Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis puts forward the development prospect and concrete protections of the network copyright protection in the Internet era through the analysis of law. It figures that the variety of the network copyright has its own characteristics; the objection system on the Internet should be established to fix on the network copyright of a certain work; the range of the network works is different from that of the traditional works; the download, copying, printing, backing up, and paste of the network works should be also considered as the reasonable use under certain conditions; the network copyright, depending on different subjects, is applicable to different liability principles of infringement; the characteristics of the network copyright infringement case should be considered in the aspect of domination, and it is proposed that a large number of cases should be transferred to the basic people's court. Key words: Network Copyright, Legal System, Protection Resume: L’essai present expose, a travers l’analyse de la loi, la perspective de developpement et des mesures concretes de protection du droit de reseau a l’heure de l’Internet. D’apres l’auteur, le droit de reseau a ses propres caracteristiques ; le systeme d’objection sur l’Internet devrait etre etabli pour determiner le droit de reseau de certain travail ; le travail de reseau est different du travail traditionnel ; le telechargement, la copie, l’imprimerie , le secours, le collage sur le reseau devraient etre consideres comme l’utilisation raisonnable dans certaines conditions ; le droit de reseau, dependant de differents sujets, est applicable a des desavantages des principes d’infraction ; les caracteristiques du cas de violation du droit de reseau devraient considerees sur le plan de la domination ; bon nombre de cas devraient etre transferes dans la cour populaire de base. Mots-Cles: droit de reseau, systeme legal, protection
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".