Search the web
Sign In
New User? Sign Up
mvco · Media Value Chains Ontologies
  • Members Only
  • Post
  • Files
  • Photos
  • Links
  • Database
  • Polls
  • Members
  • Calendar
  • Promote
  • Groups Labs (Beta)
? Already a member? Sign in to Yahoo!

Yahoo! Groups Tips

Did you know...
Want to share photos of your group with the world? Add a group photo to Flickr.

Best of Y! Groups

   Check them out and nominate your group.
Having problems with message search? Fill out this form to ensure your group is one of the first to be migrated to the new message search system.

Messages

   Messages Help
Message #
Search:
Advanced
Report of the AhG on Requirements of Media Value Chains Ontologies   Message List  
Reply | Forward Message #102 of 117 |
RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Leonardo,
 
Thank you for that clarification and indeed it was that that I was referring to since I have never been able to obtain a free copy of any ISO Industry Standard without paying a not trivial amount.  Anyhow I refer to Jaime's mail on this and look forward to discussing it in Archamps. 
 
Marc
 

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

 

 

 

 

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Leonardo Chiariglione
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de abril de 2008 14:26
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Marc,

There are no “certified copies”. There are copies of the standard that implementors may need to buy from ISO/IEC. And, as you know, a cost is typically associated to most things that are copyrighted.

But this is the commercial arm of ISO. Nothing to do with MPEG

Leonardo

From: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Gauvin
Sent: Friday, 25 April, 2008 14:05
To: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Leonardo,

I was referring to the fee required to access a certified copy my understanding is that it is not free of charge. Apologies if I am mistaken.

Marc

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Leonardo Chiariglione
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de abril de 2008 12:51
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Marc,

>such as MPEG fees (royalites?)

PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE. MPEG does not have fees or royalties or anything.

As per the ISO/IEC directives I request people who attend MPEG meetings to be duly informed of the basics of ISO/IEC operation.

Leonardo

From: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Gauvin
Sent: Friday, 25 April, 2008 12:55
To: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Leonardo,

The problem is two fold:

1) The requirement proposed makes a categorical statement about remuneration of proposed contributions without taking consideration of all related aspects such as MPEG fees (royalites?) etc,

2) A technical requirements document might not be the place to include policy statements.

On the other hand, it is useful to request information about licensing in the call as it is clearly a requirement to make the chosen proposal as accessible as possible as in unfettered access. I agree that we will  need to discuss this in Archamps.

Marc

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1>

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Leonardo Chiariglione
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de abril de 2008 12:02
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Marc,

I keep on being terribly confused.

I think this is a discussion that should be concluded at the meeting.

We are spending Hertzian and mental bandwidth just because no formulation of the problem has been stated in a clear way.

Leonardo

From: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Gauvin
Sent: Friday, 25 April, 2008 11:48
To: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Leonardo,

That is my point I do not think that it is an area that we should include.  Unfettered access is sufficient because it states that within whatever reasonable bounds the ontology NEEDS to be  EASILY accessible otherwise the uptake would be compromised something it is assumed no one wants particularly MPEG. But Unfettered access does not go so far as to determine what is reasonable in such absolute terms as the proposed requirement does. It is in my opinion, that it is better if we stick to the technical reauirements and then evaluate the responses when they are made.  What I think should be included in the proposal is the licensing terms of the solution being proposed as that certainly will prove relevant particularly in view of the Unfettered Access Requirement.  This way we concentrate on the technical issues in the requirements and allow the natural course to be taken within MPEG and all parties concerned with regards to remuneration from a more integral perspective.

I am worried that if we included such a policy requirement we might run into trouble later.  In short, if the requirement cannot be expressed in an ambiguaous fashion so as to cover all possible eventualities we should leave it out here and even if we were able to do so that does not mean that there will not be possible negative ramificaition for having out stepped our competence.

Marc

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1>

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Leonardo Chiariglione
Enviado el: viernes, 25 de abril de 2008 9:21
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Marc,

We are talking of two different things

1.       the fact that we want to enable those practising the MVCO standard to do so without paying royalties

2.       the fact that you want to make clear that this does not imply that an implementation of the MVCO standard also becomes available royalty free.

It is the first time that #1 is explicitly placed in a CfP.

It is also the first time that #2 is raised but its implication has been around for as long as MPEG has been around. As far as I know no royalties are claimed for MPEG-1 Video. Does it mean that you can consider an MPEG-1 Video implementation freely accessible to you?

I would rather not try if I were you …

Leonardo

From: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Gauvin
Sent: Thursday, 24 April, 2008 09:24
To: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Leonardo,

It may be tbe case that some understanding has been established but that has little to do with my comment:

1) that the reauirements wording does not make the distinction I think is required and

2) how is it that such policy statements are made part of the technical requirements?

 In any event and according to the examplke you give, the wording should be:

"The Ontology SHALL be made available royalty free for use by any developer in both commercial and non commercial applications"

Is this not the first time that an MPEG standard makes such a policy statement in a Requirements document?  If so I do not think there can exist previously established understanding about a first time event.

Best,

Marc

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1>

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Leonardo Chiariglione
Enviado el: jueves, 24 de abril de 2008 7:37
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Asunto: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Marc,

We are back to discussions we had many times and many places.

I assume that the ontology will be the object of the MVCO standard, so in this sense the MVCO is the equivalent of the MPEG-2 standard.

Today those who make MPEG-2 set top boxes pay royalties to make their set top boxes, but then the set top boxws are theirs and they sell them a cost.

Those who will make applications that uses the MVCO standard will not (according to the requirements) pay royalties for the use of the MVCO standard but they will sell the application at a cost.

I do not think we need a different wording, at least within MPEG (ISO) because this has been the understanding in the 20 years of MPEG life.

Leonardo

From: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Marc Gauvin
Sent: Wednesday, 23 April, 2008 15:30
To: mvco@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Martin, All

As I mentioned in London I agree with the concept of making the ontology universally accessible, however saying "royalty free implementation" can be misunderstood as the ontology itself may be royalty free as in access to the OWL file however the application that implements the OWL cannot be guaranteed to be royalty free.

Requierment 13 "Unfettered Access" covers much of what I understand is the intent behind your requirement for "royalty free implementation" in that technically access to the logic contained in say the OWL file needs to be easily accessible to any application in order for the ontology to gain widespread acceptance. 

Can you suggest a new wording that avoids confusing access to the ontology with access to implementations of the ontology?

Best,

Marc

ADVERTENCIA DE CONFIDENCIALIDAD: La información contenida en este mensaje es confidencial. La posible información de carácter personal que pudiera contener este comunicado, se encuentra amparada en la LOPD 15/99. Si recibe este e-mail erróneamente rogamos nos lo reenvíe, lo elimine de todos sus archivos y se abstenga de utilizar, reproducir, alterar, archivar o comunicar a terceros el presente mensaje, todo ello bajo pena de incurrir en responsabilidades legales. El emisor no garantiza la integridad, rapidez o seguridad del presente correo, ni se responsabiliza de posibles perjuicios derivados de la captura, incorporaciones de virus o cualesquiera otras manipulaciones efectuadas por terceros.

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: The information transmitted in this message is confidential and only for the intended recipients. The possible information that this document could contain, related to personal and/or professional data is protected by Law. If you have received this e-mail in error, please inform the sender, delete it, and refrain from any reproduction, use, alteration, filing or communication to third parties. Any unauthorised use of the contents of this message is subject to incurring legal responsibilities and possible legal penalty. The sender does not guarantee the integrity, the accuracy, the swift delivery or the security of this e-mail transmission, and assumes no responsibility for any possible damage incurred through data capture, virus incorporation or any manipulation carried out by third parties.

<hr size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1>

De: mvco@yahoogroups.com [mailto:mvco@yahoogroups.com] En nombre de Martin Springer
Enviado el: jueves, 24 de enero de 2008 16:58
Para: mvco@yahoogroups.com
CC: melanie.dulong-de-rosnay@cersa.org; evar@....edu; Marcelo.DiPietro@wipo.int; arosas@...; eiriarte@alfa-redi.org; Richard Owens
Asunto: [mvco] Revised Requirement of Media Value Chains Ontology

Jaime, All,

during the DMP GA17 in London I learned that my second requirement for
the MVCO was not clear. Thanks to the discussions and valuable input
by DMP members I was able to rephrase it - see attachment. I hope it's
clear now.

I am looking forward to reading your comments.

yours sincerely,
Martin Springer

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.7/1233 - Release Date: 19/1/2008 18:37

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.2/1387 - Release Date: 19/4/2008 11:31

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1394 - Release Date: 23/4/2008 19:16

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1394 - Release Date: 23/4/2008 19:16

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32

No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32

No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32


No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG.
Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.4/1396 - Release Date: 24/4/2008 18:32



Fri Apr 25, 2008 1:10 pm

Show Message Option
marc_gauvin
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email

Forward 		Message #102 of 117 |
Expand Messages Author Sort by Date

Dear colleagues, Please find attached a proposed Report of the MPEG AhG on Requirements of Media Value Chains Ontologies. If you have any comment, please let... 		Jaime Delgado
jaime.delgad...
Offline Send Email 		Jan 13, 2008
9:17 pm

aime, All, during the DMP GA17 in London I learned that my second requirement for the MVCO was not clear. Thanks to the discussions and valuable input by DMP...
Martin Springer
springer.mvco
Offline Send Email 		Jan 24, 2008
4:01 pm

Martin, All As I mentioned in London I agree with the concept of making the ontology universally accessible, however saying "royalty free implementation" can...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 23, 2008
1:27 pm

Marc, All, ... "Royalty free implementatable" requires that an implementation of the ontology without paying royalties CAN EXIST. Please note that I did not...
Martin Springer
springer.mvco
Offline Send Email 		Apr 23, 2008
2:51 pm

Martin, I intended to answer but have been very busy with many others and then we began other threads and I forgot about this til now, sorry if I left you with...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 23, 2008
6:32 pm

Marc, ... I think that your distinction is nonsense. Let me explain. An ontology is a formal specification of a shared conceptualisation. My requirement means...
Martin Springer
springer.mvco
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
1:02 pm

Martin, By no means is it correct to state that the MVCO is a "conceptualization of copyright law" this assertion is incorrect and I for one do not adhere to...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
3:26 pm

... I don't object to your requirement but I disagree that my requirement is a more specific wording of mine. Let's assume a developer wants to develop an...
Martin Springer
springer.mvco
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
6:54 pm

Martin, Xin, All, My rewording of Martin's equirement was to specifically avoid confusing royalties for using the ontology from royalties for the use being...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
8:08 pm

Marc, We are back to discussions we had many times and many places. I assume that the ontology will be the object of the MVCO standard, so in this sense the...
Leonardo Chiariglione
lccedeo
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
5:47 am

Leonardo, It may be tbe case that some understanding has been established but that has little to do with my comment: 1) that the reauirements wording does not...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
7:21 am

Marc, We are talking of two different things 1. the fact that we want to enable those practising the MVCO standard to do so without paying royalties 2....
Leonardo Chiariglione
lccedeo
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
7:31 am

Leonardo, That is my point I do not think that it is an area that we should include. Unfettered access is sufficient because it states that within whatever...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
9:46 am

Marc, I keep on being terribly confused. I think this is a discussion that should be concluded at the meeting. We are spending Hertzian and mental bandwidth...
Leonardo Chiariglione
lccedeo
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
10:12 am

Leonardo, The problem is two fold: 1) The requirement proposed makes a categorical statement about remuneration of proposed contributions without taking...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
10:52 am

Marc, ... PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE. MPEG does not have fees or royalties or anything. As per the ISO/IEC directives I request people who attend MPEG meetings to ...
Leonardo Chiariglione
lccedeo
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
11:00 am

Leonardo, I was referring to the fee required to access a certified copy my understanding is that it is not free of charge. Apologies if I am mistaken. Marc ...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
12:02 pm

Marc, There are no “certified copiesâ€. There are copies of the standard that implementors may need to buy from ISO/IEC. And, as you know, a cost is ...
Leonardo Chiariglione
lccedeo
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
12:36 pm

Leonardo, Thank you for that clarification and indeed it was that that I was referring to since I have never been able to obtain a free copy of any ISO...
Marc Gauvin
marc_gauvin
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
1:08 pm

Dear Martin, "- For this purpose the copyright owner of the ontology (e.g. MPEG) must grant to the developer the Right to Produce an Instance of a ...
Wang, Xin
xwang0
Offline Send Email 		Apr 24, 2008
7:26 pm

Dear all, I am also considering what Xin says. Independently of the wording of the requirement, if this is something that MPEG never required before, I would...
Jaime Delgado
jaime.delgad...
Offline Send Email 		Apr 25, 2008
12:28 pm
< Prev Topic  |  Next Topic >
Message #
Search:
Advanced
Copyright © 2009 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy - Terms of Service - Guidelines - Help