MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7005642281

Rethinking copyright and the internet: a new model for users’
\nrights

2021· dissertation· en· W7005642281 sur OpenAlexaboutno aff

Notice bibliographique

RevueSussex Research Online (University of Sussex) · 2021
Typedissertation
Langueen
DomaineBusiness, Management and Accounting
ThématiqueCopyright and Intellectual Property
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésDigital Millennium Copyright ActLegislationFair useModernization theoryIntellectual propertyCopyright ActStatuteScope (computer science)LiabilityOrder (exchange)The Internet
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

The laws of copyright can be slower to adapt and evolve than the industries they regulate. As the landscape of how protected works are made and how the public views how those works should be treated changes, the law does not seamlessly follow in course. Rather, it typically slowly grows obsolete and then undergoes periodic points of drastic redefinition in order to adapt. \nSince the Statute of Anne, the foundation for modern copyright law across the globe, many nations have implemented subsequent reforms to their copyright acts to adapt both to the modern world and to previous failures of the law. The British Copyright Act of 1956 adapted the law to a world connected in trade by expanding protection for works whose initial publication was outside of Britain.1 In 1998, the United States enacted one of the most important pieces of copyright legislation as a reaction to the effects of the internet and technology on the enforceability of copyright law. This law is known as the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). The DMCA,among its many alterations and additions to the law, created a safe-harbour provision so that online service providers could avoid vicarious liability for the actions of their members- moulding the law to the digital space.2 In 2012, Canada passed its groundbreaking Copyright Modernization Act which sought to address the rise of user-generated content by legitimising transformative works made for non-commercial purposes.3 \nThus, the overarching trend in copyright law is for it to gradually grow obsolete or ineffective within the scope of the industrial or technological power of the market until a great force of legislation brings the law back in line. \nThis thesis will argue that we have reached such a turning point. It asserts that an inability to adequately apply current law, seen through impotent enforcement mechanisms online, coupled with vague legal boundaries has brought about a need for redefinition within copyright law. Further, it hypothesises that the that the property-law model used as a basis for copyright law today is the root of issues with balancing user’s rights against creators' rights and is no longer the ideal means to protect creative works online. It will demonstrate how technology and global communication have changed the culture of creativity and creative dissemination in such a way that copyright law is no longer a competent tool in protecting and fostering the development of a large body of creative works. It will examine current would-be solutions to the problem of online infringements and analyse their inadequacies. In analysing the current relevant legal mechanisms, their failures and successes, as well as how the notion of property-like rules influence these failures and successes, it comes to the conclusion that stepping away from this property model and towards a system of liability rules online will not only help to foster new works, but will benefit those who own the rights to existing works as well. It concludes with a suggestion for a newly constructed system of liability rules, targeting areas previously discussed where the law is failing, to be applied in lieu of property rules for certain aspects of copyright protection. \nThe overarching research question this thesis serves to answer is how can we appropriately balance author’s rights with the dissemination of information in a digital world in a way that leads to a system of copyright law that is practical, fair, and enforceable? It is intended to highlight and address the growing inefficacy of copyright law in the digital world, analyse the weaknesses of modern attempts to adapt the law to the digital space, and offer unique solutions to the problems it addresses. It analyses copyright law from a global perspective through the lens of online infringements. I adopt this global perspective for two reasons. First, while copyright law is strictly territorial, it serves at the behest of a global economy and has been largely unified through treaties with respect to minimum requirements for protection and framework standards.4 Second, a global perspective is important for the comparative analyses I employ. The comparisons target the successes and failures resulting from enacted solutions to online infringement in an attempt to offer a workable solution that may be applied anywhere. Thus, this thesis sets out to be a policy analysis that dissects copyright law and online infringement as a whole. \n \n1 Copyright Act 1956 (UK) \n2 Digital Millennium Copyright Act 1998 (USA) \n3 Copyright Modernisation Act 2012 (CA) 29.21 \n4 Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works (Paris Text 1971)

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,010
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,022
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesCommunication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Théorique ou conceptuel · Signal consensuel: Théorique ou conceptuel
GenreSignal candidat: Méthodes · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,962
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,077

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0100,022
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0030,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0110,060
Communication savante0,0380,077
Science ouverte0,0030,019
Intégrité de la recherche0,0130,011
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0230,004

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,097
Tête enseignante GPT0,301
Écart entre enseignants0,203 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeThéorique ou conceptuel
Domainenon disponible
GenreMéthodes

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2021
Routes d'admission1
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueSussex Research Online (University of Sussex)Même sujetCopyright and Intellectual PropertyTravaux en français237 207