A Linked Data Terminology for Copyright Based on Ontolex-Lemon

  • Víctor Rodriguez-DoncelEmail author
  • Cristiana Santos
  • Pompeu Casanovas
  • Asunción Gómez-Pérez
  • Jorge Gracia
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 10791)


Ontolex-lemon is the de facto standard to represent lexica relative to ontologies and it can be used to encode term banks as RDF. A multi-lingual, multi-jurisdictional term bank of copyright-related concepts has been published as linked data based on the ontolex-lemon model. The terminology links information from WIPO (concepts and definitions), IATE (multilingual terms, usage notes) and other sources as Creative Commons (multilingual definitions) or DBpedia (general concepts). The terms have been hierarchically arranged, spanning multiple languages and targeting different jurisdictions. The term bank has been published as a TBX dump file and is publicly accessible as linked data. The term bank has been used to annotate common licenses in the RDFLicense dataset.


Term bank Linked data Copyright Legal localization Multilingualism 



This work is supported by the EU FP7 LIDER project (FP7 – 610782), by DER2012-39492-C02-01 CROWDSOURCING, by Ministerio de Economía y Competitividad (Juan de la Cierva Incorpora) and by the fellowship 520250-1-2011-1-IT-ERASMUNDUS EMJD.


  1. 1.
    ISO 30042:2008. Systems to manage terminology, knowledge and content – TermBase eXchange (2008)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    McCrae, J., et al.: Interchanging lexical resources on the semantic web. Lang. Resour. Eval. 46, 701–719 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Rodriguez-Doncel, V., Villata, S., Gomez-Perez, A.: A dataset of RDF licenses. In: Hoekstra, R. (ed.) Proceedings of the 27th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information System, p. 189 (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Cimiano, P., McCrae, J., Rodriguez-Doncel, V., Gornostay, A., Gomez-Perez, A., Simoneit, B.: Linked terminology: applying linked data principles to terminological resources. In: Kozem, S. et al. (eds.) Proceedings of the 4th Biennial Conference on Electronic Lexicography, pp. 504–517 (2014)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cabrio, E., Palmero Aprosio, A., Villata, S.: These are your rights. In: Presutti, V., d’Amato, C., Gandon, F., d’Aquin, M., Staab, S., Tordai, A. (eds.) ESWC 2014. LNCS, vol. 8465, pp. 255–269. Springer, Cham (2014). Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ajani, G., Boella, G., Lesmo, L., Mazzei, A., Rossi, P.: Terminological and ontological analysis of European directives: multilinguism in law. In: 11th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law (ICAIL), pp. 43–48 (2007)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ajani, G., Boella, G., Martin, M., Mazzei, A., Radicioni D., Rossi, P.: Legal taxonomy syllabus 2.0. In: 3rd Workshop on Legal Ontologies and Artificial Intelligence Techniques Joint with 2nd Workshop on Semantic Processing of Legal Texts (2009)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nakamura, M., Ogawa, Y., Toyama, K.: Extraction of legal definitions and their explanations with accessible citations. In: Casanovas, P., Pagallo, U., Palmirani, M., Sartor, G. (eds.) AICOL -2013. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 8929, pp. 157–171. Springer, Heidelberg (2014). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lesmo, L., Boella, G., Mazzei, A.: Multilingual conceptual dictionaries based on ontologies: analytical tools and case studies. In: Proceedings of V Legislative XML Workshop, pp. 1–14 (2006)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Maduro, P.P.: Interpreting European law: judicial adjudication in a context of constitutional pluralism. Eur. J. Legal Stud. 1, 137 (2007)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Hanf, D., Muir, E.: Le droit de l’Union européenne et le multilinguisme. In: Hanf, D.E., Malacek, M.K. (eds.) Langue et Construction Européenne (2010)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Casellas, N.: Linked legal data: a SKOS vocabulary for the code of federal regulations. (2012)
  13. 13.
    Peters, W., Sagri, M.T., Tiscornia, D.: The structuring of legal knowledge in LOIS. Artif. Intell. Law 15, 117–135 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lyding, V. et al.: The LexALP information system: term bank and corpus for multilingual legal terminology consolidated. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Multilingual Language Resources and Interoperability, pp. 25–31 (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Casanovas, P., Casellas, N., Vallbé, J.J.: Empirically grounded developments of legal ontologies: a socio-legal perspective. In: Casanovas, P., et al. (eds.) Approaches to Legal Ontologies, pp. 49–67. Springer, Dordrecht (2011). Scholar
  16. 16.
    Francesconi, E., Küster, Marc W., Gratz, P., Thelen, S.: The ontology-based approach of the publications office of the eu for document accessibility and open data services. In: Kő, A., Francesconi, E. (eds.) EGOVIS 2015. LNCS, vol. 9265, pp. 29–39. Springer, Cham (2015). Scholar
  17. 17.
    Gracia, J., Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Vila-Suero, D., Aguado-de Cea, G.: Enabling language resources to expose translations as linked data on the web. In: Proceedings of 9th Language Resources and Evaluation Conference. European Language Resources Association, pp. 409–413 (2014)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Derlén, M.: Multilingual Interpretation of European Union Law. Kluwer Law International, Dordrecht (2009)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Gracia, J., Montiel-Ponsoda, E., Cimiano, P., Gómez-Pérez, A., Buitelaar, P., McCrae, J.: Challenges for the multilingual web of data. J. Web Semant. 11, 63–71 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Euzenat, J., Shvaiko, P.: Ontology Matching. Springer, Berlin (2007). Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Ontology Engineering GroupUniversidad Politécnica de MadridMadridSpain
  2. 2.Institute of Law and TechnologyAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.La Trobe UniversityMelbourneAustralia

Personalised recommendations