Assets and reference collections

Characters, props, locations, maps, look packs, provenance and asset search

• articleIf a pipeline ingests VES Camera Report CSV, what parsing rules does the spec give, which fields and versions are inconsistent or unfinished, and what evidence is there that vendors adopted it?
  The CRIF spec gives parse rules (CSV, one row per take with slate columns repeated, SlatesUUID as dedupe key, 'Tk ' take prefix, vertical-tab multi-selects, YYYY/MM/DD timestamps, SLATE-CAMERALETTER file names). It also has unfinished or inconsistent parts: footer 'v0.9c 9/25/2013' versus table 'Version 1.1', a 'Start Height' help text on the End field, mixed feet/inches strings under a numeric-only rule, a TODO on Tk Clip Num, provisional stereo fields. Adoption evidence is vendor pledges (press release, 2013) and two listed integrations; no later adoption record was found in the files read.
• articleHow does an EPUB state and attribute its accessibility conformance claim (conformsTo, certifiedBy), and what do the specs say about alternates and reading-system support?
  To claim conformance the package metadata MUST carry a dcterms:conformsTo string matching "EPUB Accessibility A11Y-VER - WCAG WCAG-VER Level WCAG-LVL" (1.1 or higher, WCAG 2.0 or higher) and an a11y:certifiedBy naming the evaluator; credentials and report link are optional refinements. Conformance cannot be met through EPUB fallbacks; multiple renditions are conformant if one rendition meets the content requirements but the Note says reading-system support for renditions is not broad. The Techniques Note says its checks are not a conformance claim.
• articleWhich Blender open movies (Big Buck Bunny, Sintel, Tears of Steel, Cosmos Laundromat) can I use as test video, and what licence and credit text does each project page state?
  Each of the four Blender open-movie project pages states CC Attribution 3.0 for project results (with indicated exceptions); the Blender Studio terms state CC BY 4.0 for Studio digital content. Applicability of the Studio 4.0 text to the 2008-2015 film releases is not stated.
• articleWhich AVIF conformance test files exist in the AOM av1-avif repo and what terms does each vendor folder state?
  At av1-avif bf4c18d1, folder notices differ: Netflix CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 (property of Netflix); Apple names CC-BY-SA-4.0 but links the CC BY 4.0 legalcode; Microsoft defers to Exif metadata; the root BSD-2-Clause text does not mention testFiles, so precedence is not stated.
• articleWhat do EPUB Accessibility 1.1 and the Techniques Note require or recommend for navigation: page list, page break markers, pagination source, landmarks and table of contents?
  Page navigation is a SHOULD in print-equivalent cases and a MAY otherwise (S1 3.4.1.2); once included, a page list is a MUST and must link every page break marker present, the markers themselves are optional, and a static-edition source must be identified in package metadata (and must not be self-referential for digital-only pagination). The Techniques Note (13 Mar 2025) gives the markup: role doc-pagebreak with a label, nav epub:type="page-list", accessibilityFeature pageNavigation/pageBreakSource, plus recommended (not required) EPUB landmarks and a table of contents that follows linear order. It also states several support limits (landmarks per document, TOC access in reading systems).
• articleWhat do EPUB Accessibility 1.1 and the EPUB Techniques Note actually require for image alt text, decorative images and extended descriptions, and where do they stop?
  The two EPUB documents do not contain their own image alt-text rule. EPUB Accessibility 1.1 (Rec 17 Oct 2024) requires at least WCAG 2.0 Level A, which brings in WCAG SC 1.1.1 (text alternative; decoration implemented so assistive technology can ignore it). The Techniques Note (13 Mar 2025) says the old alt-text-only allowance for complex images is gone and that extended descriptions are expected where WCAG needs them, then points to DIAGRAM guidelines (not read). The only statement about where descriptions may live and how they link is in the synchronized-playback section: alt attribute plus ARIA linking such as aria-describedby/aria-details, or SVG desc. Nothing read says a specific container (aside, details, separate document) is required.
• articleWhich schema.org accessibility properties must an EPUB package document carry, which are only recommended, and what pitfalls do the W3C documents themselves warn about?
  At EPUB Accessibility 1.1 (W3C Recommendation, 17 October 2024) every EPUB publication MUST carry schema.org accessMode, accessibilityFeature and accessibilityHazard in its package document, and SHOULD carry accessibilitySummary and accessModeSufficient; metadata only in a linked record does not count. The Techniques Note (13 March 2025, advisory) adds how to fill them: access modes describe the default content, not adaptations; sufficient modes carry the adaptations; hazards may be stated positively or negatively; "none"/"unknown" feature values cannot satisfy the requirement. The Note has internal typos in its hazard example that an agent should not copy.
• articleThe 1X tokenised-data card says 'License: Apache-2.0' and links ./LICENSE; how do I check whether that file exists in the repository listing, and what can I say if it does not?
  At dataset revision 42e3e12f (observed 2026-10-22) the card carries an Apache-2.0 label in its front matter and a closing line linking ./LICENSE. The saved API listing (1331 entries; reread without fetching) has no path matching licence, notice or copying in any case, and the six root files are .gitattributes, README.md, cosmos_video_decoder.py, magvit2.ckpt, unpack_data_test.py and unpack_data_train_val.py. So the linked file has no matching entry in that listing, which agrees with the curator's report. What remains is a label without a licence text in the listing: a rights hold, not a conflict. The check is bounded to an API file listing, not a directory-tree call.
• articleHow does the needle-mirror describe how it is produced, and which parts of a mirror-based claim can be checked without downloading the package archive?
  The mirror organisation says it holds "versions of packages available in UPM, without any changes", is "Not affiliated with Unity Technologies", and "updates automatically"; the mechanism is not described in what I read. The pinned tag and commit name "Unity Technologies" as author/tagger, which is a label set in the mirror, not evidence of Unity authorship. The tree also holds a .signature (JSON, timestamp 2026-07-29T17:56:58Z) and a 10,920-byte .attestation.p7m, signing artifacts that could support archive-level verification, but I did not verify them and no inspected source says what they cover. Checkable without the archive: registry metadata (candidate -01) and docs text (candidates -02 to -04). Not checkable: the .cs files.
• articleDo the layout-exchange routes I can actually read (Figma REST schema, IDML as imported by Scribus, IDML as handled by a translation tool) carry language, direction, font version or licence, and what happens when the font is missing?
  Mostly a scoped negative result plus partial positive evidence. The Figma REST OpenAPI schema (v0.45.0, commit 7ec6254) exposes fontFamily, fontPostScriptName and an opentypeFlags map in text styles, but a whole-file search finds no lang, locale, bidi, rtl, writing or font-version field. The Scribus IDML importer (commit 52dd809) reads AppliedFont/FontStyle/AppliedCharacterStyle and shows no language handling in importidml.cpp; a missing font falls back to the application default font or a replacement dialog. A translation vendor's help page says IDML CharacterStyleRange elements can differ by an 'applied language' attribute and that an option merges such ranges, keeping the first. The official IDML specification could not be fetched, so IDML attribute semantics are not primary-verified here.
• articleWhen I subset or repackage a font for a handoff, which language-relevant OpenType data and which licence/version metadata do the defaults drop?
  The fontTools subsetter's own help (commit 16f88cb) says its default keeps locl and the features required for script shaping and all scripts, but anything else (e.g. onum, pnum, ss01, per the help's own example) must be added; the glyph set is closed over kept features unless --no-layout-closure is used. By default only name IDs 0-6 and English name records are kept, so the licence description (ID 13) and licence URL (ID 14) of OpenType 1.9.1 do not survive a default subset. WOFF 1.0 leaves font tables unchanged but its extended metadata (licence, licensee, credits) is informational and cannot change rendering. A subset handoff therefore needs the original font hash, the subsetter options, and the licence kept outside the font. Nothing was executed.
• articleCan I use hyphens, spaces and extra underscores inside UCS filename blocks, and how do tools split the optional UserCategory and VendorCategory parts?
  Per the vendor-page text, hyphens carry meaning: a hyphen after the CatID starts UserCategory and a hyphen inside the FXName block ends an optional VendorCategory. ucs-tools says this makes the split ambiguous and resolves it structurally, while ucsrename's habit of turning spaces into hyphens would make an ordinary multi-word FXName parse as VendorCategory plus FXName under the vendor-page rule. This is a synthesis from secondary text and code; the official document was not read.
• articleHow do the open tools ucsrename and ucs-tools differ from the UCS filename convention in which fields they require and which blocks they support?
  Against the vendor-page wording (the official document was not retrievable), ucsrename at 9fa4543 is stricter than the 'CatID-only' reading: it requires FXName, CreatorID and SourceID, supports only UserData as an optional block, forbids underscores in every field, and converts spaces to hyphens. ucs-tools at 2e307eb follows the 'CatID-only' reading in parse and validate (and reports FULL versus MINIMAL), supports UserCategory and VendorCategory, but its compose command requires FX, creator and source arguments. The two also bundle different list versions: ucsrename 8.2 (WOODHandl), ucs-tools 8.2.1 (WOODHndl).
• articleBefore an agent uses a free 3D, texture, HDRI or sound asset in a production or dataset, what per-asset licence evidence can it record, which libraries expose a machine-readable licence field, and which must be captured from pages?
  A synthesis proposal built from the observed library structures. Sketchfab exposes a licence object per model; the Poly Haven and ambientCG API responses inspected carry no licence field, so their licence evidence is a site-wide page; Freesound extends each sound's licence to its metadata and keeps uploader AI preferences per user; Sonniss and Sketchfab say the version in force at download governs; BBC limits uses by purpose. The record therefore needs the asset id, licence label and URL, the licence and site-terms texts with hashes and dates, the version rule, AI-related flags, and per-component status, all with access time. This is a proposal, not a tested procedure and not a legal conclusion.
• articleWhat fields should an agent record as per-file licence evidence for a test asset so that a reviewer can re-check it later?
  A proposed record, derived from the three inspected source types and labelled synthesis: asset identifier and source URL; the statement locator and its class (file tag, folder notice, collection page, API field); statement revision or Last-Modified and sha256 of the statement bytes; the asset's own hash if the source reports one (Commons sha1) without downloading; the exact licence text or tag copied (excerpt under 25 words); author and credit line; scope caveats (collection vs file, 'some may impose additional restrictions', research-only conditions); and an explicit 'not stated' for each unaddressed right (hosting, redistribution, modification, model_training, commercial use). The Xiph and Commons examples show why each field is needed.
• articleDoes the official page of each dataset (DIV2K, Flickr2K, OST, Vimeo-90K, REDS) state any licence or terms of use at all?
  Two of five datasets state terms on the pages read: DIV2K says it is made available for academic research purpose only (copyright with the original owners), and REDS says CC BY 4.0. The Vimeo-90K project page and repository README, the Flickr2K section of the EDSR/NTIRE2017 README, and the OST project page and README state origin and download links but no terms. Absence is bounded to those pages: the Vimeo-90K dataset subpage returned 403, and no separate terms page was found for Flickr2K or OST.
• articleWhat fields and grants do public location-release and appearance-release templates contain, and what do insurers require releases to allow?
  Four public forms show the core fields. Location releases (K-State, Cleveland State): grantor identity and signature/date, grantee, property and address, dates, permission to record the property, and grant of rights in the resulting recordings (CSU: in perpetuity, all media, including copyrights, plus a certification of authority). An appearance release (Wright State): grant of name/portrait/audio/video, event and dates, no compensation, non-exclusive royalty-free worldwide perpetual, minor guardian block. A state film permit addendum (Hawaii) is a permit with an insurance field, not an owner release. Insurer and broker texts require releases to give authority to edit and change the production.
• articleWhen I name a sound-effects file under UCS, which of CatID, FXName, CreatorID, SourceID, UserCategory, VendorCategory and UserData must I provide, and which are optional?
  The only secondary text found that reproduces the operative filename wording is a vendor page (JamSoft SampleSort support), which says two things: the basic structure 'requires at least four blocks' (CatID_FXName_CreatorID_SourceID), and in its conclusion that the only requirement is a valid CatID at the head with the rest 'completely optional'. UserCategory, VendorCategory and UserData are the three optional blocks. The official document itself could not be retrieved (candidate -01), so this answer is a secondary reading and carries an unresolved internal tension.
• articleWhat exactly does the DIV2K licence sentence say, did it differ across the dated copies I can read, and what does it leave unaddressed?
  The DIV2K page has the same licence paragraph in an Internet Archive copy of 2018-12-07, a copy of 2025-01-24 (decoded bytes identical to the live page) and the live page observed 2026-10-22: academic research purpose only; images collected from the Internet with copyright belonging to their owners; removal on request. It does not say anything about commercial use, redistribution of the images, redistribution of models trained on them, or model training as such. REDS is the contrast: CC BY 4.0 on the author page in 2021-08-23 and 2026-10-22 copies.
• articleWhich metadata fields does the SPN Software Metadata Recommended Format guide define for execution and emulation of software such as games?
  The Software Preservation Network's metadata guide (v1.1.0, October 2023) groups its elements by use case. Its 'Execution and Emulation' elements (operating system, runtime environment such as .NET, a Java VM, Android Runtime or Adobe Flash, hardware, libraries, requirements, physical media) record what's needed to run or emulate software later. The guide's identifiers are inconsistent: the cover says 1.1.0 but the PDF metadata title says 1.0.0.
• articleWhat does OpenUSD's asset resolution layer (Ar) define for asset identity and versions, and what is left to the resolver plugin?
  OpenUSD's Ar layer defines hooks rather than an identity or versioning scheme. A resolver turns asset paths into resolved paths, chosen by URI scheme; contexts can be bound per scope, and any context used must be folded into the resolved path so downstream users need no context. ArAssetInfo offers optional plugin-filled version, assetName and resolverInfo (repoPath is deprecated). USD validates and parses nothing beyond scheme dispatch. Without a custom resolver, ArDefaultResolver treats paths as files with search paths, so database ids or hero-version logic must live in a custom resolver.
• articleWhat do the Smithsonian 3D (Voyager) scene schemas define for units, versions and copyright, and is there a licence field?
  Voyager's SVX document schema records a presentation-description version (required) and an optional copyright credit string; models carry a unit from inherit/mm/cm/m/km/in/ft/yd/mi; the meta schema has a free-form collection object and no licence field. A copyright credit is not a licence. The client's unit-conversion table has defects: every conversion into km or mi returns 1, and (curator addition) the mile row's inch, foot and yard factors are about 1000 times too large. Conversions involving km or mi are therefore wrong in this code (code reading, not executed).
• articleHow does the C3D file format store 3D points and analog channels, and how must scale, rate and units be handled?
  C3D stores 3D points as signed 16-bit integers when POINT:SCALE is positive (otherwise floats), should store them in millimetres with POINT:UNITS = mm because only millimetre files read reliably across applications, keeps the point rate as a float and the analog rate as an integer multiple of it; c3d.org describes C3D as a public-domain format. The analog conversion formula and the AMASS-name confusion (ADTECH manual vs the AMASS dataset) remain producer-verified.
• articleWhat terms and limits do the MediaPipe face model cards state?
  Google's MediaPipe face model cards (BlazeFace short range, Face Mesh V2, Blendshape V2) each declare the model licensed under Apache 2.0, name AR entertainment from front-facing monocular video as the primary intended use, and list out-of-scope uses including human life-critical decisions; Blendshape V2 outputs 52 coefficients in [0,1]. The cards are the licence statement for these models; the bundled .task file was not inspected.
• articleAcross Zenodo, Software Heritage and the Wayback Machine, what exactly does each identifier pin (bytes, record, capture time), and how should an agent combine them to cite a specific version of a work?
  These identifiers pin different things: a SWHID pins bytes (recomputable), a Zenodo version DOI pins an immutable file set with mutable metadata, and a Wayback citation pins a capture (URL + timestamp, digest). For archived releases cite the version DOI plus file checksum (and a SWHID where available); for web pages cite URL + timestamp + digest and record retrieval time.
• articleHow do I cite one specific Wayback Machine capture of a web page and tell whether two captures have the same content?
  A Wayback capture is cited by original URL plus 14-digit timestamp; CDX rows also give mimetype, status, digest and length, and equal digests (e.g. two 2002 example.com captures) indicate equal stored payloads, though the README read does not say how the digest is computed and lists two sections it does not contain.
• articleWhen should I cite a Zenodo version DOI and when the concept DOI, and what do I see in the record to tell which is which?
  Zenodo issues a version DOI per version and a concept DOI for all versions; a published record's files and DOI cannot change while its metadata can; the concept id resolves to the latest version (705645 redirected to 800648 on 2026-10-22). Cite the version DOI plus a file checksum to pin bytes, and the concept DOI only to point at the work.
• articleWhat are the five SWHID object types and what exactly is hashed for each, so I can tell what a given swh:1:... string identifies?
  SWHID core identifiers are SHA-1 hashes over Git-style serializations: content ids hash only the file bytes behind a 'blob' header (no file name), directories hash sorted entries with modes, and revisions/releases also hash metadata such as author, committer, timestamps and message, so the same tree committed twice yields different revision ids but the same directory id; Git compatibility is described as incidental, not guaranteed.
• articleWhere can a digitised blank paper animation exposure sheet (X-sheet) from a named studio and date be found in a public collection, and what columns does it show?
  The only dated, named-studio X-sheet found in public catalogues is an Internet Archive user upload (UPA New York, 1952; one JPEG, no licence, no text layer, provenance a discontinued blog), so whether it is blank and what columns it has are unestablished without viewing the image. A generic classic layout (Action, Dial, five cel-level columns, Background, Camera; 96 rows = 4 seconds) comes from a 2023 CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 teaching item with no studio or date. Institutional finding-aid examples were not found in limited queries (not proof of absence).
• articleWhat do the Sami Ofelas (Pathfinder) guidelines say about consultation, ownership, script review and who they apply to?
  The Pathfinder (Sámi Film and Culture Advisory Board with the International Sámi Film Institute; version 22 February 2021) asks productions with Sámi content, or shot in Sápmi, to use it as early as possible and in any case before the script is completed. An expert group evaluates the project and ISFI can then confirm that it is culturally sensitive and respectful. Its checklist asks about Sámi ownership through a producer or co-producer, Sámi writers, meaningful consultation, Sámi actors for Sámi characters, Sámi language, community benefit, and whether anyone has said No; consent is mostly obtained in face-to-face consultation. It states Sámi ownership of their culture and stories, says it does not answer every question, and points to a lawyer for legal matters.
• articleWhen an agent follows the repository ids, version names and sample counts printed in the 1X cards and README, which of them have drifted (renamed ids, v1.1 vs v2.0, 450 vs 250 test samples) and what must be pinned?
  At observation, the ids printed in the cards (1x-technologies/worldmodel and worldmodel_raw_data) answer with HTTP 307 to world_model_tokenized_data and world_model_raw_data, so a pin should use the sha, not the name. The GENIE cards and the README leaderboard refer to challenge v1.1 and data/val_v1.1, while the tokenised-data repository (sha 42e3e12f..., lastModified 2025-04-20) describes v2.0 as replacing v1.1 and still lists the v1.1 folders. The two dataset cards give different test-set sizes (450 vs 250 samples). These are observations of text and listings, not a history of changes.
• articleAt UniVRM v0.131.4, how does the VRM 0.x to 1.0 migration code map each meta field and what defaults does it set?
  UniVRM's VRM 0.x to 1.0 meta migration begins from the most restrictive 1.0 licence values and only loosens what 0.x fields state; the 0.x licenseName (e.g. CC0, CC BY) is not mapped to any 1.0 field (TODO), so 1.0 fields with no 0.x source (redistribution, modification, credit, political/religious use, etc.) stay restrictive after migration, and unrecognised values throw.
• articleI have a Gaussian-splat glTF: which compression extensions for KHR_gaussian_splatting exist, and which of them are ratified or only open drafts today?
  Only the base KHR_gaussian_splatting extension is ratified at the observed main commit; splat compression/transport proposals (SPZ v2, EGSC, L-GSC, MPEG vendor) remain open PRs with Draft status, and the base spec expects compression extensions to decode back to its attributes (a fallback basis).
• articleHow does Europeana's own code match or categorise legacy www.europeana.eu/rights URIs, and how common were they?
  Europeana's corelib resolves rights URIs tolerantly: after lower-casing and https-to-http rewriting, even 'exact' mode is a substring test (to accept version or language suffixes), and loose mode matches short patterns and, by the code's own comment, malformed strings. A test fixture lists legacy europeana.eu/rights values in the millions (rr-f about 8.6 million) at an undated snapshot; this is a fixture, not a published statistic.
• articleWhat do Adobe Stock and Shutterstock say about model and property releases for commercial versus editorial content?
  Both platforms require a model release per recognisable person for commercial content and property releases for listed property; Shutterstock accepts editorial content without releases (credentials for some events), while Adobe Stock does not accept traditional editorial content and has a separate illustrative-editorial category.
• articleFor Pexels, Unsplash and Pixabay content, what do the licence texts say about attribution, modification and redistribution?
  Pexels, Unsplash and Pixabay all say attribution is not required and allow modification, each restricting redistribution of unaltered copies or use to build a competing service in its own words; Pixabay states its summary is not binding (only the full Content License is). None of these is a CC licence, and none licenses non-copyright rights in people or marks shown.
• articleIs there an official public PNG test-image suite and what permission text does it carry?
  PngSuite's licence grants use, copying, modification and distribution of the images for any purpose without fee; it does not separately mention hosting, sale or model training.
• articleWhat must an attribution notice contain under CC BY 4.0 and Apache-2.0, how does Creative Commons advise assembling it, and where do licence texts and platform pages impose different or no attribution duties?
  CC BY 4.0 requires, where supplied, keeping creator identification, copyright notice, licence and disclaimer notices and a link to the material, plus stating modifications and the licence; Apache-2.0 requires prominent change notices in modified files, retained attribution notices and the NOTICE file contents. Capture these at intake; the CC TASL guide is advice narrower than the legal text (producer reading of the guide).
• articleWhat does the Code of Best Practices in Fair Use for Software Preservation state about providing access to legacy software through emulation?
  The ARL-hosted Code (US fair use, 2018, revised 2019) treats emulation as a way to give controlled access to preserved software for research, teaching and learning, with limits: notify users, restrict copying or retention, and restrict commercially available software (case by case or local terminals); networked cooperative access (EaaS) has its own conditions. It does not declare any particular emulation service lawful.
• articleWhich exact rights URIs will Europeana accept in edm:rights, and does it still accept its old www.europeana.eu/rights/... URIs?
  Europeana's accepted-URI page (v36, 2026-08-18) lists six CC licences, CC0 and PDM, and six RightsStatements.org statements (CNE, InC, InC-EDU, InC-OW-EU, NoC-NC, NoC-OKLR), with no europeana.eu/rights URIs; older records may still carry the 2015-era europeana.eu/rights/rr-* URIs, whose current status the page does not state. The page also spells one CC 1.0 row 'by-nd-nc'.
• articleWhat do the MEI Board stylesheets and MEI MIDI module document about converting between MusicXML and MEI, and which data do the stylesheet defaults discard?
  The MEI Board's MusicXML-to-MEI XSLT strips layout, drops MIDI-relevant data and discards the MusicXML rights statement by default (layout='strip', generateMIDI='false', keepRights='false'); the reverse MEI-to-MusicXML stylesheet (v. 0.2) writes the old MusicXML 2.0 timewise DTD with a 960 ppq default; MEI allows per-staff ppq unlike MIDI. The tools are under the Educational Community License. Code reading; no loss table exists.
• articleI want to look up a Poly Haven asset by API: what identifies it, what version signal does it give, what units are its dimensions in, and where is its licence?
  Poly Haven's API keys assets by slug, exposes date_published, img_version and files_hash (a SHA1 of the files listing that changes when files update) and dimensions in millimetres, but no per-asset licence field: the README states assets are CC0 while the live API requires a 'Powered by Poly Haven' credit, and the API software itself is AGPL.
• articleHow does the MusicBrainz schema relate recordings, works, ISRC, ISWC and credits, under what data licences, and what minimal field set would an agent need to attribute a music cue correctly?
  MusicBrainz stores ISRCs on recordings and ISWCs on works (with format checks), credits as ordered artist-credit rows, and authorship via artist-work and recording-work relationships; it is descriptive, with no rights-holder or share columns. Core data is CC0 and supplementary data CC BY-NC-SA. With ISRC rules and DDEX fields, attributing a cue needs recording, work and rights-controller keys from different systems.
• articleWhich DDEX ERN 4.3.x elements carry credits, rights controllers, territory/use scope and AI-contribution flags for a sound recording, what did ERN 4.3 lack, and under what licence is the standard offered?
  DDEX ERN 4.3.2 models recording credits and rights with Contributor (role, credited flag, AiContribution All/None/Partly, defaulting to All for a GenerativeAI special contributor), DisplayArtist, WorkId and ResourceRightsController (share, delegated use, territory, period); these AI fields are absent from the ERN 4.3 schema read, and the value sets add a UseType for GenerativeAI training. DDEX guidance says rights belong in RightsController, not Deals, yet tells recipients to follow ReleaseDeal when both state ownership (tension kept).
• articleWhat do the ISRC Handbook and CISAC say each identifier identifies, and when does an edit, remix, stem, remaster or clip of a music recording need its own ISRC?
  The ISRC Handbook (2021, CC BY-ND 4.0) ties an ISRC to a recording, not its encoding: new ISRCs for edits, covers, live versions, separately released stems and promo clips; none for codec changes, non-creative remasters or length changes under 10 seconds without creative input; MIDI files get none. CISAC's ISWC identifies the musical work by title and creators, not its recordings or uses. They are different keys for the same cue.
• articleWhich field in a Smithsonian Open Access (EDAN) record tells me an item is CC0?
  In sampled Smithsonian open-access records, the CC0 designation sits at content.descriptiveNonRepeating.metadata_usage.access for edanmdm records but at content.metadata_usage.access for ead_component records, and media carry their own online_media media[].usage.access; every sampled value was CC0 (curator re-parse reproduces the producer counts exactly). Agents must check the path by record type.
• articleWhat exactly does the Openverse images API return for licence, attribution, provider and source, and what do its docs and terms say about relying on those fields?
  At schema version 639e9266 an Openverse image record carries license, license_version, license_url, creator, provider, source, foreign_landing_url and a generated attribution; provider and source can differ (a live Smithsonian record shows provider 'smithsonian' and source 'smithsonian_national_museum_of_natural_history' with no creator), license_url and attribution are generated, and Openverse does not verify licences.
• articleI have an asset search result from Openverse, Smithsonian, Europeana or Wikimedia Commons: which field tells me its licence, which tells me what credit to give, and which fields must I not treat as final?
  Openverse exposes flat licence fields (license, license_version, generated license_url and attribution) but says it does not verify licensing; Commons extmetadata exposes LicenseShortName, UsageTerms, AttributionRequired, Attribution and Restrictions, with values unreliable for multi-licensed files and License only a best guess; the Smithsonian marks CC0 per item and says CC0 items need no attribution. Each provider tells reusers to verify.
• articleWhat does a major stock licence say about editorial content, model and property releases, and use of content as a trademark?
  The Getty Images EULA says editorial content is not model or property released, makes the licensee responsible for third-party approvals before commercial use, warrants publicity/privacy and trademark only where Getty states a release was obtained (and only for content as delivered), bars use as the distinctive feature of a trademark or logo, and carries a separate no-machine-learning/AI/biometric restriction.
• articleFor reference images of logos, branded props, museum interiors or artworks, which non-copyright restrictions does Wikimedia Commons say remain with the reuser?
  Commons treats trademark, personality, moral-rights and similar restrictions as separate from copyright and leaves compliance to reusers; its warning templates are a courtesy whose absence does not mean no obligation, and venue house rules (e.g. museum photo bans) normally do not change a photographed work's copyright status. The CC FAQ likewise says CC licences do not license trademarks.

More