Open markpbaggett opened 5 years ago
lboulie2
commented
5 years ago Hello,
I just wanted to check in on our rights fields. We finally have a little space to breathe, and give this attention.
Do we need to:
• Re-mapping data in CONTENTdm's Rights field to Rights-Access Rights. • Entering an applicable statement from rightsstatements.org in Rights.
Thanks, Lee Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum
mlhale7
commented
5 years ago @lboulie2 - thanks for investing time to work on standardized rights. The best document for you to look at is https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aInokOIIsgf-B4iMTXU33qYN5B2jA3s91KgWoh7DZ7Q/edit. In this document you'll see that rather than writing in the textual statement from rightsstatements.org, you'll want to put in the URI. Here's an example: <dc:rights>http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC/1.0/</dc:rights>. Note that the actual URI includes "vocab", not "page." In DPLA the text for the statement will appear using this URI (e.g. example)You are also allowed to use a Creative Commons license if that would better meet your needs. Let me know if you want more information on this.
Also, if you want advice on how to determine which rights statements to use, I'm also happy to help. Here's a starter document that might be useful - PA Digital's Rights Statement Selection Tool
Not having worked with ContentDM specifically myself, I'm not certain on if "Rights-Access Rights" is the correct field to map to. We can map your rights statements correctly regardless of which specific field you use as long as it's available through OAI. @carolynfrunyon, can you confirm whether or not using Rights-Access Rights would be correct? Thanks for helping us fill in the gaps on this.
lboulie2
commented
5 years ago Thanks, Meredith.
Updating the dc:rights field with a uri is straightforward, and @carolynfrunyonhttps://github.com/carolynfrunyon walked me through that a while back. We can do that, but the tricky part for us is that how we define the rights of the items (not the rights to the metadata) is closely controlled by our legal counsel. Historically, they will not allow us to grant use of an item, without having the user sign paperwork that the attorneys created. And we often charge some sort of fee for files, to offset our costs of digitization and storage.
It sounds like my next step would be to send the attorney’s this PA Digital's Rights Statement Selection Toolhttps://padigital.org/rights-resources/. It may take some time to get a decision on how we can use the rights statements, but I will move this forward, if you think that’s best. My biggest concern is that by deviating from the institution-specific rights statement, the attorneys will shy away from approving our hosting our items on DPLA. Something to think about—any advice there?
Appreciate your help with this and @carolynfrunyonhttps://github.com/carolynfrunyon too—I still have the email where you describe how to map in CDM, so I think we’re good there.
Lee
From: mlhale7 [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 9:20 AM To: DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT DLTN_XSLT@noreply.github.com Cc: Lee Boulie LBoulie@countrymusichalloffame.org; Mention mention@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT] One Rights Transform to Rule them All for QDC (#180)
@lboulie2https://github.com/lboulie2 - thanks for investing time to work on standardized rights. The best document for you to look at is https://docs.google.com/document/d/1aInokOIIsgf-B4iMTXU33qYN5B2jA3s91KgWoh7DZ7Q/edithttps://docs.google.com/document/d/1aInokOIIsgf-B4iMTXU33qYN5B2jA3s91KgWoh7DZ7Q/edit. In this document you'll see that rather than writing in the textual statement from rightsstatements.org, you'll want to put in the URI. Here's an example:
Also, if you want advice on how to determine which rights statements to use, I'm also happy to help. Here's a starter document that might be useful - PA Digital's Rights Statement Selection Toolhttps://padigital.org/rights-resources/
Not having worked with ContentDM specifically myself, I'm not certain on if "Rights-Access Rights" is the correct field to map to. We can map your rights statements correctly regardless of which specific field you use as long as it's available through OAI. @carolynfrunyonhttps://github.com/carolynfrunyon, can you confirm whether or not using Rights-Access Rights would be correct? Thanks for helping us fill in the gaps on this.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT/issues/180?email_source=notifications&email_token=AMCUYNJEQZYJDHPOTCLBMEDP74TAHA5CNFSM4HTZ2222YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2ELLAY#issuecomment-512275843, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMCUYNKQWFO7LKFFZ5XXYF3P74TAHANCNFSM4HTZ222Q. Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum http://www.countrymusichalloffame.org
mlhale7
commented
5 years ago Hi @lboulie2 ,
I understand your concerns better now having read this. All of the rights statements we apply are associated with the resource shared. I have not personally had to deal with going through a legal counsel myself. While the Hatch Show Print broadsides should be relatively straightforward for assigning rights, it might be quite difficult to determine the rights of the vocal recordings at CMHF. I'd suggest starting with the broadsides and then tackling your recordings. You can share this approach with your legal counsel. I'd think most of the Hatch Show Print collection would likely be "In Copyright" since most of these works are from the 20th century and individual artists aren't credited in the metadata (these could potentially be treated as works for hire, assuming the metadata correctly reflects the author-firm relationship). Having recently finished Harvard's CopyrightX program, I have some basic knowledge of music copyright and you may likely already know a lot yourself. This lecture provided a lot of helpful foundational information for me. The issue is that with recorded music you're dealing with the rights of the composer, performer, publisher, record company, etc. and often composers and performers assign their rights to their publishers and recording companies. I'm uncertain of the source of your recordings (from record companies etc.), so I can't really say any more.
Perhaps at our next call we could see if others have had to do significant work with their legal counsels and share some takeaways. I'll add a note to the agenda.
Meredith
PS - Feel free to email me directly in the future if you'd like. Broad questions like this can be best addressed that way.
lboulie2
commented
5 years ago Great—thank you. I look forward to hearing other’s experience with this, thanks for adding this to the agenda. And I’ll email you directly in the future for broad questions.
Lee
From: mlhale7 [mailto:notifications@github.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2019 10:37 AM To: DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT DLTN_XSLT@noreply.github.com Cc: Lee Boulie LBoulie@countrymusichalloffame.org; Mention mention@noreply.github.com Subject: Re: [DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT] One Rights Transform to Rule them All for QDC (#180)
Hi @lboulie2https://github.com/lboulie2 ,
I understand your concerns better now having read this. All of the rights statements we apply are associated with the resource shared. I have not personally had to deal with going through a legal counsel myself. While the Hatch Show Print broadsides should be relatively straightforward for assigning rights, it might be quite difficult to determine the rights of the vocal recordings at CMHF. I'd suggest starting with the broadsides and then tackling your recordings. You can share this approach with your legal counsel. I'd think most of the Hatch Show Print collection would likely be "In Copyright" since most of these works are from the 20th century and individual artists aren't credited in the metadata (these could potentially be treated as works for hire, assuming the metadata correctly reflects the author-firm relationship). Having recently finished Harvard's CopyrightX program, I have some basic knowledge of music copyright and you may likely already know a lot yourself. This lecture https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2GGE_ToREPw provided a lot of helpful foundational information for me. The issue is that with recorded music you're dealing with the rights of the composer, performer, publisher, record company, etc. and often composers and performers assign their rights to their publishers and recording companies. I'm uncertain of the source of your recordings (from record companies etc.), so I can't really say any more.
Perhaps at our next call we could see if others have had to do significant work with their legal counsels and share some takeaways. I'll add a note to the agenda.
Meredith
PS - Feel free to email me directly in the future if you'd like. Broad questions like this can be best addressed that way.
— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://github.com/DigitalLibraryofTennessee/DLTN_XSLT/issues/180?email_source=notifications&email_token=AMCUYNMN3TG5OBE27EOQ47DP744B3A5CNFSM4HTZ2222YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOD2EZUAA#issuecomment-512334336, or mute the threadhttps://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AMCUYNI7G3BW5RXFA4A57XLP744B3ANCNFSM4HTZ222Q. Country Music Hall of Fame and Museum http://www.countrymusichalloffame.org
Why are You Reporting an Issue
Description
Our rights management in QDC is messy. Since we have an exhaustive list of potential rights statements (rightsstatements.org and CC), let's add a transform that can do string matching or uri stuff for all known cases.