March 2011 Co-funded by the Community programme eContentplus

Rights Information Infrastructure (RII) Enables Digital Search and identification System for identification of  Rights status In or out of copyright In or out of print / commercialised or not  Rights Which rights are involved  Rightholders Authors Publishers  How and where do I clear the rights  Orphan Works Orphan Works Registry

Objectives  Deliver a rights information infrastructure operable within and across borders  Facilitate identification of rightholders (authors/publishers)  Facilitate the identification of the IPR status  Provide test beds for  Business models for digital libraries  Registries for Orphan works (OW) and Out of Commerce Works (OCW)  Rights clearance mechanisms  Model licences developed by the EC High Level Expert Group (HLG)  Interoperability and criteria for interoperability

EC i2010 Digital Libraries - A summary link between HLEG and ARROW Digital Preservation Orphan Works Out-of-Print Works Online Access OP Books Business Models Diligent search guidelines Registries/databases Rights Clearance Centres Model Licensing Agreement ARROW (Accessible Registries of Rights Information on Orphan Works (and Out of Commerce Works) for Europeana

ARROW Contract Partners  Libraries  Biblioteca Nacional de España (BNE)  Bibliothèque Nationale de France (BNF)  British Library (BL)  Deutsche Nationalbibliothek (DNB)  Koninklijke Bibliotheek (KB)  Narodna in Univerzitetna Knijznica (NUK)  National Library of Norway (NLN)  University of Innsbruck (UIBK)  Publishers Associations  Associazione Italiana Editori (AIE)  Federación de Gremios de Editores de España (FGEE)  Reproduction Rights Organisation  Copyright Licensing Agency (CLA)  International Organisations  Federation of European Publishers (FEP)  International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations (IFRRO)  Technology Developers  Consorzio Interuniversitario per il Calcolo Automatico dell’Italia Nord Orientale (CINECA)  NUMILOG  ISBN Agency  Marketing und Verlagsservice des Buchhandels (MVB)

ARROW Associated Partners  Libraries  European Digital Library (EDL)  Finish National Library (FNL)  Collecting Society representing Authors  Authors Licensing and Collecting Society (ALCS)  Stichting LIRA  Publishers Association  Syndicat National de l’Edition (SNE)  Publishers Licensing Society (PLS)  The Swedish Publishers Association  Reproduction Rights Organisations  Centro Español de Derechos Reprográficos (CEDRO)  Centre Français d’exploitation du droit de Copie (CFC)  Copy-Dan Writing Information (COPYDAN)  KOPINOR  KOPIOSTO  SAZOR

Workplan: general structure  Two WPs run along the whole project 1. Project management (AIE) 2. Dissemination and Awareness (IFRRO)  Five WPs run for limited periods 3. Legal framework and business models (FEP) 4. Interoperability (BNF) 5. Architecture design (MVB) 6. Set up of Rights Information Infrastructure (Cineca) 7. Validation (UIBK)

Leadership and Management structure PROJECT LEADERSHIP MANAGEMENT BOARD OF WP LEADERS PROJECT MANAGEMENT AIE WP2 IFRRO WP3 FEP WP4 BNF WP5 MVB WP6 CINECA WP7 UIBK « ASSEMBLY of ALL PARTNERS » ALL PARTNERS « GENERAL ASSEMBLY » CONTRACTING PARTNERS

ARROW Workflow From the library request: -> Library submits a query to ARROW to a licence/information about a licence: -> RRO provides feedback to ARROW and ARROW to library □ Based on metadata exchange □ Works on step by step metadata enrichment □ Involves Libraries, BiPs and RROs □ ARROW as interoperability facilitator □ to access and query different systems □ to retrieve the relevant data □ to process and exchange this data with other systems □ to add complementary data from other systems □ to produce new meaningful information Information needed is stored in the systems of different organisations for their own specific purposes.

Workflow Based on Quality controlled Information sources Library interface Matching records Clustering editions VIAF 1st data collection BiP TEL Matching and clustering 2nd data collection RRO Matching records 3rd data collection ROW AWR Validation

Role of Libraries Libraries as End User □ Query the ARROW system to retrieve info on rights status □ Search ARROW □ Validate retrieved results and/or refine search Libraries as Metadata Provider □ TEL: ARROW bibliographic metadata provider for library domain □ VIAF: ARROW authors metadata provider □ National Libraries provide quality □ metadata to TEL □ authority file to VIAF

Role of TEL TEL as Metadata Provider □ Match library query with available records □ Purpose: identify the work □ Produce enriched record for the work □ Retrieve records of other manifestations of the same work □ Cluster the retrieved manifestation records in a work record

Role of BIPs BIPs as Metadata Provider □ Provide data about in print/out of print status □ Provide data about publishers □ Add new books/manifestations records of the work BIPs as End user □ Receive work level information &clustered manifestations □ Register International Standard Text Code (ISTC)

Project Cycle Phase I (12 months September September 2009) Legal framework & Business Models Interoperability Design of system architecture Set up of right information infrastructure Creation of Registry of Orphan Works Network of clearing mechanisms Assessment & Validation Definition of methodology and preparation of tools Testing of the system mechanisms Phase II (12 months September 2009 – September 2010) Phase III (12 months February 2010 – February 2011)

Phases and milestones  Milestones 1. 4 September 2008: Start up; First Management Board meeting November 2008: First “General Assembly” 3. Aug 2009: all the preliminary deliverables are issued 4. March 2010: start up piloting of the system 5. Feb 2011: the elements have been validated 6. Feb 2011: the final release of the ARROW system

ARROW vs Manual diligent search  February 2011, the ARROW system is up and running and has shown an important time saving when submitting records for status clearance purposes compared to manual search

Pilot countries and early users  ARROW was piloted from February – December 2010 in:  France  Germany  Spain  United Kingdom

Business Model  ARROW is designed to be business neutral (will serve equally national/government digitisation initiatives, private initiatives and Europeana)  The ARROW infrastructure will be organised on a federated way  Due to its network nature, the ARROW system consists also of a set of relationships with other players  The relationship with other entities could take the form of a network of contractual links

Benefit of using ARROW ARROW search = 5 % of Manual search time

Time save using ARROW Search for author, publisher, work, status

Business Model Key Elements* * To be refined under ARROW plus starting 1 April Organisational Background 2. Value Propositions  Competitive advantage 3. Business Architecture 4. Funding Model and budget

Business Model 1. Organisational background  Identification of  Rights  Authors and Publisher  Right status  Facilitate Rights Clearance  Build Registry of Orphan Works (ROW)  Key strategies:  Close information gap; enhance cost efficiency

Business Model 2. Value Propositions  Core service :Facilitate search  Interoperability :Open standards deployment  Competitive advantage : Include all stakeholders  Authors; Publishers; RROs; Libraries  Standards bodies  Business neutral : Open to all interested  Libraries; commercial users; publishers; authors  Collective Management Organisations (CMO)

ARROW Business Model 3. Business Architecture  Rights Information Infrastructure (RII)  ARROW Data Centre: Manages work flow; Website  Query; Retrieve information  Processes information in existing registries The European Library (TEL) Books in Print Databases (BiP) Reproduction Rights Organisations (RRO)  ARROW Works Registry (AWR)  Collection of all information from the workflow  Registry of Orphan Works (ROW)

ARROW Business Model 4. Funding Model  Financial support from European Commission  System Development and further Enhancement  Fee per use  Subscription  Larger users and multiple use  Public institutions  Flat fee per inhabitant - € 0,0011 Allows free use in all public institutions

Co-funded by the Community programme eContentplus FURTHER INFORMATION