Key to the management of intellectual property in digital media BISG/NISO

1. IDENTIFY AND DESCRIBE Key to the management of intellectual property in digital media BISG/NISO The Changing Standards Landscape Washington DC, June 22 2007 Norman Paskin T E R T I U S L t d

2. Naming and meaning • “Key to” not “keys to…” • Naming = assigning an identifier to a referent • Some general themes and practical consequences

3. The case of the headless corpse

4. Naming • Identifier: uniquepersistent alphanumeric string (“number”, “name”, “lexical token”) specifying a referent • Unique: one to many: an identifier specifies one and only one referent (but a referent may have more than one identifier) • Persistent: once assigned, does not change referent • May be part of an identifier system (other components, technical or social) • Resolution: process by which an identifier is input to a network service which returns its associated referent and/or descriptive information about it (metadata). “Actionability” • Referent: the object which is identified by the identifier, whether or not resolution returns that object. • may be abstract, physical or digital, since all these forms of entity are of relevance in content management (e.g. creations, resources, agreements, people, organisations)

5. What is being named: the (false) hat box analogy • My hat is on the shelf: I can see the hat • My hat is in a box on the shelf: now I can’t see the hat, only boxes • I put a label on the box: now I can still find the hat. • “The label identifies the hat” • The hat box analogy in digital form: “the data” and “the file server page it’s on” (the web) • I click on the link, and I get “the thing that I want”…? • “the URL identifies the content” • …only in a very simple case. • It may have moved • It may be in various forms; in multiple places; in different versions; etc. • You may not have rights to it • It may not be possible to “get” it • e.g if the referent is a person…

6. Granularity • Granularity: the extent to which a collection of information has been subdivided for purposes of identification (e.g. a collection; a book; tables and figures) • Functional Granularity: it should be possible to identify an entity whenever it needs to be distinguished • Your functional granularity may not be my functional granularity: • A wants to distinguish “this book in any format”, but B wants to distinguish “the pdf version, the html version, etc ….”

7. Compound objects • Precisely what is being named? • Suppose I have here a pdf version of Defoe’s “Robinson Crusoe” issued by Norton. I find an identifier – is it of: • The work “Robinson Crusoe”? • All works by Daniel Defoe? • The Norton edition of “Robinson Crusoe”? • The pdf version of the Norton edition of…. ? • The pdf version of…held on this server…? • Which hat is in that box? • Most digital objects of interest have compound form, simultaneously embodying several referents • Multiple identifiers may be necessary (cf music CDs) • Need to say what each identifier describes

8. Resolution • Persistence: “get me the right thing” (redirect to a valid URL) • Contextual resolution: “get me the thing that is right for me” • Appropriate copy resolution (e.g. OpenURL context-sensitive linking): same content in different contexts • Full contextual resolution e.g. rights-based) : different content in different contexts • A specific case: location-dependent resolution • e.g. Crossref / China • A general mechanism: multiple resolution: returns multiple things in response to a request from one identifier (e.g. a choice, an automated service)

9. Meaning • Assigning metadata to a referent, to enable semantic interoperability • “say what the referent is” • Semantic: • Do two identifiers denote the same referent? • If A says “owner” and B says “owner”, are they referring to the same thing? • If A says “released” and B says “disseminated”, do they mean different things? • Interoperability: the ability for identifiers to be used in services outside the direct control of the issuing assigner • Identifiers assigned in one context may be encountered, and may be re-used, in another place or time - without consulting the assigner. You can’t assume that your assumptions made on assignment will be known to someone else. • Persistence = interoperability with the future

10. Tools to ensure meaning • Basis:“Interoperability of Data in E-Commerce Systems” (indecs) : http://www.indecs.org 1998-2000 • Led to Contextual Ontology approach - used in: • ISO MPEG-21 Rights Data Dictionary (http://iso21000-6.net/) • DOI Data Dictionary (http://www.doi.org ) • DDEX digital data exchange - music industry (http://ddex.net/ ) • ONIX: Book industry (+) messaging schemas (www.editeur.org ) • Rightscom’s OntologyX - licensee of output, plus own work on tools (www.rightscom.com ) • Digital Library Federation - communication of licence terms (ERMI: ONIX for licensing terms) • May inform development of ACAP - Content Access (http://www.the-acap.org/ )

11. Representations • Physical property: • representations e.g. deeds, mortgages, are traded (not the physical bricks etc.) • Intellectual property: • representations e.g. licences, files, are traded (not the abstract Work etc.) • Representations have value • Not just an inventory but a structured entity, such as a deed • "to facilitate the comparison and combination of assets (standard descriptions)“ • We are becoming more used to representations: Avatars, licences: in general: digital objects [See: De Soto: "The Mystery Of Capital"; and Kahn: "Representing Value as Digital Objects" D-Lib magazine, May 01 (www.dlib.org/dlib/may01)]

12. Interoperability and multiple services • Services using an identifier may be offered by multiple providers • Some may be more definitive than others • “Resolution” shades into “query” • e.g. Worldcat ISBN service • Each registration authority for an identifier scheme should retain autonomy and precedence in determining rules for usage within its own scheme or community. • Many early applications will be silos; interoperability is not needed (and may not be desired) • e.g. Knovel: interactivity within its online book content through e book components • New applications will reach across silos (mash ups etc); new silos will appear. As such services grow and become many, a single source of data to power multiple services makes sense

13. Practical consequences • An identifier specifies one and only one referent (but a referent may have more than one identifier) • Make systems work together: e.g. Bookland DOIs made from ISBNs…? • Objects may be abstract, physical or digital, since all these forms of entity are of relevance in content management (e.g. creations, resources, agreements, people, organisations) • Need for many identifiers: ISTC, ISNI, Licences, etc • Your functional granularity may not be my functional granularity: A wants to distinguish “this book in any format”, but B wants “the pdf version, the html version….” • Need to enable different identifiers to work together: e.g. ISTC and ISBN • Assumptions are not sufficient for interoperability • An identifier is not enough. You need to say what you are identifying. • Context is vital: “get me the thing that is right for me” • Simple resolution may not be enough.

14. Practical consequences (cont.) • Multiple services may exist for an identifier • Don’t assume only monopoly services • One service may be definitive; some may be better than others • Digital objects may be representations of something • Need to distinguish what is a representation • Note that representations may be compound objects • Interoperability becomes more important as an economic feature when there are multiple services or multiple uses – which there will be eventually • Don’t design only for today • Common frameworks for naming and meaning (to do all this) become important when services cut across silos; across media; from different sources; etc • e.g. DOI • Multiple resolution: returns multiple results in response to a request (e.g. a choice, an automated service) • need some way of grouping and ordering those results, e.g. Handle value typing • Interoperability of Data in E-Commerce Systems • Need semantic precision and common framework

15. IDENTIFY AND DESCRIBE Key to the management of intellectual property in digital media BISG/NISO The Changing Standards Landscape Washington DC, June 22 2007 Norman Paskin T E R T I U S L t d