Rights Metadata Specification

Owned by Emily Porter
Last updated: Mar 27, 2018
5 min read

Prepared by: DLP Metadata Implementation Working Group (M-IWG)

Last Revised Date: March 2018

Status: Final Draft for Approval

Reviewed by: Scholarly Communications Office, M-IWG


Overview

As part of its larger charter, the DLP Metadata Implementation Working Group (M-IWG) includes a task for identifying:

Rights/access metadata standards (e.g. user facing notes; copyright status; rights determinations for digitization, ingest and dissemination)

This document includes specifications for Rights Metadata and its relationship to additional segments of metadata (e.g. Descriptive, Preservation, Administrative).

Summary of Recommendations

For the DLP repository, rights metadata is conceptually grouped into three areas: Rights Status, Rights Determinations, and Rights for Preservation Events/Workflows. For implementation purposes, this metadata may be contained in Descriptive, Administrative, and Preservation metadata profiles identified by the M-IWG.

Detailed information about specific metadata units is documented in the Rights Metadata Inventory worksheet.

Work Process

The Convener of the M-IWG consulted directly with members of the Scholarly Communications Office who were identified as primary stakeholders for this deliverable. Outcomes were developed and then further refined by the M-IWG group. Some components of this deliverable were also previously identified during the M-IWG’s Descriptive Metadata Specification work, which identified user-facing rights metadata.

Framing for Rights Metadata

Given the complexity of rights metadata and varied industry approaches and definitions in this area, an early task was identified to provide internal DLP scoping for “rights metadata”. As preliminary work, the sub-team identified major components overarching use cases for rights management activities, delineating what was in scope and out of scope from a metadata perspective relative to other DLP areas.

Primary use cases identified related to the creation and use of rights metadata included:

  • As a repository content consumer, I want to see available rights-related information, so that I can determine how I can utilize the material

  • As a library staff member, I want to record the rights determinations for repository ingest and usage as well as supporting rationale for the determination, so that information is stored in the long term preservation repository and so that I can use the information to inform future usage of the material

  • As a library staff member, I want to be able to systematically monitor potential changes to the rights status for material over time, so that I can update its context for use

  • As a library staff member, I want to record the rights status already assigned by a publisher, so that I can honor the existing copyright or licensing agreement and inform appropriate of usage of the material

Out of scope aspects of rights management for the M-IWG were identified as:

  • File system permissions, embargoes and levels of visibility, such as those provided by Hyrax software (to be addressed by local policy, the DLP Repository Management FRG, and technical implementation teams)

  • System-actionable rights metadata that automates visibility or access settings

  • Rights review process and procedures

Hyrax software provides the ability to configure and record rights and other information in metadata, but the user permissions to view or modify repository objects are human assigned and not directly integrated with any locally configured metadata. In other words, rights metadata that we locally customize in Hyrax is technically decoupled from the filesystem permissions, but that metadata should still serve as the point of determination for why filesystem permissions have been assigned.

Inventory and Analysis

A review of current state metadata and practices was conducted, including the following Emory sources:

  • Bibliographic Maintenance for Digitization documentation

  • DAMS metadata

  • Keep metadata

  • OpenEmory metadata

  • ETDs metadata

  • Dataverse metadata

  • Digital Preservation Functional Requirements Group AIP specification

  • Digital Preservation Functional Requirements Group Preservation Events and Workflows

  • Digital Collections Steering Committee Policy Task Force policies (2018 revisions)

External Sources were also discussed by the M-IWG to generate additional ideas:

  • PREMIS 3 Ontology

  • ODRL

  • DPLA

  • Samvera Rights Metadata Profile

The semantic units inventoried or otherwise identified were then reviewed for applicability to the repository context and for possible consolidation. Note: as part of the review and analysis, some metadata currently recorded in the Bibliographic Maintenance for Digitization document was determined to be broader than the scope of what the DLP repository would need to record.

Rights Metadata Requirements

Full details for the metadata described below are found in the Rights Metadata Inventory spreadsheet. This spreadsheet repeats information for some metadata units already identified in the Descriptive Metadata Specification.

Rights Metadata Concept

For the DLP Repository, rights metadata falls into three categories:

  1. Rights Status

  2. Rights Determinations

  3. Rights for Preservation Workflows and Events


The diagram that follows shows the relationship of rights-related activities in the repository context.

Rights Status

Rights status metadata indicates the current state of the object’s rights, such as its copyright status, license or agreement status, and additional information about its access or appropriate use. This information is stored directly on the object and informs the selection of appropriate system access controls and visibility. Rights Status metadata has largely been previously identified in the Descriptive Metadata specification and is mostly end user-facing:

  • Rights Statement [Local/Free Text]

  • Rights Statement [Controlled] (Values from rightsstatements.org)

  • Re-Use License

  • Restrictions on Access

  • Rights Holder

  • Copyright Date

  • Access Restriction Expiration Date

  • Rights Documentation URI*

*Rights Documentation URI is a new staff-only field which would enable staff to link to internal documentation such as a Deed.

Note: while the majority of this metadata is currently identified as Descriptive Metadata, this metadata may also be packaged or presently separately if needed for implementation purposes.

Rights Determinations

This type of rights metadata supports library staff activities for researching and providing rights determinations, which then inform repository users’ rights to modify and/or access repository material. Metadata in this category occurs in both Descriptive (user facing) as well as Administrative (staff facing) segments.

Descriptive metadata units supporting ongoing rights research identified:

  • Creator

  • Publisher

  • Date Issued/Published

  • Place of Publication/Production

  • Publisher Version

Additional, staff-only rights determination-supporting metadata units identified:

  • Scheduled Rights Review Date

  • Scheduled Rights Review Note

  • Rights - Internal Note

  • Rights - Legacy Data

  • Copyright Screening Questions [Multiple, from ETDs workflow]

  • Data Classification

  • Sensitive/Objectionable Material

  • Sensitive/Objectionable Material Note

Preservation Events and Workflows Rights Information

Additional rights information may be recorded with a human-initiated preservation workflow, such as those identified by the Digital Preservation Functional Requirements Group. In these cases, repository staff users may need to record additional rights information to explain the context of a particular preservation activity that impacts access to material.

Workflow-specific rights metadata will exist in parallel to the overarching Rights Status metadata, and will record changes to the object’s usage over time. Examples include:

  • Clarifying the local determination for making a copyrighted digital object available through Fair Use/Section 107

  • Recording the local determination for a Decommissioning workflow, by which an object is made permanently dark

  • Accessioning workflow information might include information about restrictions to access based on Deeds of Gift or Sale.

Preservation Workflows/Events Rights Metadata units identified:

  • Preservation Rights Basis [e.g. In Copyright - Section 108; Administrative Decision]

  • Preservation Rights Basis - Review Date

  • Preservation Rights Basis - Reviewer

  • Preservation Rights Basis - Note

  • Preservation Rights Basis - URI

Additional Recommendations for Implementation

The following activities are recommended for implementation phase efforts:

  • Individual system-level migration strategies must be addressed prior to implementation, including potential transformation of MARC 583 values from digitization workflows

  • Rights metadata information flows need further consideration as the organization identifies systems of record for repository metadata

  • Additional analysis and cleanup of legacy rights data is recommended, so that inaccurate information is not carried forward to the new repository environment

  • Investigate feasibility of modifying the current DAMS schema to incorporate the new DLP recommendations for Rights Metadata