From renato at odrl.net Tue Nov 2 15:28:04 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Romeo Project Message-ID: <968A448E-2C87-11D9-B2EB-00306541C018@odrl.net> Hi all, the UK Romeo Project from last year developed some ODRL binding for CC licenses: Cheers Renato Iannella http://renato.iannella.it From renato at odrl.net Mon Nov 15 13:16:21 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Re: Romeo Project In-Reply-To: <968A448E-2C87-11D9-B2EB-00306541C018@odrl.net> References: <968A448E-2C87-11D9-B2EB-00306541C018@odrl.net> Message-ID: <5775C094-36AC-11D9-A70C-00306541C018@odrl.net> On of the issues from the Romeo Report [1] was the need to explicitly express all the usage permissions (such as play, print give, etc) as this is the basis of the ODRL permission model. (The model will be revised in Version 2.O to cater for new requirements [2].) There are two mechanisms that we could adopt to support this requirement. 1 - define a new Permission semantic to allow any "usage" permission 2 - imply that by using the ODRL/CC Profile, all permissions are allowed except those specified in the expression. Is there any preferences? (or other options?) Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net [1] [2] From lgunnars at twr-europe.at Thu Nov 25 03:05:34 2004 From: lgunnars at twr-europe.at (Lars Gunnarsson) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Meaning hidden in the name of profile? Message-ID: Sorry for my delay in commenting on this issue. Alternative 2: Implying that the CC profile means "all permissions allowed" to my understanding actually means that we are hiding the semantic . Checking for this would then only be possible based on the name of the profile. In other words, any implementation will have to test whether the name is ODRL/CC and then from that point on handle this profile differently. This would mean that if somebody else wants to define a profile of their own with a similar meaning, but still not completely compatible with the ODRL/CC, then they can not do so. The will have to also imply that the name of their own profile means the same thing as ODRL/CC. But this now means that their implementation is no longer compatible with the rest of the world. This is for sure not a good solution! Alternative 1: To me this seems to be the right place to describe what the ODRL/CC Profile is all about. Any implementations will have to consider the new Permission semantic, or else they will not be able to handle the ODRL/CC profile. I am not able to suggest how the syntax of this semantic should look like, as my experience is more in the area of implementing applications. There will probably be others on this list who can make suggestions on that. If the syntax is designed nicely, so that it is clearly understood that this syntax means "any usage" and limitations then can be added (in a formal way), then we gain that any profile can make use of this (potentially a local profile of my own design, not published anywhere), and any implementation will be able to deal with it correctly (as long as it can deal with this specification). Sounds like a very good design to me! Regards, Lars Gunnarsson Trans World Radio, Europe Vienna, Austria -----Original Message----- From: odrl-cc-bounces@odrl.net [mailto:odrl-cc-bounces@odrl.net] On Behalf Of odrl-cc-request@odrl.net Sent: Dienstag, 16. November 2004 12:27 To: odrl-cc@odrl.net Subject: Odrl-cc Digest, Vol 2, Issue 2 Today's Topics: 1. Re: Romeo Project (Renato Iannella) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Mon, 15 Nov 2004 12:16:21 +1000 From: Renato Iannella Subject: [Odrl-cc] Re: Romeo Project To: ODRL Creative Commons Profile WG Message-ID: <5775C094-36AC-11D9-A70C-00306541C018@odrl.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed On of the issues from the Romeo Report [1] was the need to explicitly express all the usage permissions (such as play, print give, etc) as this is the basis of the ODRL permission model. (The model will be revised in Version 2.O to cater for new requirements [2].) There are two mechanisms that we could adopt to support this requirement. 1 - define a new Permission semantic to allow any "usage" permission 2 - imply that by using the ODRL/CC Profile, all permissions are allowed except those specified in the expression. Is there any preferences? (or other options?) Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net [1] [2] ------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Odrl-cc mailing list Odrl-cc@odrl.net http://lists.odrl.net/mailman/listinfo/odrl-cc End of Odrl-cc Digest, Vol 2, Issue 2 ************************************* From renato at odrl.net Thu Nov 25 13:09:48 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Meaning hidden in the name of profile? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1530E299-3E87-11D9-AEF6-00306541C018@odrl.net> On 25 Nov 2004, at 02:05, Lars Gunnarsson wrote: > Alternative 1: > To me this seems to be the right place to describe what the ODRL/CC > Profile is all about. Any implementations will have to consider the > new Permission semantic, or else they will not be able to handle the > ODRL/CC profile. Lars - thanks for your comments. I tend to agree as well with defining a new semantic Permission (this will also fit into the ODRL 1.1 model more appropriately). CC defines 2 Permissions that all licenses have: - Reproduction - the work may be reproduced - Distribution - the work (and, if authorized, derivative works) may be distributed, publicly displayed, and publicly performed The CC full license details are listed here: and include: "Every license allows licensees, provided they live up to your conditions, (1) to copy the work (2) to distribute it (3) to display or perform it publicly (4) to make digital public performances of it (e.g., webcasting) (5) to shift the work into another format as a verbatim copy" Trying to map the 2 Permissions to the above: - Reproduction = 1, 3?, 5 - Distribution = 2, 3?, 4 Does (3) - which includes "display", belong to Reproduction? In other words does Reproduction actually cover the semantics of display/play/execute/print - the four core use permissions from ODRL? If it does, then we do not need a new explicit Permission. It if does not, then we do! Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net From renato at odrl.net Fri Nov 26 12:19:51 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] CFP: Second International ODRL Workshop 2005 Message-ID: <459C46B6-3F49-11D9-8565-00306541C018@odrl.net> ============================================= Second International ODRL Workshop **** Call for Participation **** Lisbon, Portugal, 7-8 July 2005 ============================================= The Second International ODRL Workshop continues from the successful First Workshop by bringing together people from research and industry to share current experiences and discuss the continuing development of the language to ensure its future success and strength. The ODRL language expresses rights information used in the open creative industries and commercial Digital Rights Management (DRM) sector. The Workshop will be held in Lisbon, Portugal from Thursday 7 July to Friday 8 July 2005. Submissions are now being sought that cover implementations, research, deployment, and profile extensions of ODRL across all industries and communities. Submissions are also invited from complementary research in the field of Rights Expression Languages and their impact on the DRM and creative sector. The Call for Participation includes the details of the submission requirements for the Workshop: Further information can be obtained from the Program Chairs: - Susanne Guth, Vienna University of Economics and BA, Austria - Carlos Serrao, Adetti, Portugal Email: We look forward to seeing you in Lisbon in 2005. Renato Iannella General Chair 2nd International ODRL Workshop From ml at creativecommons.org Tue Nov 30 04:00:20 2004 From: ml at creativecommons.org (Mike Linksvayer) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Meaning hidden in the name of profile? In-Reply-To: <1530E299-3E87-11D9-AEF6-00306541C018@odrl.net> References: <1530E299-3E87-11D9-AEF6-00306541C018@odrl.net> Message-ID: <41AB55A4.5050201@creativecommons.org> Renato Iannella wrote: > CC defines 2 Permissions that all licenses have: > - Reproduction - the work may be reproduced > - Distribution - the work (and, if authorized, derivative works) may be > distributed, > publicly displayed, and publicly performed > > The CC full license details are listed here: > > and include: > "Every license allows licensees, provided they live up to your conditions, > (1) to copy the work > (2) to distribute it > (3) to display or perform it publicly > (4) to make digital public performances of it (e.g., webcasting) > (5) to shift the work into another format as a verbatim copy" > > Trying to map the 2 Permissions to the above: > - Reproduction = 1, 3?, 5 > - Distribution = 2, 3?, 4 I believe "publicly" is the key to (3) and modifies both "display" and "perform", so (3) maps to Distribution. > Does (3) - which includes "display", belong to Reproduction? > In other words does Reproduction actually cover the semantics of > display/play/execute/print - the four > core use permissions from ODRL? > > If it does, then we do not need a new explicit Permission. > It if does not, then we do! Reproduction does cover local display/play/execute/print, but not distribution of the results of those actions to others. -- Mike Linksvayer http://creativecommons.org/about/people#21 From ml at creativecommons.org Tue Nov 30 13:18:30 2004 From: ml at creativecommons.org (Mike Linksvayer) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Re: Romeo Project In-Reply-To: <5775C094-36AC-11D9-A70C-00306541C018@odrl.net> References: <968A448E-2C87-11D9-B2EB-00306541C018@odrl.net> <5775C094-36AC-11D9-A70C-00306541C018@odrl.net> Message-ID: <41ABD876.7090606@creativecommons.org> Renato Iannella wrote: > On of the issues from the Romeo Report [1] was the need to > explicitly express all the usage permissions (such as play, > print give, etc) as this is the basis of the ODRL permission > model. (The model will be revised in Version 2.O to cater for > new requirements [2].) > > There are two mechanisms that we could adopt to support this > requirement. > 1 - define a new Permission semantic to allow any "usage" permission > 2 - imply that by using the ODRL/CC Profile, all permissions are > allowed except those specified in the expression. > > Is there any preferences? (or other options?) CC RDF doesn't do either, but rather permissions can be thought of as a diff against default copyright rules, which sort of allow nothing, and requirements and prohibitions can be thought of as limits on the permissions granted. Taking the example of http://creativecommons.org/licesnes/by-nc/2.0/, reproduction, distribution and derivative works are explicitly allowed, on the condition that attribution is given and commercial use is not made. Uses outside of reproduction, distribution, and derivative works are not permitted (although these three cover all interesting permissions I can think of). -- Mike Linksvayer http://creativecommons.org/about/people#21 From renato at odrl.net Tue Nov 30 15:08:03 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Re: Romeo Project In-Reply-To: <41ABD876.7090606@creativecommons.org> References: <968A448E-2C87-11D9-B2EB-00306541C018@odrl.net> <5775C094-36AC-11D9-A70C-00306541C018@odrl.net> <41ABD876.7090606@creativecommons.org> Message-ID: <6EAD00F5-4285-11D9-8546-00306541C018@odrl.net> > There are two mechanisms that we could adopt to support this > requirement. > 1 - define a new Permission semantic to allow any "usage" permission > 2 - imply that by using the ODRL/CC Profile, all permissions are > allowed except those specified in the expression. > Is there any preferences? (or other options?) I think the answer to the above is to simply use the CC Reproduction semantic - which seems to cover the ODRL specifics of play, display, execute, print. Cheers Renato Iannella http://renato.iannella.it From renato at odrl.net Tue Nov 30 15:53:21 2004 From: renato at odrl.net (Renato Iannella) Date: Sat Jun 2 13:28:25 2007 Subject: [Odrl-cc] Updated WD - 30 Nov Message-ID: An updated ODRL/CC Profile Working Draft is now available: The "Change History" at the end of the document indicates the major additions/modifications. Please send in comments/feedback... Cheers Renato Iannella ODRL Initiative http://odrl.net