RE: News industry requirement: action "license"

Hi Renato,

 

your proposal comes very close to our intentions.  Regarding "limited set of
rights": I think the basic statement should be that only the use as defined
by Permissions and Constraints is allowed, and I'm quite sure that even for
very open licenses some restrictions will apply, e.g. a typical one is that
the licensee is not allowed to sublicense it = no nextRights.

 

Cheers,

Michael

 

From: Renato Iannella [mailto:ri@semanticidentity.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, November 13, 2012 12:50 PM
To: Michael Steidl (IPTC)
Cc: 'ODRL Community Group'
Subject: Re: News industry requirement: action "license"

 

 

On 13 Nov 2012, at 19:29, Michael Steidl (IPTC) <mdirector@iptc.org> wrote:





-          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.)

 

Thanks for that...

 

So the recommendation is that we update the "sell" definition to mean the
transfer of all rights (and the actual asset, no copy), and add a "license"
action that means a copy of the asset and a limited set of rights (that may
be expressed in nextRights?)

 

 

 

Cheers...

Renato Iannella

Semantic Identity

http://semanticidentity.com

Mobile: +61 4 1313 2206