l4e – wg3 – subgroup identifiers & registries part 1 – identifiers what do content...

L4E – WG3 – Subgroup Identifiers & Registries

• Part 1 – Identifiers• What do content identifiers do?• Why are they important?• What are their requirements?• What are they used for?• Current concern : 2 AV content

identifiers aiming at same purpose.

L4E – WG3 – Subgroup Identifiers & Registries

• Part 2 – Registries• Identifiers’ registries• Rights registries

• Centralized vd Decentralized (distributed)• Examples of on-going projects

• Part 3 – For Archives

Part 1 – Identifiers

• What do content identifiers do?– They identify content, based on some information that has

been provided– Shorthand for an exact description of a particular content– They don't make assertions about ownership, rights, how

the content can be used, etc– They can lead to separate, more complete, metadata and

descriptions from other commercial and public sources– They should be interoperable with many other

identification systems—commercial, international standard, industry standard, public/State, private, etc.


• Why are AV content identifiers important?– Metadata is the language of humans to identify things; identifiers are

the language of computer-based systems– Without reliable identifiers, you (and your system) don't know easily

what content and/or specific asset/video/clip/program/etc your catalog/rights document/cue sheet/sale bill/transfer request/encoding order/etc is referring to

– They make it completely clear which version of something you're talking about – e.g. the German subtitled or the German dubbed version of the original French release or the edited-for-Germany release

– They can increase AV workflow efficiency – They can increase accuracy of AV measurement, tracking, and reporting– Although not a right identifier in itself, they make it easier to identify AV

works and, therefore, right holders thereof


• For example– They improve efficiency

• They make it simpler for rights holders, licensees, and distributors to communicate with each other

• They reduce the costs of moving digital assets through a complex distribution chain- from creation, to post-production, to offer/retailing, to distributing, to reporting and measurement, all moving towards automation

• They simplify, automate and reduce errors in usage reporting• They improve measurement of uptake• They improve the management, research & tracking of things in relation to AV

works (including rights).

– They can be used in relationships to group or join things• They can be used in conjunction with other identifiers (musical works, sound

recordings, books, text, robust commercial metadata sources, etc.) • They allow connecting of information from multiple systems (archive catalogs,

commercial metadata, distribution points)


• What are the requirements of an identifier? – Unique number referring to unique content within the scope

of the ID– Adaptability :

• Coverage at the right level of granularity for a wide range of use cases• Flexibility and extensibility to deal with new circumstances and use

cases

– Neutral governance structure that gives a balanced voice to the various communities it is designed to serve• Improves stakeholder buy-in• Allows reaction to changes in requirements and uses• Includes content creators, registrants, users, technologists,

application developers, archives, rights holders, etc.


• What are the requirements of an identifier?(continued)

– Authoritative :• Supervision by recognized authority (e.g. ISO or industry-driven

standards body)• Data supplied by trusted sources : producers, archives, metadata

authorities, and other key industry members. • High degree of accuracy, and well-understood mechanisms for

reporting and fixing errors

– Persistence :• Persistence and maintenance of the standard’s specifications• Persistence of the registry (of identifiers with their corresponding

descriptive metadata)• Guaranty that ID relates to the same content for perpetuity



– Interoperability (because there will never be only one identifier)• Explicit support of identifiers from other systems or domains• Use in other formal and industry specifications (MPEG, DVB,

AACS & Blu-Ray, Digital Cinema, CableLabs VOD, Ultraviolet…)• Flexible data formats and registration methods• Machine to machine interfaces, APIs, and web services for

easy access and interoperability

– Free use and circulation of the ID itself in order to enable applications and support use cases



– Accessibility of registry• Resolve the ID to its associated defining metadata from the

central registry• As needed for some uses, access to the registry through

appropriate mechanisms (APIs, web services, cache copies, …) to enable workflow automation, integration, and other efficiencies

– Support for external services (extended metadata, distribution, reporting, etc.)

– Commercially reasonable/nominal cost for issuance, use, implementation


• What are they used for?– Workflow management, workflow automation,

distribution– rights management (declaration, reporting, payments,

…), rights tracking & rights clearance– cross-referencing, catalogue matching– metadata/information retrieval & aggregation, asset

retrieval


• Current concern : 2 AV content identifiers aiming at the same purpose

– ISAN and EIDR are both established AV content identifiers• ISAN : International Standard Audiovisual Number (ISO 15907)• EIDR : Industry standard based on DOI International Standard (ISO 26324)

– ISAN and EIDR as identifiers have the same purpose (identifying AV works and their versions)• But the organisations & technical infrastructure surrounding the identifiers is currently targeted at

the needs and priorities of different ecosystems

– As a result, today the two identifiers are either used differently, used by different communities of stakeholders, used in parallel … or even not used at all.

– The two identifiers are today complementary rather than in full competition with each other:• Different use cases -- Small overlap in implemented use cases• Different user bases -- Small overlap in users



(cont’)

• Possible outcomes– Merge the two into a single system that issues only one ID

• Unlikely in the short term– Too much sunk investment by the systems and their sponsors– Users can't change immediately

– Make both do all things for all people • Expensive• Requires both to expand into areas that are not currently their main expertise

– Close interoperability, so that if you get one, you automatically get the other• Get both IDs from a single registration, where needed• For the users, no risk of making a wrong decision• Takes advantage of the strengths of both systems



(cont’)• Status

– Detailed technical discussions are already underway– Non-technical discussions (commercial, governance) have started as

well– Parallel, but interoperable systems, is not ideal, but in the short term:

• It would be much better than what we have now (pick one or the other, and worry if you did the right thing)

• It is achievable in a much shorter timescale than other solutions

– It leaves several possible future paths open for technology, financials, and governance, as well as a unified singular system



(cont’)• Consequences

– for new IDs• Anyone who gets an ISAN can generate and discover an EIDR ID when they need it• Anyone who gets an EIDR ID can generate and discover an ISAN when they need it

– For previously existing IDs• The two systems have to do a matching and gap-filling process between the two systems• We are already doing technical analysis on this

– As a result, no one has to worry about making a bad choice. • You can get both at the same time, or know that if you have gotten one you can also get

the other when you need it• If you have your own identifiers, include them too, to increase interoperability with

systems that are not already part of the two identifiers' ecosystems.



(cont’)– Example: ITV

• Currently getting ISAN• With proposed solution, can get EIDR ID as needed for EIDR-based

applications

– Example: Studio• Currently getting EIDR ID and ISANs through separate processes for different

applications• Under proposed solution can get ISAN and EIDR IDs simultaneously through a

single process as needed

– Generalization of Examples: • Currently must get ISAN and EIDR IDs through separate processes• Under proposal, can get both through single process

Part 2 – RegistriesIdentifier Registries

• Identifiers need a registry backing them up– To guarantee uniqueness– To store the metadata– To provide resolution, lookup, etc

• ISAN and EIDR both have this• The “identifier registry” must be only for identification

– ISAN and EIDR both agree on this : key condition to remain a useful and effective content identifier

• More detailed databases can be built based on the identifier, but additional metadata shouldn't be in the “identifier registry”

Part 2 – RegistriesIdentifier Registries

• Other metadata belongs in its own specialized registries. Examples:– Rights databases– Commercial information– Databases of music tracks in AV works– Extended metadata on cast, crew, etc– Still images, reviews, scripts

• This is OK as long as you have cross-referencing and the ability to automate. Example– Broadcaster uses a common ID to build its program guide from multiple sources– Rights society uses AV identifier as key for a list of rights holders for the work in a

particular territory

• Distributed databases linked through common and broadly used standard identifiers enable rapid evolution and efficient implementation of new ideas

• Longer term, in some cases operational efficiencies may be realized if specific Registries are combined into a single registry

Part 2 – RegistriesRights Registries

• Centralized systems vs Decentralized (distributed) systems– Both require identifiers

• Various ongoing projects and applications :– Global Repertoire Database

• centralized; mainly musical content, but also aiming at specific AV content such as videoclips

– Linked Content Coalition (LCC) • Federated/distributed• RDI (the EU implementation project of LCC)• DCE (the UK implementation project of LCC.)

– Safe Creative registry in Spain (safecreative.org)– FRAME (see WG1 presentation)– …

Part 2 – RegistriesRights Registries

• The rights registry is as much a legal and social problem as it is a technical one. Especially around– Authoritativeness and certainty– Completeness– Conflict management (this is unavoidable)– Trust– Critical mass of uptake

Part 3 – For Archives

• There is no reason not to get an identifier, even if the rights to the content are not clear

• Neither ISAN nor EIDR implies ownership or rights of any sort• Choosing one does not preclude using the other• Having a standard “external” identifier (often used in connection with specific

internal identifiers) can make research of all kinds easier– Diligent search (for determining rights, orphan status, etc)– Creation of cue sheets for included music– Linking to other data sources (editorial content, ancillary material)– Scholarly citations

• Assist automation of other tasks– Digital encoding, digital publication/distribution– Discoverability, linked data applications

• Communication across multiple systems (internal and external)– Separation of archival and consumer-facing data

• parental ratings, language identification, marking, fingerprinting, measurement, …

Further steps ?

• Elaborate further on parts 2 & 3– Notably through further benchmarking with

existing projects and other local initiatives of Registries.

• Stakeholder « framework » agreement– Further analysis of needs– Further analysis of barriers to overcome– Points of agreement as to how to overcome

barriers to use of identifiers & links with Rights registries

l4e – wg3 – subgroup identifiers & registries part 1 – identifiers what do content...

Documents

things identifiers

reliable identifiers

identifiers musical

unique content

particular content

content crea

av works

accuracy of av measurement