An illustration of copyright in the Discovering Literature site:

If we assume an article like http://www.bl.uk/romantics-and-victorians/articles/duality-in-robert-louis-stevensons-strange-case-of-dr-jekyll-and-mr-hyde# is typical, then the overall article text is listed as https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The works shown on the page have a range of licences and copyright statuses, but that shouldn't affect the project.

Some general comments about the schema:

1. I'd echo Mia and Corine's sentiments, and suggest reusing existing bibliographic ontologies where possible. RES understands the bibo (http://bibliontology.com) and frbr (http://purl.org/vocab/frbr/core) ontologies especially. You could also use the blterms (http://www.bl.uk/schemas/bibliographic/blterms) ontology Corine mentioned. If there are any mappings we need to add to RES for terms in your vocabularies, we can figure that out, too.

2. Is the RDF going to be delivered in parallel with the main site? If so, we recommend that any resources have statements about where their formats are located, especially the RDF serialisation, as described here: https://bbcarchdev.github.io/inside-acropolis/#document-metadata.

A quick note that while looking for how to express Work and Article, I came across FaBiO (http://purl.org/spar/fabio/), an ontology which reconciles elements of bibo and frbr. I haven't come across it before (it's not mentioned in the Acropolis docs or any of the literature I've read recently). It looks like it could be a nice fit for the kind of data you're publishing.

Having said that, RES currently has rules for recognising frbr and bibo statements, so they have a privileged status with respect to the index. It would be worth sticking with those in the short term. There's no reason you couldn't go back later and add FaBiO statements (either adding them on top or replacing the bibo and frbr statements) if you felt it was a better way to express your data. I'm going to discuss it more with the RES team and see whether it's a good fit for inclusion in our rules which construct the index.

From an FRBR perspective an article is a form of Work. Each article is a work in its own right but in the context of the discovering literature collection, article is being used in a specialised sense of works that describe other entities, including works or persons etc. In a different context an article is a work that is published in a serial work, such as a news paper or journal.

As I mentioned in another comment, schema.org maybe worth looking at for some of these items

I think it would be worth keeping the bl schema (even though it doesn't exist on the web), as this gives additional information about relationships between resources. These can be mapped to rdfs:seeAlso links in RES.