amazon.com: I hope it is of interest for you and your colleagues and will help establishing interoperabilty in the field of DRM. The topic has never been as important and up-to-date as today! Best regards Susanne P.S. Here are some key words from the content: 1. Motivation & Intoduction 2 Digital Rights Management Systems 2.1 Trading Digital Goods 2.2 Digital Rights Management (DRM) 2.2.1 DRM Defnition 2.2.2 Perspectives of DRM 2.3 A Sample Digital Rights Management System and its Functions 2.3.1 DRM System Functions 2.3.2 A Sample DRM System 2.3.3 A Sample DRM Process 2.3.4 Commercial DRM Products and DRM System Variants 2.4 The Role of Rights Expression Languages in DRM 3 Rights Expression Languages (RELs) 3.1 Defnition of Terms 3.2 Requirements of RELs 3.3 Characteristics of RELs 3.5 Current Market Situation and Trends 4 Electronic Contracts 4.1 Contract Life Cycle 4.2 Contract States 4.3 Execution of Rights . 4.3.1 Electronic Contracts, Electronic Tickets, and Licenses 4.3.2 Ticket-Driven Rights Execution 4.3.3 Hybrid Rights Execution 4.4 Contract Objects and Contract Use 4.5 Contract Modelling and Creation 4.6 The Generic Contract Schema 4.7 Enforceability of Electronic Contracts 4.8 Contract Management Issues 5 Design of a Rights Expression Exchange Framework 5.1 Exchanging Rights Expressions 5.1.1 The Communication Model 5.1.2 The Rights Expression Communication Model 5.2 The Rights Expression Exchange Framework 6 Implementing the Rights Expression Exchange Framework 6.1 Software Architecture 6.2 The Rights Expression Generator 6.3 The Rights Expression Interpreter 6.4 The Rights Expression Wrapper and Unwrapper 6.5 The Mediator 7. Case Study of the Rights Expression Exchange Framework 7.1 Access Control with Context Constraints 7.2 Access Control Decision Based on Electronic Tickets -- Susanne Guth ODRL Initiative susanne@odrl.net NEU +++ 3DSL von 1&1 mit extra Vorteil f?r GMX Besteller +++ Jetzt Einf?hrungsangebot sichern: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/dsl -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX ProMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11711T4781a From renato at odrl.net Thu Feb 8 10:16:45 2007 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On 7 Feb 2007, at 23:43, Vicky Weissman wrote: > I took a rough stab at this a few years ago by defining a "core" > language that I called "Rosetta". I'm currently trying to refine > the ideas and would be happy to mail the results to anyone who's > interested. (Hopefully I'll have a first draft in time for CCS.) Vicky - feel free to distribute to this WG ;-) Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20070208/040f75d8/attachment.html From renato at odrl.net Thu Feb 8 14:52:37 2007 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] !! NEW Book on Interoperability of DRM Systems !! In-Reply-To: <20070207164113.158360@gmx.net> References: <20070207164113.158360@gmx.net> Message-ID: On 8 Feb 2007, at 02:41, Susanne Guth wrote: > I am proud to announce that the Book: > > "Interoperability of DRM Systems" Well done (again!) Was this based on your thesis? Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net From aarnab at cs.uct.ac.za Thu Feb 8 18:21:47 2007 From: aarnab at cs.uct.ac.za (Alapan Arnab) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: <20070207140051.75530@gmx.net> References: <20070207140051.75530@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1170919307.6951.2.camel@iduna> Hi Susanne, Vicky, I am just wondering how this core is different to the model I mailed in January ... I had only the objects you list below with two differences: 1. I do not have a prohibition element because I don't think it should exist; and I explain my reasons. 2. I split party up into rights holder/producer and user/consumer; mainly for modelling reasons. This could be condensed into one I think. Alapan On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 15:00 +0100, Susanne Guth wrote: > Hi Vicky, > > good to hear from you again. Maybe you can use the basic ODRL language elements to do this approach. I want to avoid another REL development. > > Core Element of ODRL are in my opinion: > > - Rights > - Asset > - Party > - Permission > - Duty > - Prohibition > - Constraint > - Action (with Transfer Rights) and > - Object > > However, very important are also the relationships between the elements. > I you are not sure, why we need the one or other relationship, maybe you'll find answers in our requirements document. > > > > So long > Susanne > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > Datum: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:43:37 -0500 > Von: "Vicky Weissman" > An: odrl-version2@odrl.net, odrl-version2@odrl.net > CC: > Betreff: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 > > > Hi All, > > > > Sorry I haven't been around for awhile. I want to comment on Steven's > > last > > email. > > > > ------- > > > > > > I have Greg [Heileman]'s permission to quote from his response; these > > parts > > seem like they may be of interest: > > > > It is theoretically possible to "chunk" ODRL or XrML into parts - some > > that > > would be part of a core REL, and others that would be identified as > > middleware or even application-level parts. From our perspective, it > > seems > > that ODRL is better suited for this than XrML. Or perhaps we can define a > > core, and then show how it maps to specific parts of ODRL and XrML - this > > might get around some of the standards issues you mention. > > > > ------ > > > > I took a rough stab at this a few years ago by defining a "core" language > > that I called "Rosetta". I'm currently trying to refine the ideas and > > would > > be happy to mail the results to anyone who's interested. (Hopefully I'll > > have a first draft in time for CCS.) > > > > Best, > > Vicky > > > > > -- Alapan Arnab Data Networks Architecture (DNA) Laboratory Department of Computer Science University of Cape Town Rondebosch, 7700 South Africa Tel: +27 21 650 3127 Web: http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~aarnab/ Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com ---------- "You must always believe that you can be the best, but you must never believe you have achieved it". Juan Manuel Fangio From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Thu Feb 8 20:44:00 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] !! NEW Book on Interoperability of DRM Systems !! In-Reply-To: References: <20070207164113.158360@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20070208094400.315110@gmx.net> Hi Renato, yes it is basically my thesis, just brought out as a book. I think a lot of topics that are addressed in the book are still discussed today even in our ODRL Initiative (Core Elements, etc.). What was Chris' Role in the XrML Development? I guess, I missed that point. So long Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 13:52:37 +1000 Von: Renato Iannella An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: Re: [Odrl-version2] !! NEW Book on Interoperability of DRM Systems !! > > On 8 Feb 2007, at 02:41, Susanne Guth wrote: > > > I am proud to announce that the Book: > > > > "Interoperability of DRM Systems" > > Well done (again!) > > Was this based on your thesis? > > Cheers > > Renato Iannella > ODRL Initiative > http://odrl.net > > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX ProMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11711T4781a From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Thu Feb 8 21:25:14 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 In-Reply-To: <1170919307.6951.2.camel@iduna> References: <20070207140051.75530@gmx.net> <1170919307.6951.2.camel@iduna> Message-ID: <20070208102514.315110@gmx.net> Hi Alapan, as I wrote in my email below. The important thing is the relations. They are completely different than in the ODRL model, the carefully chosen relations are the heart of the model I guess. Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Thu, 08 Feb 2007 09:21:47 +0200 Von: Alapan Arnab An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: Re: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 > Hi Susanne, Vicky, > I am just wondering how this core is different to the model I mailed in > January ... I had only the objects you list below with two differences: > 1. I do not have a prohibition element because I don't think it should > exist; and I explain my reasons. > 2. I split party up into rights holder/producer and user/consumer; > mainly for modelling reasons. This could be condensed into one I think. > > Alapan > On Wed, 2007-02-07 at 15:00 +0100, Susanne Guth wrote: > > Hi Vicky, > > > > good to hear from you again. Maybe you can use the basic ODRL language > elements to do this approach. I want to avoid another REL development. > > > > Core Element of ODRL are in my opinion: > > > > - Rights > > - Asset > > - Party > > - Permission > > - Duty > > - Prohibition > > - Constraint > > - Action (with Transfer Rights) and > > - Object > > > > However, very important are also the relationships between the elements. > > I you are not sure, why we need the one or other relationship, maybe > you'll find answers in our requirements document. > > > > > > > > So long > > Susanne > > > > > > -------- Original-Nachricht -------- > > Datum: Wed, 7 Feb 2007 08:43:37 -0500 > > Von: "Vicky Weissman" > > An: odrl-version2@odrl.net, odrl-version2@odrl.net > > CC: > > Betreff: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 2 > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Sorry I haven't been around for awhile. I want to comment on Steven's > > > last > > > email. > > > > > > ------- > > > > > > > > > I have Greg [Heileman]'s permission to quote from his response; these > > > parts > > > seem like they may be of interest: > > > > > > It is theoretically possible to "chunk" ODRL or XrML into parts - some > > > that > > > would be part of a core REL, and others that would be identified as > > > middleware or even application-level parts. From our perspective, it > > > seems > > > that ODRL is better suited for this than XrML. Or perhaps we can > define a > > > core, and then show how it maps to specific parts of ODRL and XrML - > this > > > might get around some of the standards issues you mention. > > > > > > ------ > > > > > > I took a rough stab at this a few years ago by defining a "core" > language > > > that I called "Rosetta". I'm currently trying to refine the ideas and > > > would > > > be happy to mail the results to anyone who's interested. (Hopefully > I'll > > > have a first draft in time for CCS.) > > > > > > Best, > > > Vicky > > > > > > > > > -- > Alapan Arnab > Data Networks Architecture (DNA) Laboratory > Department of Computer Science > University of Cape Town > Rondebosch, 7700 > South Africa > > Tel: +27 21 650 3127 > Web: http://people.cs.uct.ac.za/~aarnab/ > Blog: http://idiots-mind.blogspot.com > ---------- > "You must always believe that you can be the best, but you must never > believe you have achieved it". > Juan Manuel Fangio > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth cantoergosum@guth.it http://cantoergosum.guth.it/ "Feel free" - 5 GB Mailbox, 50 FreeSMS/Monat ... Jetzt GMX ProMail testen: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/promail?ac=OM.GX.GX003K11711T4781a From vickyw at cs.cornell.edu Sat Feb 10 00:40:53 2007 From: vickyw at cs.cornell.edu (Vicky Weissman) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] RE: ODRL-Version2 Digest, Vol 20, Issue 4 References: Message-ID: On Febuary 8, 2007, Alapan Arnab wrote: I am just wondering how this core is different to the model I mailed in January ... ---- Vicky Replies: The paper I'm writing now is different than yours but I'm a bit uncomfortable saying how because it's a work in progress, so it's likely to change. I'm sorry this isn't much of an answer but I hope to have a better one for you soon. -Vicky -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.odrl.net/pipermail/odrl-version2/attachments/20070209/aa618e8a/attachment.html From jaime.delgado at ac.upc.edu Tue Feb 20 21:23:11 2007 From: jaime.delgado at ac.upc.edu (Jaime Delgado) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> Message-ID: <6.2.1.2.2.20070220112050.055625c8@localhost> Dear all, We also support this approach. Best regards, Jaime Delgado. At 07:11 06/02/2007, Renato Iannella wrote: >On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > >>I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then >>make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation >>and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users >>to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should >>keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the >>core only in our ODRL V2 Document? > >I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document >(a cut down version of what we have now). > >Then we can have the extensions: > "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" > "ODRL V2 - Payments" > etc > > >What do others think? > >Cheers > >Renato Iannella >ODRL Initiative >http://odrl.net > > >_______________________________________________ >ODRL-Version2 mailing list >ODRL-Version2@odrl.net >http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 From Susanne.Guth at gmx.net Tue Feb 20 21:43:32 2007 From: Susanne.Guth at gmx.net (Susanne Guth) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? In-Reply-To: <6.2.1.2.2.20070220112050.055625c8@localhost> References: <1167319496.6928.17.camel@iduna> <20070203153053.206460@gmx.net> <4B4A3672-BF2B-4679-B2D0-1AD31710DAC3@odrl.net> <6.2.1.2.2.20070220112050.055625c8@localhost> Message-ID: <20070220104332.205960@gmx.net> Hi Jaime, good to hear from you. Have you already seen that there is a 3rd ODRL workshop in Koblenz this year? http://odrl.net/ So long Susanne -------- Original-Nachricht -------- Datum: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 11:23:11 +0100 Von: Jaime Delgado An: "ODRL Version 2.0" CC: Betreff: Re: [Odrl-version2] Make it Simpler? > Dear all, > > We also support this approach. > > Best regards, > > > Jaime Delgado. > > > At 07:11 06/02/2007, Renato Iannella wrote: > > >On 4 Feb 2007, at 01:30, Susanne Guth wrote: > > > >>I see what you mean. Maybe we can declare core elements and then > >>make suggestions for complemenatary elements, such as Negotiation > >>and so on. In the same chapter we should encourage the ODRL users > >>to define their own additional elements. However, I think we should > >>keep this all in one document, or would you suggest to have the > >>core only in our ODRL V2 Document? > > > >I was thinking that the "ODRL V2 Core" is a separate document > >(a cut down version of what we have now). > > > >Then we can have the extensions: > > "ODRL V2 - Negotiation" > > "ODRL V2 - Payments" > > etc > > > > > >What do others think? > > > >Cheers > > > >Renato Iannella > >ODRL Initiative > >http://odrl.net > > > > > >_______________________________________________ > >ODRL-Version2 mailing list > >ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > >http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 > > _______________________________________________ > ODRL-Version2 mailing list > ODRL-Version2@odrl.net > http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-version2 -- Susanne Guth susanne@odrl.net http://odrl.net !! New DRM book available on Amazon.de/.com !! Ist Ihr Browser Vista-kompatibel? Jetzt die neuesten Browser-Versionen downloaden: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/browser From renato at odrl.net Wed Feb 21 10:39:36 2007 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:06 2007 Subject: [Odrl-version2] CFP: Virtual Goods and ODRL International Workshop Message-ID: *** We are please to announce that the ODRL Workshop has joined with the VirtualGoods Workshop *** ==================================================================== 5th International Workshop for Technology, Economy, and Legal Aspects of Virtual Goods incorporating the 3rd International ODRL Workshop **** Call for Participation **** 11-13 Oct 2007, Koblenz, Germany http://www.virtualgoods.org/ ==================================================================== With the rise of new digital music portals, the development of copyright laws world-wide and the increasing success of alternative models, the discussion on digital rights management is even more intense than ever before. Any business model of virtual goods must include not only the virtual objects and their technical control functions, but also the human actors and their personal and economic interest. What is needed is a simple and safe technololgy which supports a balance of interests between creators, providers and consumers of digital goods. Current technology does not give satsifactory answers. The goal of this conference is to bring together experts from scientific and practical fields, researchers from different disciplines, developers, and users interested in electronic commerce of virtual goods. Topics of interest include, but are not restricted to, the following aspects: * Content protection (watermarking, encryption, signatures) * Technical solutions in digital rights management * ODRL Rights Expression Language * User acceptance of digital rights management * New business models and solution architectures * Peer-to-Peer systems * Virtual goods services such as payment and delivery * Fraud management * Security and privacy * The economic role and perspective of the actors * The economic/cultural/legal impact on the society Papers sumissions are due: 1 June 2007 For complete details, including important dates, committee members, please visit the Call for Papers site at: ====================================================================