This specification defines the eXtensible rights Markup Language (XrML), a general-purpose language in XML used to describe the rights and conditions for using digital resources.
Publisher
ContentGuard
Critical Arguements
CA This chapter provides an overview of XrML. It provides a basic definition of XrML, describes the need that XrML is meant to address, and explains design goals for the language.
Conclusions
RQ not applicable
SOW
DC ContentGuard contributed XrML to MPEG-21, the OASIS Rights Language Technical Committee and the Open eBook Forum (OeBF). In each case they are using XrML as the base for their rights language specification. Furthest along is MPEG, where the process has reached Committee Draft. They have also recommended to other standards bodies to build on this work. ContentGuard will propose XrML to any standards organization seeking a rights language. Because of this progress ContentGuard has frozen its release of XrML at Version 2.0.
CA ContentGuard intends to submit XrML to standards bodies that are developing specifications that enable the exchange and trading of content as well as the creation of repositories for storage and management of digital content.
SOW
DC ContentGuard contributed XrML to MPEG-21, the OASIS Rights Language Technical Committee and the Open eBook Forum (OeBF). In each case they are using XrML as the base for their rights language specification. Furthest along is MPEG, where the process has reached Committee Draft. They have also recommended to other standards bodies to build on this work. ContentGuard will propose XrML to any standards organization seeking a rights language. Because of this progress ContentGuard has frozen its release of XrML at Version 2.0.
Type
Web Page
Title
Towards a Digital Rights Expression Language Standard for Learning Technology
CA The Learning Technology Standards Committee (LTSC) of the Institute for Electrical and Electronic Engineers (IEEE) concentrated on making recommendations for standardizing a digital rights expression language (DREL) with the specific charge to (1) Investigate existing standards development efforts for DREL and digital rights. (2) Gather DREL requirements germane to the learning, education, and training industries. (3) Make recommendations as to how to proceed. (4) Feed requirements into ongoing DREL and digital rights standardization efforts, regardless of whether the LTSC decides to work with these efforts or embark on its own. This report represents the achievement of these goals in the form a of a white paper that can be used as reference for the LTSC, that reports on the current state of existing and proposed standardization efforts targeting digital rights expression languages and makes recommendations concerning future work.
Conclusions
RQ The recommendations of this report are: 1. Maintain appropriate liaisons between learning technology standards development organizations and those standards development organizations standardizing rights expression languages. The purpose of these liaisons is to continue to feed requirements into broader standardization efforts and to ensure that the voice of the learning, education and training community is heard. 2. Support the creation of application profiles or extensions of XrML and ODRL that include categories and vocabularies for roles common in educational and training settings. In the case of XrML, a name space for local context may be needed. (A name space is required for both XrML and ODRL for the ÔÇ£application profileÔÇØ or specifically the application ÔÇôLT application- extension) 3. Advocate the creation of a standard for expressing local policies in ways that can be mapped to rights expressions. This could be either through a data model or through the definition of an API or service. 4. Launch an initiative to identify models of rights enforcement in learning technology and to possibly abstract a common model for use by architecture and framework definition projects. 5. Further study the implications of patent claims, especially for educational and research purposes.
CA Overview of the program, including keynote speakers, papers presented, invited talks, future directions and next steps.
Conclusions
RQ Some steps to be taken: (1) Investigate potential move to a formal standards body/group and adopt their procedures and processes. Potential groups include; W3C, OASIS, ECMA, IEEE, IETF, CEN/ISS, Open Group. The advantages and disadvantages of such a move will be documented and discussed within the ODRL community. (2) Potential to submit current ODRL version to national bodies for adoption. (3) Request formal liaison relationship with the OMA. <warrant>
Type
Web Page
Title
The MPEG-21 Rights Expression Language: A White Paper
CA Presents the business case for a Digital Rights Expression Language, an overview of the DRM landscape, a discussion of the history and role of standards in business, and some technical aspects of MPEG-21. "[U]nless the rights to ... content can be packaged within machine-readable licences, guaranteed to be ubiquitous, unambiguous and secure, which can then be processed consistently and reliably, it is unlikely that content owners will trust consign [sic] their content to networks. The MPEG Rights Expression Language (REL) is designed to provide the functionality required by content owners in order to create reliable, secure licences for content which can be used throughout the value chain, from content creator to content consumer."
Conclusions
RQ "While true interoperability may still be a distant prospect, a common rights expression language, with extensions based on the MPEG REL, can incrementally bring many of the benefits true interoperability will eventually yield. As extensions are created in multiple content verticals, it will be possible to transfer content generated in one securely to another. This will lead to cross channel fertilisation and the growth of multimedia content. At the same time, a common rights language will also lead to the possibility of broader content distribution (by enabling cross-DRM portability), thus providing more channel choice for consumers. It is this vision of the MPEG REL spreading out that is such an exciting prospect. ... The history of MPEG standards would seem to suggest that implementers will start building to the specification in mid-2003, coincidental with the completion of the standard. This will be followed by extensive take-up within two or three years, so that by mid 2006, the MPEG REL will be a pervasive technology, implemented across many different digital rights management and conditional access systems, in both the content industries and in other, non-rights based industries. ... The REL will ultimately become a 'transparent' technology, as invisible to the user as the phone infrastructure is today."
SOW
DC DC The Moving Picture Experts Group (MPEG) is a working group of ISO/IEC, made up of some 350 members from various industries and universities, in charge of the development of international standards for compression, decompression, processing, and coded representation of moving pictures, audio and their combination. MPEG's official designation is ISO/IEC JTC1/SC29/WG11. So far MPEG has produced the following compression formats and ancillary standards: MPEG-1, the standard for storage and retrieval of moving pictures and audio on storage media (approved Nov. 1992); MPEG-2, the standard for digital television (approved Nov. 1994); MPEG-4, the standard for multimedia applications; MPEG-7, the content representation standard for multimedia information search, filtering, management and processing; and MPEG-21, the multimedia framework.
