Konzept #692

Do we need/want release contributions?

Added by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago. Updated almost 2 years ago.

Status:ErledigtStart date:
Priority:HochDue date:
Assignee:Alexander Blum% Done:

100%

Category:-
Target version:Repertoire 2) Testing phase II

Description

This ticket spawend from #665

Right now we have creation contributions, which relates (solo) artists to a creation via

  • allocation type (Composition, Performance, Text)
  • performance type {if Performance} (Recording, Producing, Mastering, Mixing)
  • role {if Composition or Performance/Recording}
  • collecting society {if Text}
  • neighbouring rights society {if Performance}

Right now, e.g. production needs to be set for each creation, which might be counter intuitive. On the other hand, as releases are also produced, it might be reasonable to have also a similar release contribution, where also different types/roles might be specified (e.g. artwork, mixing, etc).
Some of those might propagate to the creations of a release.

This concept might also depend on #691 (Copyright Owners)

Do we want/need that? What could be reasonable specifications and how would it relate to creation contributions?


Related issues

Related to collecting_society - Datenbank #665: New objects Erledigt
Related to collecting_society - Konzept #691: Usecases and structure for copyright owners Erledigt
Related to collecting_society - Konzept #754: Tracking of membership of collecting societies? Erledigt
Related to collecting_society - Konzept #858: Write specification for rights management Erledigt 12/02/2019 12/05/2019

History

#1 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago

#2 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago

  • Related to Konzept #691: Usecases and structure for copyright owners added

#3 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago

  • Description updated (diff)

#4 Updated by Meik Michalke almost 3 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Meik Michalke to Alexander Blum

why is collecting society bound to text only? it can also be relevant for composition or performance, or even artwork (e.g., VG bild). i assume text refers to lyrics. a neighbouring rights society is also a collecting society (were there any reasons we thought of why they should not be merged?).

but yes, we want that. allocations that come to mind are

  • production
  • artwork
  • text (as in liner notes)
  • layout
  • mastering
  • mixing

#5 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago

  • Assignee changed from Alexander Blum to Meik Michalke

Meik Michalke wrote:

why is collecting society bound to text only?

I assumed, that the distinction of collecting society and neighbouring rights society it that of copyright (text, composition) and ancillary copyrights (performance). Is this wrong?

it can also be relevant for composition or performance

I thought, the right owner for composition will be represented within the "creation tariff category" (see #754)?

Can you elaborate, why it could be relevant for performance?

or even artwork (e.g., VG bild).

This might be solved, if we model "release contribution".

i assume text refers to lyrics

That's right. Shall we use "lyrics" as key instead? It's only for the database, but would be useful, if the language is also consistent there. Now would be the best time to change such things.

a neighbouring rights society is also a collecting society (were there any reasons we thought of why they should not be merged?).

The origin of the distinction was the old impwiki. They are now "merged" on an object level (Object "CollectingSociety" with two boolean attributes "represets copyright" and represents ancillary copyright").
Shall they also be "merged" on the database / user gui level?

  • production
  • artwork
  • text (as in liner notes)
  • layout
  • mastering
  • mixing

The last time we talked, I understood, that production/mastering/mixing should be creation level, as there might be releases with different sets of those contributions. How is the relation between those release contributions and creation contributions? Maybe it would be best to start a new overview - I started one here, could you add the rest, how you envision it?

There's also the question of the user interface for those "parties":

  • What fields (name, adress, etc) should be provided?
  • Is it possible, that the party changes (e.g. other legal systems which allow transfer of authorship)?
  • (How) Should those entries be addable / browsable for others?

Maybe we should better talk about this again.

#6 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 3 years ago

  • Related to Konzept #754: Tracking of membership of collecting societies? added

#7 Updated by Alexander Blum over 2 years ago

  • Priority changed from Normal to Hoch

#8 Updated by Alexander Blum about 2 years ago

  • Target version changed from 2) Testing phase II to Repertoire 2) Testing phase II

#9 Updated by Alexander Blum about 2 years ago

  • Project changed from repertoire to collecting_society

#10 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 2 years ago

  • Related to Konzept #858: Write specification for rights management added

#11 Updated by Alexander Blum almost 2 years ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to Erledigt
  • Assignee changed from Meik Michalke to Alexander Blum
  • % Done changed from 0 to 100

solved in #858

Also available in: Atom PDF