W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-odrl@w3.org > November 2012

RE: News industry requirement: action "license"

From: Michael Steidl \(IPTC\) <mdirector@iptc.org>
Date: Tue, 13 Nov 2012 10:29:51 +0100
To: "'ODRL Community Group'" <public-odrl@w3.org>
Message-ID: <007b01cdc181$6ecef010$4c6cd030$@iptc.org>
Hi Renato,

rights are a tricky thing:

-          "Agreement" as Policy Type is ok as it defines to reflect that
two or more parties have agreed on something = a mutual consent by the
involved parties. And this is a concept which is relevant in the context of
law. But it does not include on what has been agreed.

-          Many of the terms of the Action vocabulary are about what exactly
has been agreed on = pinning down the "something".

-          As I have also some practical business experience with news
exchange in Central Europe I know that law, or at least the courts, in this
region make a clear difference between selling a good and licensing a good -
as explained in my initial email: selling = all of the good, regardless if
tangible or intangible, and all related rights are transferred from one
party to another, a 1:1 transfer; while "licensing" = a copy of the tangible
manifestation of the good and only limited rights to use it are transferred,
if this is not an exclusive license (as for most real-world cases) it could
be a 1:n transfer. (Aside: a key dispute was about software: what Microsoft
etc. did was not understood as selling but as licensing.)

I hope this makes the background of this issue a bit clearer.

 

Michael

 

From: Renato Iannella [mailto:ri@semanticidentity.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 2:26 AM
To: Michael Steidl (IPTC)
Cc: 'ODRL Community Group'
Subject: Re: News industry requirement: action "license"

 

 

On 9 Nov 2012, at 19:58, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org> wrote:





-          The ODRL action "sell" defines that it is about trading an asset
- which is understood by the legislation of many countries the a full
transition of the ownership is executed. This is not the case for licensing.

 

Hi Michael, I do not think we had the "full transition of the ownership"
definition in scope for "sell".

If you look at the Vocab comments for "sell" you can see we had "Next Policy
is recommended for the third-party" implying that the assigner can specify
which rights the assignee can on-sell.

 

Given this definition of "sell", does this cover your "license"? 

 

Usually we use the Policy Type to indicate that this is a "license" (our
term is "agreement")

If the requirement is "how to express that content is licensed to a party",
then we would look at the Policy Type?

 

Also, do we need a term for the "full transition of ownership" action now?

 

 

Cheers...

Renato Iannella

Semantic Identity

http://semanticidentity.com

Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206

 
Received on Tuesday, 13 November 2012 09:30:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 13 November 2012 09:30:26 GMT