arrow-net.eu

1. Co-funded by the Community programme eContentplus www.arrow-net.eu

2. Summary • What Arrow is • How it works • Demo • Some hidden elements • How “matching and clustering” works • Integration with other existing systems • Fostering standard deployment • The Registry of Orphan Works • Next steps • Some real use cases emerging (finally!) • Why Arrow Plus?

3. What Arrow is • Arrow is a distributed systemfor facilitating rights information management in any digitisation programme, scalable to further applications • A distributed system: a network of databases made interoperable through use of standards • Rights information management: conceived as a separate function from (though linked to) “rights management” (the RII = Rights Information Infrastructure) • Any digitisation programme: Arrow is conceived to be neutral to legal frameworks and business models • Future applications: Rights information may be crucial in new digital markets

4. And what about orphan works? • Orphan works are definable at the end of a search process • We provide an environment and tools to facilitate the search • At the end we may have some unsuccessful searches: these works are “candidate orphans” • It is up to stakeholders, within a given legal framework, to decide whether a work is orphan or additional searches are required • This is an application of our “neutrality principle”

5. Partners, liaisons organisations (in italic) • Libraries • EDL Foundation - TEL • National libraries in France, Germany, Spain, The Netherlands, UK, Norway, Slovenia, Finland, Italy • University library of Innsbruck • Publishers • Federation of European Publishers • Publishers associations of Italy, Spain, Germany, UK • Authors • European Writers Council • ALCS in UK • Reproduction Rights Organisations • IFRRO • RROs in Spain, France, Italy, UK, Norway, Denmark, Finland • Technology Developers • Cineca (University consortium in Italy) • Numilog (Private company in France) • Standard organisations • ISBN agencies (Italy, Slovenia, Norway, Finland, Germany) • European DOI agency (mEDRA) • Editeur members • ISTC consortium members • ISNI ISO-WG members

6. The Arrow workflow ROW AWR VIAF Clustering editions 1st data collection TEL BiP 2nd data collection Matching records Matching and clustering 3rd data collection Validation RRO Library interface Matching records Library

7. The Arrow Registry of Orphan Works (ROW) • All the information about works collected along the workflow are stored in the Arrow Work Registry (AWR) • This is for internal functionalities only • When Arrow is not able to provide rights information about a work, the data about that work are visible through the ROW • This includes work data and clustering information • These are not Orphans in proper sense • Someone else should establish whether our search is sufficient to declare the orphan status • Neutrality again: • Centralised or distributed administrations of the ROW are enabled • It will depend on the stakeholders / legal decisions

8. How we are working • Arrow is an neutral and flexible “ready to use” infrastructure • To serve a particular agreement some customisation are required through setting the parameters of the system according to the terms of the agreements • Examples: • Arrow already manages dates: when a cut off date is defined, it is just a matter to give the right value to the existing algorithm • The publication date can be managed at manifestation or at work level: any combination is supported • e.g.: A book published in 1960 that had a new edition in 2007 can be treated differently than a book published in the same date with the last edition in 1999 • The availability status can be defined with any territorial extend • e.g. for France we’ll consider also availability in Belgium and Switzerland, likely in Quebec

9. The value of Arrow for use cases /1 • In bulk data processing accuracy depends on: • Effectiveness in matching and clustering • Analysis on the Google Settlement database demonstrated it very clearly • Mapping and interoperability between data sources (in particular between library and commercial databases) • A European dimension and neutrality also on this respect • E.g.: when a library in country A wants to clear rights on a book published in country B, there are two alternatives • The library receives the license from the national CMO who has a bilateral agreement with the CMO in country B • The library receives the license directly from the RRO in country B • Having separated the phase of dealing information with right clearance, Arrow supports both solutions

10. The value of Arrow for use cases /2 • In managing the claiming process (for opting out or for claim the share of remuneration) there are the same matching and clustering issues • if a publisher submit an ONIX file with all his/her titles, every record should be matched with original library record that describes the book candidate to be scanned, and with all the other records containing the same work • Once the process is completed the RRO can easily perform a notification to all the rightholders registered in its database, after the disambiguation we provide for works and “rightholder names” • This maximises the number of rightholders notified, and thus minimises the cost due to scanning books that later rightholders ask to remove • The Arrow Work Registry can be used to publicise scanning project in very flexible way • It is not simply a Registry of Orphan Works: it starts from the analysis of books that libraries ask to digitise, not from an abstract identification of orphan works, which is of scarce value

11. Why Arrow Plus? • The current model works for countries where the book data infrastructure is quite advanced: • The national library catalogue should be in TEL • Books in print database exists • Reliable RRO database exists • How to move towards countries where one or more of these elements lack? • The obvious answer • We need to create or to improve the national data infrastructure • Always starting from existing data sources (e.g. an Internet bookshop, a wholesaler…), but creating something more sophisticated for the future • The project will support the start up of BiPs and RROs databases in several European countries

12. Arrow Plus - Objectives • Enhancing the Arrow system, to make it more effective in meeting existing and emerging user needs in a larger number of countries • Co-ordinating the involvement of a number of additional European countries, starting from an analysis of existing data sources, as defined in the current Arrow project, and defining optimal strategies to enrich these resources • Implementing the Arrow business model developed under the current Arrow project, to put a long term sustainable service in place • Examining how Arrow can be used in relation to visual material when this is included in books that are to be digitised and made available

13. Countries involved in Arrow Plus • Germany, Spain • Continuity with current pilot and enrichment of the system • The French working group anticipated that they wish to continue using Arrow as “client”, though not member of the new project consortium • Austria, Belgium, Ireland, Italy, The Netherlands • Countries with quite sophisticated book data infrastructure • Bulgaria, Greece, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Portugal • Countries that require major new developments

14. Arrow Plus – Work Package overview

15. Arrow Plus – Work Package 3 (FEP) • Objectives • To co-ordinate the deployment of the Arrow system in new countries, ensuring full participation of national stakeholders and maintaining interoperability across borders • To analyse the user needs in countries involved, in order to identify requirements and the ad hoc development pattern to join the Arrow system • To take care of the relations between the national specification and technical development in WP4 • To provide timely and regular information about the project evolution to all partners

16. Arrow Plus – Work Package 3 (FEP) • Description of work • Each national reference partner to analyse – involving national stakeholders, under the coordination of WP leader – the existing databases and alternative resources to use in the Arrow workflow (T3.1) , and define users requirements for specific solutions • Interact with system designers (in WP4 and WP5) and technical developers to ensure correct implementation of solutions (T3.2) • During the validation phase, with the use of the system, the national working groups will ensure that the data resulting from the use of the system correctly populates the local Arrow resources • At national level, sustainability plans will be prepared (T3.3) to identify business models for maintenance of the services created during the project after the end of it. This will be coordinated in particular with WP5

17. Thank you for your attention FURTHER INFORMATION Anne Bergman-Tahon FEP – Federation of European Publishers Rue Montoyer 31 1000 Brussels Belgium Tel +32 2 7701110 abergman@fep-fee.eu http://www.arrow-net.eu Co-funded by the Community programme eContentplus