>> David Brunton: I'd like to
start off our second Biannual
Meeting of the Copyright
Public Modernization Committee
with a quick reminder that
this session is being recorded.
I'm your MC, David Brunton.
I'm a Special Advisor to
the Register of Copyrights.
And I would encourage any of
the panelists with questions
or technology issues to
reach out directly via chat
to myself for Ellis Brachman.
And, without further ado,
I'd like to welcome Library
of Congress Chief Information
Officer Judith Conklin.
>> Judith Conklin:
Thank you, David.
And thank you to our CPMC
members, and those of you who --
you -- in our audience
for joining us today.
We have a lot to cover.
But I want to make --
take a moment to
recognize the hard work
and close collaboration
of the Copyright Office
subject matter experts,
and our Library's
technology team.
I'm proud of the
partnership we have created,
and the progress we are making,
in bringing the Enterprise
Copyright System, ECS, to life.
And one of my first
conversations as the new CIO,
Shira and I discussed the
importance of technology,
and nearly everything the
Copyright Office does today.
She noted, and I wholeheartedly
agree, that we have
to be successful together.
As CIO, I am committed
to ensuring
that the Copyright Office
has the technology it needs
to meet its mission, to promote
creativity and free expression,
and efficiently administer
the nation's copyright laws.
There are two things at the
heart of everything we do
with technology at the Library:
user experience design and,
of course, IT security.
With ECS, we are building
a system from the ground
up that will serve both
the Copyright Office
and the copyright community.
We have worked hard to
ensure that the unique needs
of both sets of users --
both sets of users have been
incorporated in the new system.
We still have a lot
of work to do.
But the feedback
from our pilot users
so far has been incredibly
useful,
and taken into consideration
during our
continued development.
I am, also, aware of how
valuable copyright data is.
And I can assure you we
are taking IT security
very seriously.
We have significantly hardened
the Library infrastructure
and network over
the last few years,
and are following
federal standards
and industry best practices
to protect the information
you entrust to us.
I look forward to a
great conversation today,
and encourage you
not to hold back.
We want your feedback.
We want to know your concerns.
That is the purpose
of this committee,
to help us ensure we
deliver ECS in a way
that meets all of your needs.
Now I'll pass it off to
my colleague, the Register
of Copyrights, Shira Perlmutter.
I would like to --
oh, sorry, excuse me.
So, Shira, there you
-- I'm passing it off.
>> Shira Perlmutter:
Thank you, Judith.
And let me start by
seconding all of your remarks.
And I want to welcome
the members
of the Copyright Public
Modernization Committee,
and also the members of the
public who are joining us today.
This is, as David said,
the committee's second
public meeting.
And it coincides very
nicely with a number
of significant milestones that
we'll be sharing with you.
Copyright Office Product
Manager Sarah Garske will start
with a review of our
past year of working
under the Scaled
Agile Framework.
This approach was still new to
us last time the committee met.
But we now have a full year
under our belts to talk about.
Next, product owners from the
Copyright Office will give live
demos of components of the
Enterprise Copyright System,
or ECS, that have been
in pilot for some time.
Both will reach major milestones
in the next few months.
So, first, Shawn Gallagher
will show the latest version
of the Copyright
Public Record System,
which will become the
preferred access point
for copyright data this spring.
And that includes some new
features and functionality.
Then, KanKan Yu will provide
a demo of the public interface
to the Copyright
Recordation System.
Which I'm pleased to announce
will be available to all members
of the public for recording
Section 205 documents beginning
this spring as well.
And the final demo today is
something the office has been
working on for quite some time.
And that is putting our
historical record books online.
This is a major initiative
involving more
than 26,000 books.
We were proud to be able
to release the first 500
of these books online
in February.
And, just this week,
an additional 400 will
be made available.
This is the first of a
series of periodic releases
that will eventually
culminate in full online access
to the entire record
book collection.
So, I am quite excited about the
progress on these initiatives.
And I'd like to express
appreciation to the OCIO
and Copyright Office staff
who are collaborating
to make it all happen.
After the demos, we'll have
a roundtable discussion
by the committee, and also a
chance for members of the public
to join with questions.
I very much look forward to
hearing everyone's input.
So, let me now invite Sarah
to take the virtual stage.
>> Sarah Garske:
Thank you, Shira.
I am delighted to be speaking
to the Copyright Public
Modernization Committee,
and to others who
have joined us today.
You may have heard me say before
that the Enterprise
Copyright System is envisioned
as an intuitive, flexible and
easy-to-use enterprise system
that incorporates registration,
recreation, licensing
and public record
capabilities and features.
The creative community
and Copyright Office
staff will greatly benefit
from the optimized
business processes,
user-centered flexible design,
consistent optimized interface,
and centrally implemented
capabilities
that are being built into the
Enterprise Copyright System
and its components.
It was a terrific year for the
Enterprise Copyright System.
In 2021, we matured our
implementation of Scaled Agile
for managing development
at the portfolio level.
We conducted quarterly events
bringing together the product
development teams, to
showcase the work done
in the previous three months,
and also to plan the work
of the next three months.
We expanded the size and scope
of the Registration Product team
to position ourselves to
build the complex end-to-end
registration claim -- end-to-end
workflow that begins with you
as a creator, submitting
the registration claim,
and ends with a decision
on that claim.
We increased participation,
and began to ready the
recordation application
for a calendar year 2022
expanded pilot for the public.
We enhanced the features
already available
through the Copyright Public
Record System application.
We initiated development
on the examination workflow
for licensing Statement
of Account submissions.
In 2022, we will deep dive
into registration development
to begin to address the needs
and feature set identified
on the recently developed
creator journey map.
Later this year, we anticipate
opening up public access
to Title 17 Section
205 Recordation
Submission Functions.
We have begun readying the
Copyright Public Record System
with its advanced search engine,
and user-focused feature set,
to assume more of the
production load as we begin
to deprecate the
Copyright Public Catalog,
the legacy system.
We will continue to develop
examination capabilities
for Statement of
Account submissions.
And, now, enough for me.
Let's see some software
in action.
Shawn Gallagher, Product Owner
for the Copyright Public
System, over to you, sir.
>> Shawn Gallagher:
Thank you, Sarah.
Appreciate the introduction.
So, let me just begin
sharing my screen here.
And, hopefully, this is
going out live to everyone.
What I'm showing is
the current version
of our Copyright Public
Record System pilot.
Which we did release
the Recent Records
and Recent Searches features
last August, so I believe just
after our initial CPMC meeting.
And, so, you will see
those two features here
in the upper right-hand
corner of the screen.
And now I'd like to switch over
to our live demo environment,
where you'll see some
subtle and slight changes.
We have added an
additional feature here
to our simple search bar that,
in addition to having a keyword
search, allows you to specify
if you'd like to search
for names or for titles.
You do see the Recent Records
and Recent Searches up here.
But we've also added
a Name Directory.
Now, this is a feature
that's available
in the current public catalog.
But it isn't surfaced
very easily.
It's kind of an indirect
way to get to it.
And, so, we provided
a more direct way
to access this Name Directory.
Which is a collection of an
alphabetical listing of all
of the names that have been
indexed from records submitted
to the Copyright Office.
So, this is -- essentially,
it's a long alphabetical list,
somewhat like an
old telephone book,
where you have all
these indexed names.
So, if I type in an author's
name here, or claimant,
we'll give it a quick search to
see what records are brought up.
And, so, it searches through
all of those indexed names,
and gives us 65 records
here for Toni Morrison.
And clicking into Toni
Morrison's name gives us an
associated records
list, where you can page
through the seven pages
of results that we have
for records associated
with her name.
Clicking into the first record
here, we'll be able to page
through the results in
the detailed record view.
And you'll see that Toni
Morrison's name is listed
down here at the bottom.
This is, also, an access point
to that same associated records
list in the Name Directory.
And, again, from this associated
record, you can sort them
by title, by the
record type, by date
and by copyright
number, if you'd like.
So, we hope that this
feature is really helpful
to our stakeholders.
We have heard from a lot of --
a lot of external folks that the
Name Directory is a great way
for them to navigate their way
through the copyright records.
So, going back to the Home
page, another feature that I'd
like to talk about is the
Registration Certificate
and the Recorded
Documents Certificate.
At the moment, those
certificates are only viewable
through a specialized system
in the Copyright Public
Records Reading Room
in the Madison Building in
Washington, D.C. And, so,
what we would like to do is to
make those certificates viewable
and available beyond the
walls of the building.
So, if we're clicking into this
registration detailed record
view right here, we can see
that this PDF of the Certificate
of Registration is available.
And, so, by clicking
on that link,
it's going to open
up in a new window.
And we will see the certificate
as it was printed and processed
through our Siebel System,
again with the title,
publication information,
author, copyright claimant,
rights and permissions.
And, so, this is a
similar artifact we have
for recorded documents.
So, I'm going to put a
recorded document number here
in our keyword search bar to
bring up a recorded document.
You can see this is
a demo environment.
This still does say
Certificate of Registration,
but I assure you it is a
Recorded Documents Certificate.
You'll be able to tell
by the very straightforward
form factor here.
So, we have the Certificate --
Certificate of Recordation
with the register's signature,
the date of recordation,
and the corresponding volume
and document number
that was found
in the detailed record view.
So, going back, that takes us
through two of the new features
that we're releasing, that we
hope make it more accessible
and easier for our stakeholders
to discover the copyright
records.
And, with that, I would like to
hand it over to my colleague,
KanKan Yu, who is the Product
Owner for the Recordation Pilot.
>> KanKan Yu: Thank you, Shawn.
Good afternoon.
And thanks for taking the time
to look at what we're preparing
for our expanded pilot.
A very quick background.
The pilot has been available
to a very limited group
of invited individuals since
we launched the first release
in April 2020.
We have received a lot
of positive feedback
from our invited users.
And by spring of
2022, we are targeting
to expand the pilot user
base to the general public,
so they can take advantage of
the pilot features specific
to Section 205 documents.
And the office will
be operating the pilot
under its own special
pilot program roles.
With that, I am going
to share my screen.
So, as part of this live
demo, I will do a quick run
through of what those
features are.
The first page that you'll
see is the login.gov screens.
Here, the user will
enter their credentials.
If they do not have
login.gov credentials,
they will have the ability
to create an account.
I will go ahead and log
in with some credentials
that I created for this demo.
So, generally, there is two
steps to authentication.
But I have selected the option
to remember my credentials
on this specific
browser for 30 days,
so I bypassed the second
authentication factor.
If this was a new browser
beyond the 30 days, I would have
to prove a second method,
either by getting a code
through my phone, text, or using
one of the login.gov codes.
For our first-time users,
there is an ability to set
up your account -- account
information and profile.
Since I've already
done through --
done that through my demo
account, I won't be able
to show you the first-time
user experience.
But I can go into my accounts
here in the navigation menu,
and this is where I would be
able to manage my profile,
my contact information,
maybe tweak some information
about my organization,
manage the users
within my organization, if
I created the organization,
and also manage the
deposit accounts
that I've either created
or given access to.
Now, keep in mind, these
deposit accounts are specific
to the pilot program,
and not to be confused
with eCO deposit accounts.
You may have noticed a pop
up when I first logged in.
Those are notifications for
key activity that has happened,
whether it might be a key event
or a piece of correspondence
that took place, maybe a
certificate was generated.
And you'll see these icons with
the dots indicate new items.
For the sake of time, I won't
go into those features too much.
So, back here on the dashboard,
the remitter sees a screen
where they can see all
of their service requests
that they have created
for their filings.
They can sort by status up here.
Which corresponds
to a specific place
in the document submission
cycle --
submission and review lifecycle.
For example, flagged means
that there might be an
issue during examination,
where the service request,
or SR as we might call
it throughout the rest
of this demo, maybe the
SR is being reviewed
and something has popped up.
And there's a correspondence
associated with it
that needs the remitter
to look at.
And then we have
something like pending,
which means that the SR is
just waiting for someone
to pick it up for review.
So, this feature alone takes
care of a number of inquiries
and correspondences
that we've received
in the paper submission world.
Without getting too
much into the research
and taking time away from
our demo, we've looked
at major correspondence
areas in the paper world,
and we have a number of features
that we're making available
where the goal is to cut
down on correspondences,
so that we can translate
that over
to reducing the processing
time from beginning to end.
Users will have the ability
to start a new filing
by clicking this button,
Start New Application.
Since we're running on a limited
time, I'll go ahead and open
up a draft SR that I created
earlier for this demo.
So, starting with the Documents
tab, the user will be able
to upload the document
they wish to file.
There will be questions,
and the type of questions
and answer options will
pivot based on the answers
that are provided
as the user is going
through the Submission Wizard.
For example, if they submitted
a non-English document,
we'll add in more fields
throughout the form
for translations, as well as
asking for a translation file
of the document they
wish to record.
We, also, have certifications
that the require --
that the remitter
is required to make.
Some of our remitters may be
third-party intermediaries,
or simply that they may
not have been the ones
who prepared the document.
So, we have various options
for the different types
of users that we have.
If the person who can make
the certification is not part
of the remitter's organization,
we keep all of the forms
that you need for
the Submission Wizard
within the Submission
Wizard themselves.
So, they may want to
download a form to up --
to complete and upload back
into the Submission Wizard,
that minimizes the amount
of times they have
to leave this page.
And if the person who can
make the certification is part
of the organization, we have
seen remitters transfer the
Service Requests
among themselves
to get the necessary
certifications.
While I'm here, I do want
to show you the Help
feature that we have.
And this feature has been
really helpful since day one
of the pilot system
back in 2020.
We have some instructions here
for document certifications
through onscreen text.
So, you have some of
the instructions here.
But if you want to know
more detailed information,
like what do these three
options really mean in here,
we have more information
located in this Help flyout.
And it will give you
more information.
And that really minimizes,
again, the hunting and pecking
on other pages, navigating
a way to figure
out what we're asking for.
And perhaps if you want to
know or see some additional --
additional information, like
maybe the specific regulations,
we have a link out here for
Section 201.4 in the Code
of Federal Regulations.
Even so, we also expanded
the Help content here.
Maybe you want to know examples
of what to do to complete.
So, we also offer
examples in areas
where we've seen people need a
little bit more assistance here.
I'm going to go ahead and
move on to the next tab,
since we are limited in time.
But there are a number
of options here,
and optional information
you can add,
pertaining to your document.
And throughout the wizard, we
have a lot of help text here.
So, again, this help
carries over.
Here, we have the Help
Content for Parties.
I have already added two
parties to the Service Request.
You can add more parties by
clicking this button here.
And as you add more parties,
they will keep popping
up on this page.
We offer two ways
of uploading works.
You either enter
them one at a time,
or you can upload multiple
titles using a spreadsheet.
Here, I have an example of
what a bad spreadsheet might
look like.
The system will tell
you right away
if your spreadsheet has issues,
like what I've shown here,
where the issues are,
columns 3, column label C3.
And it'll, also, give
you some suggestions
on what might fix that error.
So, I am going to upload
a good spreadsheet.
And without the errors
I fixed in --
that I fixed, I have uploaded
a number of works in this --
in this application,
77 in total.
We, also, have the
Contacts tab to make sure
that the contact information
is correct, in the event
that we need to correspond.
This takes care of a lot of
issues on the office side,
where we don't know
if the information we have
correct -- on file is correct.
Sometimes people leave,
sometimes we send
correspondences
and it's not going
to the right person.
This is important because we
will wait 45 days for a reply.
And if we do not get one,
we will close the SR
due to a no reply.
So, here, you can see
the remitter contact
and the correspondence contact.
Last, but not least, we
have the Payments page
where we have the option
to add special handling.
We have the option to
review the applications.
We, also, have the ability
to preview what the public
record might look like.
Which is really useful for users
who may have accidentally
provided some personal
identifiable information,
as part of the indexing
information.
And they have the opportunity
to strip that out prior
to submission, if
that was the case.
The system offers
two forms of payment.
I am going to go ahead and
select the deposit account.
I'm going to select
Apple Pie here.
And then there's the fee
breakdown showing me what
contributed to the total
that I'm about to pay.
I'll make the Certification
to Submit
and here is my e-signature.
Go ahead and sign.
Now I'm going to go ahead and
submit the Service Request.
So, since I selected
special handling,
this SR will be routed directly
to a specialist for review.
If I didn't select special
handling, we would have --
we would have routed this
through a separate algorithm.
What we will, also, have is an
expected recordation up here.
We will have additional
actions that you can take,
like maybe you want to
make some corrections,
maybe as a power user you
might want to use this
as a starting point for another
document you wish to record.
We have the payment information.
But I really want to draw your
attention to the area down here
for recordation documents.
Right now, it shows
public record preview,
just like what we did
in the review section.
However, once this
SR is approved,
the final documents will rely
-- reside in this section.
The Certificate of Recordation,
as well as the number
of the document, that will
be part of the public record.
You will, also, have the ability
to link to the patalog --
link to the Public Catalog
System where you can search
for the public record,
created based off
of the indexing information
that was provided
in the Submission Wizard.
If your document was
unfortunately rejected
for recordation, this is
also where you're going
to find the rejection letter,
as well as a copy of that letter
that was sent directly to the
remitter's messaging center.
So, this is a very quick preview
of what the public may
see in spring of 2022.
We've taken a lot of time
to address user feedback
during the pilot.
And our processing times
are on a scale of weeks,
rather than months, or sometimes
at the worst of our backlog,
like what we saw during the
pandemic, processing time
for paper was briefly
over a year.
We are really excited to
get these pilot features
to the hands of the general
public, so they can have
that positive experience
we've heard
from our pilot users so far.
That's a lot of features --
there's a lot of features
that I have not covered
in this demo today that
will also be available
in the expanded pilot.
Such as messages
and correspondence,
Service Request management
on the remitter's side,
managing organization and
deposit accounts, and search.
If you'd like for
that deeper dive,
please feel free to reach out.
I'm so glad you had
the opportunity
to see the pilot system
in today's meeting.
At this point, I am going to
hand this off to Maren Read.
She's the Deputy Director
of Copyright Records.
And she'll show you an exciting
Historical Public Record demo.
>> Maren Read: Thank
you, KanKan.
And good afternoon, everyone.
I'm very happy to be with
you all today to share
with you our new
Copyright Historical Record
Books Collection.
This is a major project that
we've had underway as part
of our initiative to make
our Historical Public Records
available online.
And, as Shira mentioned, we
have over 26,000 record books
that hold registrations,
renewals, assignments,
notices of use, and other types
of records, from 1870 to 1977
that we want to make
accessible to the public online.
This information can be
used for copyright research.
And many of these
works are still
under copyright protection.
So, we have taken a
two-phased approach
to providing access
to these records.
In our first phase,
which we're in right now,
we're digitizing the books, and
developing a digital collection
on the Library of Congress's
Digital Collections site,
to provide a preview
with book-level access.
And then our next phase will
be to develop metadata for each
of the records within
the record books,
like the registration
applications,
and provide record-level access
through the Copyright
Public Record System.
>> David Brunton: Maren,
I'm going to just interject.
We're not seeing your screen.
>> Maren Read: Yes.
Let me --
We're going to go from here.
Thanks, David.
>> David Brunton: Perfect.
>> Maren Read: Yes.
And, so, we're going to develop
metadata for each of the records
in the record books, so that we
can provide record-level access.
So, we released the first set
of record books on February 1st.
And they are accessible from
the copyright.gov website.
And if you click on Research,
you can go to Copyright
Historical Record Books Preview.
And that will take you to the
Library of Congress website
where the collection
is available.
And there are 500
books currently online.
And they are registration
applications
for books registered primarily
between 1975 and 1977.
But we do also have
some earlier books,
I think as early
as 1969, available.
We are adding the books
on a periodic basis
in reverse chronological
order by class.
So, we started first with
the books, and that's Class A
at the time that these
were put together.
And our goal is to
post 2,000 books
by the end of this fiscal year.
We already are expecting
to release another set
of books this week,
another around 400 books.
So, from this site, you
can view an About page
with background information on
the record books collection,
that goes through some
information about each type
of record that can be
found in the books.
The first 500 that
have been released are
registration applications.
It includes a disclaimer about
not using these for not reliable
for legal matters
and a privacy notice.
And then if you click
on Collection Items,
you will see all of the
items in the collection.
So, these are the 500 books
that are currently available.
And the view you're
seeing here is sorting them
in chronological order.
So, as I mentioned, we
do have some from 1969.
So, those show up first.
And when you click on one of
the books, it will take you
to an image of the spine.
So, metadata about
the particular book,
which includes the class,
the volume, and the range
of record -- registration
numbers found in the book,
as well as the year
covered in the book.
So, you can browse.
You can locate an application
by year and registration number.
You can view and
download individual pages.
Or you can, also,
download the full book.
So, if you don't know
the registration number,
you can go to some of the other
resources that are available
from our website, like
the Virtual Card Catalog,
and do a search for
a particular book.
And that'll help you find
the registration number.
So, I have done a
search already for --
we've been looking up what --
you know, popular books
from the years covered
in this initial release.
And one of the most popular
books for 1976 was "Interview
with the Vampire" by Anne Rice.
So, we have here the card from
the Virtual Card Catalog for
"Interview with the Vampire."
And you can see the
registration number
and the year it was registered,
and use that information
to then go back -- find the book
in the Record Books Collection,
that would include this
registration application.
You could, also, use the
Catalog of Copyright Entries,
and locate the same information.
So, here on this page, is also
"Interview with the Vampire"
and the same registration
number, A76919.
So, with this information,
you can go back
to the record book site, and
find the book that includes
that registration number.
So, I've gone ahead and
pulled that up here.
So, you can see this is the
registration numbers 769500
through 769999 from 1976.
So, the application
for "Interview
with the Vampire"
should be in this book.
And from this page,
you can open up
and view all 1,007
pages in the book.
And that's about the average
number of pages in each book.
You could download a PDF of
the book, the entire book,
and browse through it that way.
If you do click here
on the spine,
you get to each individual page.
Each application
is two pages long.
And you can look
through it that way.
In the interest of time,
since this registration
application is near the end
of the book, I've gone
ahead and pulled it up here.
So, this is the applicant --
registration application for
"Interview with the Vampire."
We can go to the
first page here.
You can zoom in,
get a closer look.
So, you can see there is the
registration number, 76919,
we saw in the Virtual
Card Catalog;
the name of the claimant,
Anne O'Brien Rice; the title,
"Interview with the Vampire,"
and then it also
has the second page
of the application
if you flip ahead.
So, you can zoom in and out.
You can download these
individual pages.
And you can keep -- also keep
browsing through the rest
of the book by hitting the
page or selecting a page here.
So, as I mentioned, we're
going to continue to add
to this collection periodically,
and make, you know,
the books available over
the next several years.
Thank you very much.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Maren.
And we've had one of the
panelists ask for [inaudible].
There we have a link
to the Copyright
Historical Record Books.
So, I appreciate -- I'd like
to move into the next phase.
We're actually running a
little bit ahead of time.
I'd like to move into the next
phase of our discussion today.
I want to start,
though, with a big thanks
to all of the presenters.
This is the first time
that we've done live demos
of new software for
members of the public.
And it takes a lot of time
and planning to pull it off.
In just a moment, I'm going to
ask the CPMC members to turn
on their cameras
and microphones.
So, members, get
yourselves ready.
But before I do that, I want to
read two things for the benefit
of people who are listening.
The first is a quote from the
new Copyright Office Strategic
Plan, which you can find online
and I have a beautiful
print copy of here.
The strategic plan is focusing
of the Copyright Office.
And one of the focused
approaches that we're going
to take is under Goal 2,
which I'm going to read aloud.
We will continuously improve
and update our services using --
utilizing state-of-the-art
technology
to meet the evolving needs
of the copyright community.
The second item I'm going to
read is the prompt question
that we sent to members
before this meeting.
And the prompt question
bears both on --
a little bit on the
purpose for this group,
and on a setup for
our next meeting.
Which we're tentatively planning
for mid-August, six
months from now.
Here's the prompt question that
was sent around to members.
Which has already generated
a vigorous discussion
in chat among the panelists.
Are there any particular
technologies, either state
of the industry or emerging,
that the Copyright Office should
be aware of and/or considering
as part of the IT
development work
for ECS applications
involving registration,
recordation and public records?
So, at this point, if
CPMC members are willing,
I'd like everyone to
turn on your cameras,
and keep your microphones
on mute for just a moment.
We'll begin the roundtable
discussion
after a couple more
introductory remarks.
Our hope today is that this can
be a wide-ranging discussion.
In some ways, this would be
easier if we were all together
in person, and sitting
up on a stage together,
and we're talking backstage.
But we're mimicking
that a little bit
with the panelist chat on
the -- on the chat function.
And I'd like to get
it happening as much
as possible on the
stage as well.
We'll spend the next hour in
a discussion that will begin
with CPMC members
talking to each other.
And then transition
into taking questions
and comments from the audience.
So, if you're a member
of the audience,
and you don't see the
Q&A button, it should be
on the bottom of your
screen near the center.
Feel free to submit questions at
any time during the discussion.
Though we may save them
depending on the pace
of the conversation,
and where it's going.
I will note that there are a
number of questions that came
up during the demos
about specific functions,
that I would encourage panelists
and members of the public
to raise, if they'd like
those answered as well.
During this discussion, I would
also like to encourage members
who have reached out to me
directly to raise points
that have been made via
email, including reflections
on how a group like this one
can be made the most useful
to our office, to
our development team,
to our stakeholders, but also to
the other members of this group.
I arranged via email for one
of the members, Melissa Levine,
to start the discussion
off today.
But before I hand it off
to Melissa, I would also
like to ask that members
briefly state their name
and affiliation the
first time they --
the first time they
come off mute.
This helps with our transcript
so that we've got people's --
we've got it on the transcript,
as well as for searchability
purposes.
And as a reminder, our product
owners are actually also
on the call as panelists.
So, if panelists have
specific questions about one
of the demos you saw, you
can raise them to a panelist.
But I would also encourage
people to just sort
of raise the features
that you've been talking
about in the chat in
the group as well.
And if you're a panelist with
a point that you'd like to jump
in on, I'd ask for panelists
to use the Hand Raise button.
And I'll do my best to keep them
in sort of a reasonable queue.
But if I do get it wrong, and
I don't see a raised hand,
or if you feel like
you've been waiting longer
than is warranted, I
assure you it's a mistake,
and please feel free
to hit me up on chat.
So, without further ado,
Melissa, would you begin
with a short introduction of
your name and affiliation?
>> Melissa Levine: Sure.
>> David Brunton: And give us
give us a couple of remarks.
>> Melissa Levine: My
name is Melissa Levine.
I work at the University
of Michigan Library,
and I direct our
Copyright Office here.
That presentation was amazing.
I had no idea that all those
good things were happening.
So, that's really exciting.
I have a question
and a suggestion.
The question is, "How do
all these systems integrate
with the Library of Congress
and their collections
beyond the kind of treatment
of the historical books as
artifacts, that sort of thing?"
And the other -- the
suggestion is this.
As I understand each
of these systems are
in some ways distinct.
And they treat the analog
materials -- like they --
they use -- they use digital
-- they're basically pictures.
So, they're not searchable
inside the individual artifacts.
In other words, you have
catalog information,
you have high-level information.
But you still have to know
like which volume of the CCE
or the -- the -- or
the historical book.
You have to sort of know
what you're looking for.
So, you can't eliminate
the absence of things.
And you can't connect items
that may be related, such as,
let's say, short stories
published in one class
in one year that is
part of an anthology,
and another with a
different registration.
One of the things that I've --
I admire, I don't know if
you're familiar with the work
that Greg Graham has been doing
at New York Public Library.
It's a transcription project.
I think that that's a really
valuable and important path.
I, also, think that it would
be a really exciting sort
of public engagement project
to do a transcription project
with these materials through
something like Zooniverse,
if you're familiar with that.
That's -- that would be golden.
Anyway, I've gone a
little long, sorry.
>> David Brunton:
[inaudible], Melissa, thank you.
Before we go to James
Neal, Natalie Buda Smith,
would you be willing to give
a couple of just quick remarks
about how the systems of the
Enterprise Copyright System sort
of integrate with each other
and with Library of
Congress systems?
And I think -- I would --
before I hand it off to Natalie,
I would just point out that
the copyright record books
that everyone saw demoed,
which were just released earlier
this month, the first set
of these were released
earlier month --
this month, the digitized
items are actually available
via loc.gov.
Natalie, do you want to jump in
and talk a little bit
about integration?
>> Natalie Buda Smith: Sure,
I'll jump in just
with a couple points.
And these are my buzzwords.
So, integrating the services --
the copyright services together
is driven by several things.
But the two that I
really like to talk
about are a design system
-- a shared design system.
So, we have a very active --
actively managed design system,
which captures all of the
user interface components,
so all of the interactions,
so that they are shared
across the services.
So, when you look
at recordation,
and you go to Upcoming
Registration and Public Record,
copyright.gov, you
know, the list goes on,
that they are using components
that users will recognize
from any service they
use from Copyright.
So, there's a consistency
there that we're building in,
in order to make sure
that people understand
the interactions,
and they're very usable.
We've done a lot
of user research,
a lot of usability testing.
So, from a user experience,
or from the UI component
perspective, there's a lot
of reuse, and actually a design
system that is quite complex
and heavily managed, in order
to direct that consistency
and integration across
the services.
So, that's one thing that
we like to talk about.
And then we, also, are
sharing, as you've --
if you've seen any of
our other presentations,
the micro services.
You know, we're really
into building
and reusing components
as they make sense.
Because not only is
it more efficient,
but from a user perspective, if
I'm familiar with how to engage
with a component in one service,
I most likely will be able
to easily use it
in another service.
So, that's for the
integration for ECS.
And then -- and then with
loc.gov, like David mentioned,
there's collections
available now from Copyright.
We have a quite mature
digital collection workflow
that we've engaged.
And, so, you can find copyright
collections now on loc.gov.
And that's thanks -- there's two
different teams there, again,
it often takes a collection
of teams to do this work,
that have been working really
well together to make sure
that the processes line
up, and there is a flow
between Copyright
and the loc.gov team.
So, that's my introduction
of that.
I'm not sure if you wanted me
to drill into anything more.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Natalie.
That was just fabulous.
James Neal, would you go next?
>> James Neal: Hi, I'm Jim Neal.
I'm Vice-President and
University Librarian Emeritus
at Columbia University in
New York, honorary member
of the American Library
Association,
and Senior Policy Fellow
at its Washington office.
I had raised a couple
of questions in chat.
First one related
to the availability
of authority control in the
name system, particularly
for name changes
and name variations.
And several people followed
up with some additional
related questions.
My second question
related to the works
that are not in English.
I heard the presenters
speak about translations.
But I'm particularly
interested in works
that are produced
originally in other languages
that are submitted
for copyright,
and how the system
manages those.
And the third question I
raised related to the fees --
the copyright fees, and
whether there was an option
within the system for people
who are registering their works
who can't afford
to pay that fee.
And if there's some type
of financial assistance,
or other support, that is
available to those individuals.
Those are my questions.
>> David Brunton: Thanks, Jim.
So, the first question
about authority,
the Copyright Office does not
currently use a name authority.
Names that are indexed in the
Names Directory are listed
as they've been cataloged
on the application,
or a recorded document
submission.
There may be similar
names, misspellings
and other anomalies in the data.
And I -- obviously, I
was the one who asked you
to raise that as a topic.
I think that's an interesting
topic for us to consider.
If I can ask the product owner
for the recordation system,
KanKan Yu, to briefly talk about
the languages in recordations.
KanKan?
>> KanKan Yu: Hi.
So, I'd be happy
to talk about that.
So, we do collect
non-English languages as part
of the Section 205 filings.
And we actually don't
have a restriction
as to what language it's in.
So, it could be a language
that's using Roman characters
or non-Roman characters.
We will collect the translation
for it for the purposes
of reviewing the
document for recordation,
as well as transliterations
of certain fields
to use this indexing
information.
Now, when it comes to
producing the public record
for those items, we try
to maintain the language
that the remitter provided.
So, if it has -- if it comes in
in Russian or Hindi or Chinese,
or these non-Roman
character-based languages,
then we'll maintain
that dataset.
But, unfortunately,
at this point,
our current cataloging
system cannot support that.
So, what we'll do is we'll
index the translations
or the transliterations
of what we have.
But we do have conversations
down the line
about how that's going
to expand as we build
out our new public
record system.
>> David Burton: Thanks, KanKan.
And then to the final question,
the Copyright Office
does not have any cases
where the applications currently
deviate from the posted fees.
But I will point
out that fee setting
and the fee study
process is subject
to the public comment period.
And that that would be --
that any future fee
setting would happen sort
of through that process.
And thanks for raising
those points, Jim.
So, I'm going to hand it
off next to Jeff Sedlik.
Jeff, please introduce yourself.
>> Jeff Sedlik: Hi,
I'm Jeff Sedlik.
I'm the President and CEO
of the PLUS Coalition.
And I'm, also, a professor
at the Art Center College
of Design teaching copyright law
and copyright registration
practice
and -- amongst other things.
So, I've not -- I
participated in a process early
on in the development of the
registration application,
where a team came to
my home for half a day.
And I was very impressed by the
depth of their understanding
of the challenges
faced by claimants
in registering their works.
And then it kind of went dark.
And I'm wondering if the Library
and the Copyright Office have
considered inviting this panel,
this committee, to participate
in the pilot program,
because I haven't been asked.
And can I see by a show of hands
who on the committee has not
been asked to participate,
has not been asked
to participate in
the pilot program?
Okay. So, I would appreciate --
you know, there's a wealth of
knowledge on this committee.
And I would appreciate
the opportunity
to bring my knowledge
on copyright registration
further into the process.
And, so, I would
ask that we are --
that we are invited
into that program.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Jeff.
That was very helpful.
Just to clarify, there is
no Registration System pilot
open yet.
The two pilots that are open
are the Copyright Public Record
System and the Recordation
System.
And that will definitely be in
upcoming meetings, as well as --
I mean, the amount
of work that's going
on for the Registration
System is just extraordinary.
We didn't have anything
where we're getting ready
to release or show today.
But this group will be certainly
consulted both directly --
and, Jeff, I would
imagine as well, you know,
having participated in the early
sessions, that you would be
on the list already for that.
>> Jeff Sedlik: That
would be great.
And I -- just in closing,
I do have to acknowledge
how impressed I've been
with what I've seen with the
process that's being followed.
And I was in the
office end of 2019.
All the walls were
covered with index cards.
It was kind of old school.
But it was a beautiful
thing to see, actually,
all the public comments put in
order under the subject matter
on index cards, and then
carefully considered.
Which was then, I'm
sure, digitized
and brought into the process.
But I have been impressed
to date by that process.
>> David Brunton: One of
our disappointing things
about this pandemic
operation has been fewer --
less work on whiteboards
and on sticky notes.
But thank you for that --
thank you for that comment
and that observation.
Scott Weingart, can I
kick it over to you next?
>> Scott Weingart:
Thank you so much.
I am Scott Weingart.
I direct the Navari Family
Center for Digital Scholarship
at the University of Notre
Dame Hesburgh Libraries.
My question/suggestion builds
off of what Melissa brought
up earlier, but specifies it
a little bit more specifically
for the Copyright Historical
Record Books program.
And that's sort of repeating
the question of whether
or not there's a plan to
OCR these specifically,
and turn them into machine
actionable and queryable data.
Particularly with respect to
the relationship between that
and the Virtual Card Catalog,
so that there is an easing
of the process of moving
back and forth between those.
And then I want a
second suggestion
that now a few others have made.
Which is the potential for
crowdsourcing or collaborating
with institutions or
universities like, for example,
the Internet Archive who have
already done work in this space.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you so much.
That's -- those are
just great observations.
And I do want to point
out that the record books
that are currently
available are downloadable.
And I would imagine
that some people who are
on this call are already
downloading them to do OCR work.
But there is also work
underway at the Library to sort
of make better use of
scanned images that we have.
If those of you who
are familiar with some
of the Library's efforts
that have really kicked
up into high gear, even
during the pandemic,
things like crowd.loc.gov,
there are just an, you know,
extraordinary number
of crowdsourcing.
And one of the efforts that went
into crowd.loc.gov was
early copyright title pages.
And it was just one of the most
successful and interesting OCR
and crowdsourcing projects that
we've done really at the Library
since that program started.
So, I think it's a big deal.
I will say that -- I just want
to register the office's sort
of enthusiasm for people
who make use of the data --
of the data that is
made available public,
including these record books
that we're putting online now.
And just the hope that
we're not the only ones
who are looking critically
at them as something that --
you know, as something
to make into a resource.
I'd like to kick it over
to Todd Carpenter next.
>> Todd Carpenter: Hello.
My name is Todd Carpenter.
I'm the Executive
Director of NISO,
the National Information
Standards Organization.
First of all, I'd like to
commend the office and the team.
This -- what you've
shown is great work.
I really appreciate it.
So, congratulations so far.
I think there's a
lot to build on.
I think you're addressing some
real community needs here.
And the comments that have been
made, and I think will continue
to be made, are meant in the,
"Hey, this is great work,
let's keep going
in this direction."
Melissa made a great point
that digitizing image files,
and Scott brought this up again,
doesn't really serve the needs
of the func -- of a functionally
interoperable digital system
at which the Copyright Office
is a part -- a core part.
Jim made the point
about authority files.
I would take that a step
further, and make the point
that there's a need
here to attach these
to machine functional
identifiers in the community,
so that we can facilitate
interoperability
with these data.
And I think Scott
nailed it there.
I would strongly suggest
to the Library of Congress
and the Copyright Office that
you're taking a first step,
which is really important,
but take --
moving it to functionality is
really where we want to go,
and will serve the
needs of the community.
I had a couple of specific
questions with regard
to the recordation process
that I mentioned in the outset.
The first is, "Is there any
process to notice anomalies
in the recordation process?"
Say if I'm submitting an
Excel file of my 75 works,
is there any duplication
matching?
Like, "Hey, you've
already done this.
You don't need to
pay this fee twice."
You know, something
along those lines?
And, also, is that
process of something
that can accept non-Latin
characters
from a system's functionality
perspective?
>> David Brunton: Todd,
thank you so much.
I appreciate the questions.
And thank you for
raising them again
after you raised them on chat.
I think it's helpful to
the audience and as well
as to the other members.
I'm going to invite KanKan Yu
back on the stage for a minute
to talk specifically about
the recordation pilot,
and to address the two
questions about pattern matching
in the process, and about
non-Latin characters
in the process.
>> KanKan Yu: Hi.
Hopefully, you guys can hear me.
>> David Brunton: We can.
>> KanKan Yu: So, in
terms -- great, great.
I always wonder when I
come off unmute from Zoom.
In terms of pattern
matching, at this time,
we don't have any
pattern matching.
If something is listed twice,
it will be treated
as a separate work.
In terms of getting
charged twice, it's going --
unless it's one of those
cases that have bumped you
up into a fee tier, it will not
inflict in the next -- the --
I guess it won't up
your charges for fees.
And we have our fee schedule.
I can try to pull that on chat.
And, basically, it's
-- our fees are based
on groupings of titles.
So, if it's one to 50 additional
titles, you'll have one fee.
But then you have a
much larger group.
So, unless that extra title
is going from 50th to 51,
we're not going to
charge that extra fee.
But, in general, for
pattern matching,
we don't have any at this time.
We are constantly soliciting
feedback from our users.
We are interested in knowing
how they're using the system,
how their needs evolve,
and trying to keeping --
keep up with those needs.
So, if it's something that --
something that is
coming up quite a bit,
and it's interesting to
the users, we will be happy
to consider it as a
feature functionality.
And in terms of uploading
works for non-Latin
or Roman-based characters,
we do allow that.
We have two spreadsheets,
and that will pivot based
on what you selected,
whether your document is
in English or not in English.
And the forms change as well.
So, when you get to the
works page, if you select
that you have a non-English
document,
the works upload
spreadsheet will shift
over to a non-English
version of it, which will ask
for a lot more things.
It will take your language,
whichever it might be,
along with additional fields for
translation and transliteration.
>> David Brunton: Thank
you for that, KanKan.
Keith Kupferschmid, can I
hand it over to you next?
>> Keith Kupferschmid: Sure.
Thank you.
And thank you, again,
for doing this.
Hopefully, everyone can
see and hear me okay.
I'm Keith Kupferschmid, the
CEO of the Copyright Alliance,
as you can see behind me.
So, I had several questions.
But the first I just -- the
first thing I wanted to say was
to kind of reiterate something
I had said at the first meeting.
And I think I'm speaking
for the other CPMC members,
but perhaps not.
And if not so, they can agree
or disagree with me in chat.
I had suggested that
we meet more frequently
than every six months.
I think all the CPMC members are
happy to -- happy to help out,
and happy to provide
their insights and work
with the Copyright Office staff.
And, so, however we
can be of assistance.
I know we're happy to jump
in and help more frequently
than just meeting
every six months.
So, I'm hopeful that, and
I'm seeing in the chat,
others are agreeing
with me here.
So, I'm not off base here.
And just let us know what
-- how -- when we can help,
and I'm sure everyone
would love to do that.
In terms of a few of the
questions I have, we talked --
we saw a demo of public records,
and we saw a demo
of recordation.
What we didn't see was a demo
of the Registration System.
Arguably, but not too arguably,
I think the Registration System
is the most important thing
that the Copyright Office does.
And, so, you know, the
cynic in me says, "Well,
registration is lagging behind
the other two, because, well,
this is a library and
they're more interested
in public records,
and what have you,
and the historical records."
But it's probably
more to the fact
that the Registration
System, I guess,
is just probably
just more difficult
to build and takes more time.
And, so -- but it still
would have been nice
to get a little bit of more
of an update here on that.
So, my questions, though,
have to do with for
all these systems,
whether it's recordation,
public records,
the registration systems.
I'm assuming, but
we didn't hear this,
that all of those systems
will be mobile accessible.
Okay? We saw a demo here,
but that wasn't mobile.
So, that's one of the questions.
In terms of the public records,
would it be possible for someone
to create an account, so
they can save their searches,
and go back and see recent
searches that they've done,
so that when they do a search,
they can just merely
quickly update that search,
or tweak the search, depending
on new information or something?
Is -- excuse me.
Will that be a possibility?
And then, also, will it be a
possibility in public records
to have an, I guess
what I would call,
enhanced search capabilities?
So, for instance, if
you weren't, let's say,
looking for Toni Morrison, but
you're looking for Joe Smith,
and Joe Smith returns so many
results that you'd like --
you'd be like, "Okay, look, I
know the Joe Smith I'm looking
for was around in the 1950s.
Can I do like an advanced
search and narrow that down?"
But there are other times when
you do want a broad search.
So, will the public record
search functionality accommodate
kind of both of those
needs, if you will?
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Keith.
I can jump in quickly on
the registration question.
And there is, in some sense,
a simpler answer
than both of those.
Which is that recordation
and the Copyright Public
Record System started earlier.
So, we're further behind,
because we started later
on the Registration System,
in terms of actual
software development.
But it is our plan to
do a demo of the sort
of Registration System in
progress next time around.
I will say that,
historically, some of the reason
for the Recordation System
having started when it did,
which actually a little
bit predates our sort
of big modernization project
that we're in the midst
of right now, was that that
system was previously being done
on paper.
And, so, it was being -- it was
sort of leapfrogging from kind
of not having a system at
all to having a system.
And that was one of the
reasons, I wouldn't say
that it was treated so
much as a higher priority,
but just that it came
sequentially first.
The other thing that I would add
about registration
specifically is
that it is enormously more
complicated than either
of the other two systems, and
also has a very high volume.
So, there are a lot of -- a lot
of issues to consider with that.
I do want to -- then
talking specifically
about your questions
about recent searches
and enhanced searches, I want
to invite Shawn Gallagher,
the product owner from the
Copyright Public Record System,
briefly back on the stage
to talk a little bit
about the recent searches
and any enhanced searches.
But, also, to remind the
audience, and the members
as well, that this system is
currently live and in pilot,
and available to
members of the public
at publicrecords.copyright.gov.
And I would strongly encourage
everybody to go try it,
just right this instance
all at once.
So, Shawn, do you
want to talk briefly
about recent searches
and enhanced search?
>> Shawn Gallagher:
Sure, David, thanks.
And while you do all
try to load test the
publicrecords.copyright.gov
website, while you're there,
click on that feedback link, and
then follow through that survey.
We'd definitely love to have
some of that feedback captured
in places other than
this meeting.
So, Keith, that's
a great question
about having an account.
I think part of the vision
for the Enterprise
Copyright System is
to have a single account
with the Copyright Office,
so that you can interact
with all of our services.
And part of that would
be connecting an account
to the Public Record
System, so that in addition
to the recent records and
recent searches feature that's
out there and available
now, both of those timeout
after about four hours due
to security requirements,
with an account, you could
create saved searches
and saved records section
within the [inaudible]
Public Record System
that would allow you to hold on
to those searches and records,
and rerun them at any time.
So, that's a feature that's
definitely down the road.
And we're very excited to
release it once it's ready.
>> David Brunton: Thank you,
Shawn, that was really helpful.
Brewster Kahle, a
brief introduction,
and could you give
us our next comment?
You're still on mute.
Sorry about that.
I can actually --
>> Brewster Kahle: No Zoom
meeting would ever be complete
[inaudible] "You're on mute."
Anyway, thank you for
all of this, really.
We appreciate being invited in.
I have a request, an offer,
and then maybe a citation
to an opportunity due to
the digital opportunity.
So, the request is bulk
access, and how can we make
that really easy
for people to do.
As, you know, you know
there are, you know,
opportunities with, you
know, there was scanning
of the copyright records by
University of Pennsylvania,
the Internet Archive
and Project Gutenberg,
and then Mike Glascott,
Rutgers, and then Stanford.
And there's people that are
up for doing all of that.
So, please, bulk
access with no fees.
And just make it easy.
And you can -- you know,
you can date stamp datasets,
and make additions
and things like that.
That's kind of understood
these days.
You don't have to be worried
that if you put something out,
you know, they're going to be
-- it's a work in progress.
It's all understood.
We kind of know how
to deal with that
in the scientific
publishing world.
That's a request.
Offer, mass digitization
of books in your microfilm.
Well, it's an offer.
If we could get a -- you
said there's microfilm.
Gosh, we've gotten
good at microfilm
at the Internet Archive.
So, up for doing the mass
digitization of microfilm
or books being donated.
If there's an extra
copy and just donate it,
and we'll do it for free.
With OCR, it can be
done in a couple months.
You know, it'd be kind of great.
The OCR, also, is getting
a lot better these days,
the machine learning
things are just --
it's kind of stunning
and kind of great.
Databasing is still -- that's,
you know, the Holy Grail.
But that's not completely
easy to do without a lot
of domain knowledge and work.
So, that's an offer.
The third is an opportunity
due to digital.
Building on Melissa's
question about the integration
with the Library of Congress,
I think the opportunity
here is legal deposit
of digital materials.
And do this at the point of
the copyright registration.
So, that, basically,
have an Upload button.
Right? Just get it.
While they're thinking of
it, while they're doing it,
make it part of the whole
system, that the digital --
and even if it's pointing to
a URL, I know that the Library
of Congress can also
crawl a website.
So, there are things that,
because we're dealing
in the digital world, we
can take advantage of that.
We don't have to have metadata
separate from the data itself.
You can go and have
the digital files.
So, just three points.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you so much.
I appreciate the feedback.
And one of the things that, for
those members of the public,
we had a -- we had
a smaller meeting
in which we teased a
little bit of the demo work
that we're doing
for this group here
in the Copyright Public
Modernization Committee.
We had an in between meeting
in which we did our very
first demos to the group.
And one of the things
that we found was,
that when we show
what we're working on,
that we get extraordinarily
valuable input from this group,
and from members of the public.
And I just really appreciate
that people are sort of bringing
that into this conversation.
It's an unusual thing for us
to be doing it this way
before a live studio audience.
But it's not too
different from what the --
how this would be done if we
were in a post-virtual world,
where we were -- where
we were gathering maybe
in the Coolidge Auditorium,
and we were all sitting
up on a stage and talking to
each other in the background.
I see -- Jim Neal, I think
it's possible that I forgot
to acknowledge your
earlier hand raise.
I think I -- did you
have another question?
Or was that --
>> James Neal: I did not.
>> David Brunton:
Okay, thank you.
I apologize.
So, the next person that
we've got is Roy Kaufman.
>> Roy Kaufman: Hi there.
Roy Kaufman from
Copyright Clearance Center.
I really liked the
Name Directory.
And it led to a whole bunch of
questions and some suggestions,
including to pick
up on something
that Todd Carpenter
put in in the chat.
So, the first thing on the
Name Directory, I'm curious,
you know, we take in a lot of
metadata at CCC about authors,
and actually knowing
that this author --
you know, let's start middle
names, middle initials,
you know, all identity
management, whether it's,
you know, institutional
identity management
or author identity management
is a challenge, so both in terms
of disambiguation and in terms
of making sure you've
got everyone.
So, some questions
about that, generally.
How are you doing it?
Which leads to the obvious, you
know, points that, you know,
Todd made, which is if
you enable people to do --
put in an identifier, you
don't have to choose the --
don't choose which identifiers,
I've said this before, you know,
let them put in ISNE,
let them put
in ORCID, and then do a call.
So, you've now got that person
and their disambiguated.
Question -- you know, great
to have a Name Directory.
Assuming if you can do that,
you can have the same kind
of directory for all
the other fields.
Because, you know, the name,
the title, the claimants,
the attorney who filed it,
all of these have value.
And as long as you're creating
the structure, hopefully,
you'll be able to do
that kind of searching
on all the metadata
fields, not just the name.
And I guess I'll -- I have
more, but I'm going to sort
of stop there, because
that's sort of a whole bunch
of concepts thrown in.
And I think it's unfair to make
you answer even more at once.
So, thanks.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you so much.
So, I appreciate it.
I'm not sure that I caught
every single question.
So, feel free as I invite one
of our product owners to come
and talk a little bit about
how the names are being handled
in the Public Record System.
And then I also wanted
to say that before we get
to public questions, which
I think are going to happen
in just a couple of minutes,
after this question is answered,
we'll take a real short bio
break, and then we'll jump back
on and take any questions
from the audience.
So, KanKan, can you
talk a little bit --
I see that you jumped
in on chat.
But can you also
talk a little bit
about how the standard
identifiers
for parties are started --
starting to be brought into
the recommendation system?
And then, Shawn, if you
want to follow up with that,
how we're doing that with
the Public Record System?
>> KanKan Yu: Yeah, sure.
And I think that's a -- I think
it's a really cool question.
It's one of those items where,
when we initially
were doing research
for the Recordation
System, we were looking
at additional indexing
information.
And I'm actually really happy to
hear ORCID ID being brought up.
We are taking in standard
identifiers for parties.
We're, also, taking in
standard identifiers for works.
So, that can be part of
the indexing information.
But, again, it's not --
it's one of those items
that are not currently
being indexed
in the Public Catalog System.
So, as folks are using the pilot
system, they can provide us all
of this optional information
where we're going
to be storing it.
And we would like to
continue that conversation
as the public -- the new Public
Record System moves forward
in how that's going to be
utilized, and where some
of those synergies will be.
And, Shawn, over to you.
>> Shawn Gallagher:
Hey, thanks, KanKan.
Yeah, I think I would
add that we --
once we are able
to pull information
for the Copyright Public
Record System directly
from the new recordation
pilot, we'd be happy
to surface those ORCID IDs.
And looking in our
documentation,
I think we have a collection
of about 19 different
standard identifiers,
not only for authors
and claimants,
but also for work types,
or other identifiers
of copyrightable materials
that we'd be happy to display.
I think one of the challenges is
getting all of that data mapped
from the systems where
they're collected to a system
where they can be
presented to the public.
And I did also want to
add that in addition
to the Name Directory,
you know, we are working
with the information
as it's been collected
and indexed by the
office so far.
And a lot of this is
going back to 1978.
And, so, there's not a lot
that we can necessarily do
with that information as it is.
We want to make sure that it's
faithful to the application.
But that if you are
searching for names,
we do have the ability
under the Event Search
to do an all name search, which
should cover your parties,
your claimants, your
authors, any other names
that are identified and indexed
in those copyrighted materials.
And then you can filter those
down using our date filters.
Which you'll see over
on the right-hand side,
in addition to major
record type filters,
and then subtypes as well.
So, if you are looking to try
to narrow those results down,
that is one other
way to go through it.
And I think -- I did see
that there's a question
about only 19 standard
identifiers.
We're always happy to
include even more, I think,
if those are something that the
office is looking to collect.
We're happy to display
those if it's appropriate
in the Copyright
Public Record System.
>> David Brunton: Great.
Thank you.
So, with that, we're going to
take a very short bio break.
I think we'll come
back at about 3:01.
So, I'm going to go off camera,
and -- I'm sorry, not at 3:01.
I apologize.
At 2:51. So, we're going to
just take a two-minute break.
And we'll be back on
camera in two minutes
with a couple more questions
that we've got coming up.
All right, Kathleen
Rodriguez, I'm going to kick it
over to you for the
next comment.
>> Kathleen Rodriguez: Hi.
Can you hear me?
>> David Brunton: We sure can.
Thank you.
>> Kathleen Rodriguez: Okay.
>> David Brunton: You're
coming through loud and clear.
>> Kathleen Rodriguez: Okay.
I'm Kathleen Rodriguez.
I'm a Senior Paralegal
with Warner Media.
And we process over 4,500
applications per year
to register and record documents
with the Copyright Office.
So, my issue relates
to security.
I ran some of these plans by
our internal cybersecurity team.
And they recommend
the implementation
of native cloud security,
and CSA Cloud Control Matrix.
So, I just wanted to ask
if those are on your radar
to include in the
upcoming system.
And, also, I understand that
Dr. Hayden had testified
in the recent Senate hearing
on oversight of Library
of Congress modernization
efforts in October, about --
she talked about the Library
seeking to expand IT security
in the cloud in requesting
funding.
So, how does that impact this
if the funding is not received?
And I was interested to
know how you'd handle that.
>> David Brunton: Kathleen,
thank you so much
for the question.
So, I think at this stage,
I'll invite a colleague
from the office, the
Chief Information Officer
up on the stage.
My best guess is that
this would be a question
for Mike Myvek [assumed
spelling] to join on.
Judith Conklin, the CIO
herself, is jumping on camera.
Hi, Judith.
>> Judith Conklin: Hi.
Thank you.
We've been very fortunate
over the last couple years
to receive funding from
Congress for IT security.
And, as you know, IT security,
cybersecurity continues to be,
you know, forefront
in all of our minds.
And, so, as we look at our
hybrid hosting environment,
we submitted an additional
funding request to Congress
for cybersecurity in the cloud.
And that's what you're
referencing.
We do have -- I want
to assure you
that we do have cybersecurity
in the cloud now.
We just -- as the attackers, the
bad guys improve their skills
and tools, we have to
continue to do that.
If we do not receive funding,
we will do a couple things.
The first is we will
resubmit it.
And we -- second, we will also
-- at the end of the year,
our Principal Deputy Librarian
of Congress looks at funding --
looks at money that hasn't
quite been spent yet.
And it's called resource
allocation.
And it goes up to him
as an unfunded request,
and they get prioritized.
And we have submitted it
also for an unfunded request.
From a standards point of
view, we do follow NIST,
the National Institute of
Standards and Technology.
We have been significantly
audited on NIST.
The Legislative Branch does
not have to abide by NIST.
The Library of Congress has
chosen to follow NIST standards.
And in the -- because of that,
the auditors can audit us
on our implementation of NIST.
And we have consistently
done well in our audits,
our cybersecurity audits.
They will continue to audit us.
Some people get frustrated
with that.
I call it free consulting.
Because they do come
look at very specific --
they get very specific on
what they're going to audit.
The most recent is very --
you know, a very specific set
of our security controls.
And I'm sure they will continue.
And I work very closely
with the Inspector General
on what they should audit
next in our IT environment,
in our technology environment.
So, when they do have
findings and recommendations,
we improve those areas.
And the IT security team is
very quick to resolve those,
quicker than any of our
other teams actually.
They take them very seriously.
And most IT security people do.
So, there are native
-- when we --
we do have an AWS
cloud environment
in our hybrid hosting
environment.
With AWS, we have native
cloud tools that come with it.
And we -- what the funding
is for is to enhance.
And I have an IT
security background.
And, so, I understand
a lot of this.
It's to put more enhancements,
more tools in our
cloud environment.
On top of that, we're doing
something called zero trust.
And you can look that up.
I won't bore the audience
here with what zero trust is.
But we're implementing
zero trust.
And it's something the
Executive Branch has mandated.
But we had already begun zero
trust before they mandated it.
And we are -- we have a
project for zero trust.
And we are implementing that
for our high-value data,
our high-value assets.
And I assure you that
copyright data is, to us,
a high-value asset --
are high-value assets within
the Library of Congress.
And we will be implementing zero
trust for that copyright data.
49
>> David Brunton:
Judith, thank you so much.
I appreciate you
jumping on camera,
and joining us on the stage.
Susan Chertkof, can you
give us our next comment?
>> Susan Chertkof : Yes.
Hi. Thank you.
I'm Susan Chertkof.
I'm the Senior Vice-President
for Legal and Regulatory Affairs
at the Recording Industry
Association of America.
And I just -- I wanted
to thank you for this.
It was nice to see the demos.
Although you didn't do the demo
of the Copyright
Registration System,
my question was related to that.
And, David, you and I had
corresponded offline about this.
But I just wanted to put it
on the record that my members,
who are big companies that
have a lot of copyrights
and register a lot of
copyrights, are interested
to make sure that there's going
to be bulk processing
capabilities,
and not just
single-work-by-single-work
processing capabilities
built into the new system.
So, that was really the main
issue that I wanted to raise.
I would second Kathleen's
concern about security.
Obviously, the deposit
[inaudible] that we put
in are highly valuable assets
to my member companies.
And then the other question
I had was during the demo
of the Recordation System, the
person that was giving the demo,
and, I'm sorry, [inaudible]
who that was,
mentioned that there was
functions put in to cut
down on correspondence and
reduce processing time.
And I was wondering
what those things were.
>> David Brunton:
That's a great question.
Thank you, Susan.
And I would, also -- as Susan
alluded, I've been corresponding
with a number of the Copyright
Public Modernization Committee
members via email,
including Susan.
And I would just -- I
included my email address
on the last group
email to the panelists.
I would just encourage
people to reach out.
I enjoy the in between
conversations almost as much
as I enjoy being on camera for
this -- for this conversation.
I just wanted to
highlight that there were --
there was much agreement
in the chat
about bulk operations being a
key feature that I would imagine
that those sentiments would be
echoed by the audience as well.
So, thank you for raising that.
>> Susan Chertkof: Yeah.
And, to follow up, you know,
my members would be happy
to participate in pilots
on that sort of thing.
And I assume any sort of bulk
processing features would
include an API so that you could
easily do the bulk processing.
>> David Brunton: Thank
you for that, Susan.
Before we move on to
the next question,
I would like to invite
KanKan Yu back to the stage
to talk specifically
about some of the features
to reduce correspondence, and
sort of what features those are.
And I will note that there's
been a discussion inside the
Library about some of these
key performance indicators
for systems.
And a key performance indicator
for sort of a social system,
you might think of the amount
of time that somebody spends
on the system as
being an indicator
that things are going very well.
But I would say, as
Susan alluded to,
if people are spending a lot of
time, or a lot of extra time,
to do a registration or a
recordation, that's a sign
that things are going poorly.
And, so, the goal
with these tools
to reduce correspondence isn't
to limit people's ability
to correspond, but to reduce
the need for correspondence.
So, KanKan, do you want to talk
briefly about what a couple
of those features are?
>> KanKan Yu: Yeah, absolutely.
And, so, when we first
started looking at how
to translate the paper
process to the online system,
we didn't just want to
take what was in paper
and just throw it online.
We wanted to be able
to have that -- have --
be able to take features
and minimize processing
time in areas that we can.
And, again, as David mentioned,
it's not to say that we want
to remove or eliminate
correspondence all together.
It's just [inaudible] what
are some of the areas --
the bottlenecks that we
see in our processing time,
and let's try to find
solutions and technology
to alleviate those areas.
So, one of the things that
we looked at was we get a lot
of inquiries about status.
So, earlier I mentioned, we
have tracking of the status
of where your service
request is at.
That alone took care
of a majority
of our status inquiries.
We had people asking, you know,
"Did you receive
our Service Request?
Where is it?
Has someone looked at it?"
The correspondence itself, did
we contact the right person?
Sometimes we can wait up to 45
days before we close out an SR.
But did it even go
to the right person?
So, we wanted to make sure we
had some good contact management
features in there, making sure
that if people moved or changed
that you would be able to
update your contact information,
and it would translate over to
the reviewer or the examiner.
Those are some tied
savings that we have there.
Because if we're reaching
out to the wrong
person, we wait 45 days.
Where if we had the
right information,
we might not have
to wait as long.
We have the Centralized
Messaging System.
Sometimes we're finding out
that when we were sending
out correspondence,
it was getting caught
in junk mail, spam folders.
It might have been
blocked by incoming --
their incoming network -- or
our users' incoming network.
So, again, you know, a
lot of wait time is there.
And we're trying
to minimize that.
So, we implemented the
Centralized Messaging Center.
Also, data validation.
Sometimes, in the paper
world, you send something in,
and you won't know if
something is not correct,
or something might cause a
hiccup in the review process
until someone's looking at it.
Which might be months or weeks.
So, we wanted to implement
features that would be able
to catch some of
the common mistakes
or common errors
right off the bat,
so that as you're submitting
things, we can really find ways
to streamline the
processing time
that it takes from
cradle to grave.
Sorry about that.
Now, that study didn't
end back then.
So, while we're in
the pilot system,
we're still keeping
an eye on those.
We talk to our remitters
on a monthly basis.
We're constantly trying
to figure out, you know,
how is it working,
is there other areas
that we can improve
on, streamline on.
And these are the features
that we continuously try
to bring back into our
development process,
and try to streamline and tweak,
and make that processing
time more efficient.
Hopefully, I answered
that question.
Did I miss any parts of it?
>> Susan Chertkof:
No, that was good.
Thank you, thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
>> KanKan Yu: No problem.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Susan.
And thank you, KanKan.
Before we kick it over to you,
Keith, we did have one question
from a member of the public
that actually is on a topic
that we've considered out
of scope for this meeting
about the Copyright
Claims Board.
But I am -- I'm pasting a link
into the chat that will go
to all participants, including
those in the audience,
to specifically -- you'll note
that this is the
Copyright Claims Board.
And that there is a link from
the Copyright Claims Board
to the open rulemakings.
And the open rulemaking, this
is that area where members
of the public can
register their opinions
about how registration
should happen,
or how the system should
work, or what the --
what the sort of thing should
look like when we're done.
And, so, I wanted to answer
that question real briefly,
so that people could get to
that information quickly.
So, Keith, over to you now.
>> Keith Kupferschmid:
All right.
Well, thank you very much.
And, so, I had a
follow-up to some
of my other questions earlier.
So, in preparation for this
meeting, I went to look in terms
of what updates, what
documentation is out there
since the last meeting.
So, for instance, I went
to the Copyright Office's
Modernization web page
for an update.
And I really didn't
see very much there.
And I didn't see any really --
any written materials or reports
that had come out
in the interim.
And perhaps I'm missing
something.
So, my question to the -- to
the -- to the group here is,
"Within the last
six to eight months
or so what updates
have occurred?
Or is there some
document that we can go
to to stay -- to
stay up to date?"
And along those lines, I
noticed on the website,
it talks about the percentage
of recordations being submitted
to the office using this
new recordation pilot
application program.
And if the goal in fall of
2021 was to have 20 percent
of those recordations filed
through the pilot program,
I have no idea whether
that goal was met or not,
or what future goals are for
that in 2022, or when you roll
out the one that's made
available to the entire public.
And I ask simply because if
you're not meeting your goals,
we can try to help.
Right? We have a very
large membership.
We can reach out to those
members and say, "Hey, look,
there's this recordation
pilot program going on,
and they need more
photographers,
or they need more, you know,
people recording
things more generally,"
and try to drive
those numbers for you,
if in fact you're
looking for something.
And then my second question
somewhat related is --
and I think I know the
answer to this based
on what KanKan just
said, which is,
both for the Recordation System
and the Public Record System,
that's a dynamic process.
So, it seems like they're adding
new features as it goes along.
Because I had tested out both
of those earlier, like I said,
six months ago, eight months
ago, whatever it has been.
And I had sent some comments in.
But if things are changing,
I should probably go
back and test them again.
And maybe others might
want to do that, too.
So, sort of a two-part question.
>> David Brunton: So, Keith,
just to clarify, when you talk
about the like new
features and functionality
that they're working
on, are you --
you're suggesting something
like sort of release notes,
or that sort of thing?
Is that kind of the level
that you're looking at?
>> Keith Kupferschmid: Yeah.
Well, actually, I'm
just answer -- asking --
I think you're asking
about my second question.
And if I'm wrong,
let me [inaudible] --
>> David Brunton: Sorry.
Really, the first question.
But, yeah, [inaudible] --
>> Keith Kupferschmid:
Just like what --
you know, you set certain goals
and milestones for yourself.
Are you meeting those
milestones?
Yes, no. If not, why?
Why not? You know,
that type of thing.
Because, like I said, we have a
very big group here in the CPMC,
plus the public, who I'm
sure would be willing to help
if that's possible, so.
So,
>> David Brunton: Great.
So, we'll start with that
second question first then,
and kick it over to you KanKan
for just a brief description
of sort of who is using the
recordation pilot, and how much.
KanKan, you're still on mute.
If --
>> KanKan Yu: Okay.
Hey, can you hear me now?
>> David Brunton: There we go.
>> KanKan Yu: All right.
So, right now we -- so, in terms
of the 20 percent mile maker,
we have met the 20 percent.
And we are constantly
looking for new people.
I believe our next engagement
marker was 40 percent
of the submissions there.
And we are -- and
right now, it's --
we are asking folks to
participate in the pilot.
So, any kind of messaging
you would like to help us get
out there, that would
be fantastic.
The pilot system is
completely optional.
So, when we do invite
folks, they have the option
to choose paper or
use the online system.
We are using our
current eCO contact list
and some internal contact
lists that we have built out.
But if there are more folks
that would be interested
in using the recordation
pilot, please let us know.
We would be happy to extend
an invite over to them.
>> David Brunton: Okay.
And then the first part
of your question, Keith,
if I understood it
correctly, was about --
a question that's
more specifically
about sort of what's been done.
Like it's kind of the list
of features and functionality
that have been worked on?
>> Keith Kupferschmid: Yeah,
well, that's part of it.
But, also, milestones.
Like, for instance,
I go to the website,
and KanKan just mentioned,
the next milestone is 40
percent, that's not up there.
It'd be nice to know, like
with a little check next
to 20 percent, okay, we
reached that milestone,
the next milestone is 40 percent
we want in let's say the spring
of 2022, or something.
Something like that would
be good to just get an idea
of the progress of the
different programs.
>> David Brunton:
That's great feedback.
Thank you.
And I think there
are a couple of --
you know, there are a
couple of ways, obviously,
that people have kept pace
with the recordation
pilot specifically.
And I know that there is
some information that sort
of gets sent out to
pilot participants.
But, also, it's great to sort
of hear the feedback that sort
of a more central location
would be desirable to you.
We have -- I'm just
looking around.
We've got a couple of members
that we have not heard from.
And I want to just ask
if there are any sort
of remaining questions or
comments or considerations,
or if anyone wants to chime
in with a second round.
We're nearing the end of our --
we're nearing the end
of our allotted time.
And we have about
15 minutes left.
Pamela, go ahead.
>> Pamela Malpas: Hi.
I'm Pamela Malpas.
I'm with the Association of
American Literary Agents,
and the head of the
Copyright Committee
within that organization.
So, I'm speaking on behalf
of authors and their agents.
And, first of all, just thank
you for the opportunity to hear
about what you're doing, to have
a conversation about it, to,
you know, exchange ideas.
And this whole process
is wonderful.
It's great to be able
to be a part of it.
I think it was Judith
Conklin made a remark
about copyright data being
considered a high-value asset.
And I would say, speaking
from my community or my part
of the view of all
of this, it is --
yeah, it is the reason for being
for how authors make
their living,
how agents make their
living, how photographers
and many other people do.
So, the value of that
copyright is foremost
in my view of this whole thing.
And I guess, as a broad
question, I'd be curious
to know how the needs
of copyright protection
inform the process
of what you're building.
I think, you know, from my
agents' Association Copyright
Committee, our view is
what we are trying to do is
to enable authors to
understand and secure
and to protect their copyright.
And, obviously, the
registration of --
for copyright is the
first part of that.
But there are many
steps beyond that.
And I'm sort of curious about
what part in the discussion
and the building of the
architecture that has played
for copyright renewals,
that those documents would
list those family members.
And, sometimes, I think --
I think that the expectation
of privacy that existed in the
days when all of this was done
on paper was one thing.
And the expectation of privacy
now may be somewhat different.
But I think there are people
to whom it would be a
great surprise to realize
that they have been sort of,
you know, outed as the child
of author x. So, I'm a
little curious about how
that has been built into
discussion, or what kind
of feedback you've had.
And just to second a remark
that I think it was Keith made,
it might have been made a couple
of times, about mobile access.
I think one of the things
that we've all found
in the last couple of years in
the migration to work from home,
is, first of all, from
most authors' perspectives,
the interaction with the
Copyright Office is very much
done from home computer.
You know, now pretty much all
of us are home computer
users most of the time.
Right? So, you know, anybody
who had to migrate to work
from home, whatever their
environment, is now operating
in more of a handheld
device situation.
And, so, that kind of mobile
access to check on your --
the status of your copyright
registration, and so on,
is I think more important
to all of us.
And I'm just curious.
I'm not sure that there was
actually an answer to that.
I think in an earlier meeting,
there was comment that sort
of everything built now
is mobile optimized.
Therefore, it's not -- you
know, that's been dealt with.
But I'd be curious to
hear more about that.
And I think that was all.
Oh, no, I did have
a further comment.
Several people have talked
about name authority and sort
of data normalization tools.
And those are certainly
of interest.
And I'm curious about how
persistent identifiers are being
built into the thought
process of how -- how --
what information
is being recorded
and codified moving forward,
again, in the interest
of copyright protection.
And now I will shut
up and listen.
>> David Brunton: Oh,
thank you so much.
That was just like --
that was so -- we might --
we might make you
go first next time.
So, I will say that I -- the
very first part of your question
about protecting copyright.
Can I just ask, as a point of
clarification when you talk
about that, are you talking
about the legal protections
of copyright?
Or are you talking about
the technical protections
of the copyrighted materials?
Or were you talking about both?
>> Pamela Malpas: Well, I
think I'm talking about both,
in the sense that for
the average person
on the street there isn't
necessarily an understanding
of what the difference between
those two things might be.
So, yeah, this is kind of
-- I'm taking an easy out.
I'd say both.
>> David Brunton: Great.
So, I'm going to jump with
that to the second question
to talk a little bit about
the historical records.
And something that I think
it may be that the audience,
and possibly the members,
have not understood.
Which does not necessarily --
you know, it doesn't obviate
the need to treat this with sort
of tremendous security.
But the historical records were,
previously to being scanned,
a matter of public record.
And a person could come to the
Library of Congress and sort
of get those addresses
previously.
I will say that we are aware
of circumstances where,
to our surprise, we had to
scrub personally identifiable
information from -- that
was just scribbled --
you know, somebody scribbled
on a registration their social
security number or something,
you know, a bank account
number or something like that.
But I will remind the audience,
as well as the members,
that there is a process
for having data removed
from the public record
part of what we do as well.
Judith Conklin has
come back on camera.
And I appreciate that, Judith.
You must have read my mind
knowing that I was going
to kick the protection
of data question
over to you and Jim Karamanis.
>> Jim Karamanis: Hi.
So, I'm Jim Karamanis.
I'm the Director of IT Design
and Development for the Library.
David, can you hear me clearly?
>> David Brunton: Sure can.
You're coming through
loud and --
>> Jim Karamanis: Okay.
>> David Brunton: Clear, Jim.
you hear, Jim?
>> Jim Karamanis:
Great, thank you, David.
So, let me talk a little
bit about security.
Security and accessibility,
and things like that,
all have to be inherently baked
into the software
development process.
So, maybe 20 years ago, all
that stuff was retrofitted.
And we always had
problems in the past.
Right? But, in modern
software development,
our security team is
part of the daily scrum.
They work side by side
with the system architects.
They're constantly
scanning our code base.
So, security is 100
percent integrated
into how we do software
development on a daily basis.
We take that very,
very seriously.
At the Library, we're
responsible
for many large public-facing
systems.
So, this is something that we
have a lot of expertise in.
Also, touching on
the mobile question,
which I think is a very good
one, what we find that with most
of the libraries public-facing
websites, we're seeing
up to 40 percent now
of users are coming
to us via mobile devices.
And if you go back and
you look at that -- let --
that page on loc.gov, the
collections application,
for instance, if you bring
it up on a mobile device,
you'll see that it works great
whether you're on an iPad
or you're on an iPhone.
And that's how we design all
of our public-facing
web applications.
So, I don't see this being any
different for Copyright ECS.
We expect that -- you
know, we're at a point
where we're turning the tide.
And we're probably going
to see more people accessing
our websites via mobile than PC.
So, absolutely, that's baked
into the software
development process as well.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Jim.
And I saw the chatter
from the group talking
about responsive design
of the applications.
Can you talk a little bit about
just what is responsive design?
>> Jim Karamanis: Yeah, sure.
So, yeah, that's a
really good point.
So, responsive is just sort
of tactic jargon for saying
that a webpage can
resize no matter what sort
of device you're using.
So, if you're using a
giant television screen
as your monitor, or you're
using a tiny little phone like I
like to use, because
I'm very old school,
and I like this small thing
that fits in my pocket,
it works the same
way no matter what.
Now, the way the site works
and interacts may
change a little bit,
because the way you interact
with a page, you know,
you're using your mouse
on a really large screen,
versus the touches you may do on
a very small screen, may change.
But the website itself will
automatically, on the fly,
adjust to the device
you're using,
and give you the
best user experience
for the device that
you're using.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Jim.
That's really helpful.
So, the next part of
Pamela's question was sort
of another multi-part question
about name authorities
and identifiers.
Which have been a little bit
of a theme during the
conversation today,
both in the panelists' chat --
there have been several people
who mentioned identifiers.
And before we --
we're -- we're --
we're nearing the end of our
time for today's session.
But before we near the end
of our time, I'd like to,
just very quickly, if any
panelist wants to sort
of mention specific identifiers
that they would think would be
useful for the Copyright Office
to look at, as we're going
through the process both
for unique identifiers for
names, as well as for any others
that you think we should use.
And if you've got one, feel free
to bring yourself off of mute,
and just blurt it right out.
>> Unidentified Speaker: URLs.
>> Todd Carpenter: If anyone at
the Library of Congress wants
to talk about persistent
identifiers, I am happy to have
as long a conversation
with anyone at the team
about every identifier
that exists in the world,
and what's involved with them.
>> David Brunton:
Thank you, Tom.
So, we've got a -- we've got a
vote for all of the identifiers.
We've got a vote for URLs.
I appreciate it.
We are nearing the end of
our time together today.
And I just wanted to take a
moment to thank the members
of the Copyright Public
Modernization Committee.
We have enjoyed the process
of finding our groove
with this kind of a meeting.
There are several
panelists who noted
that the CPMC meeting was
more interactive this time.
That was sort of a thing
that we piloted in the
in between session that we did
that has worked out very well.
But I, also, wanted to
encourage any Copyright Public
Modernization Committee
members who have ideas
about how it could be
even more interactive,
or even more useful, in
addition to the idea that came
through loud and clear of
that people are interested
in more frequent meetings,
would just like to hear
if there are any suggestions
that people have for this kind
of conversations that they've
had in their own organizations
that have been especially
impactful.
I, also, wanted to just say
that we had a couple of members
who were unable to join us
today, including one who is away
on a honeymoon, but we expect
to have a full [inaudible]
in the August meeting.
And we'll be sending out a
"save the date" a little sooner
than we did last time.
And our goal is to -- is for
the sort of prompt questions
and the topics of that meeting
to be announced well in advance,
so that people have a lot
of time to think about it,
and possibly provide
some feedback on it --
provide some feedback on sort of
what the agenda is going to be,
even in between making a
final schedule available
to the public.
And, so, with that, and
without further ado,
I just want to thank
all of the members.
I want to thank the
audience who participated
with their listening and
questions today as well.
And to look forward to seeing
you all again quite soon.
And maybe next time
it'll be in person.
>> Unidentified Speaker:
Thanks, David.
>> Unidentified Speaker:
Thank you.
Bye-bye.
>> Unidentified Speaker:
Thank you.