Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper asks whether there is a need for law-makers to aid in the efficient transition to a new knowledge-based economic and social environment through the use of intellectual property devices. The use of such devices was effective in assisting with the transition to an industrial society that, combined with developments in commercial law and secured transactions, further fuelled economic growth in Canada. Can these disparate areas of law be brought together to provide opportunities for the growth of knowledge-based business? The Law Commission of Canada instigated a two-part investigation into these questions. The investigation culminated in the Commission's report Leveraging Knowledge Assets: Reducing Uncertainty for Security Interests in Intellectual Property (2004). This article describes the process of the investigation undertakend by the Commission and more particularly describes the results of the first branch of the enquiry, which was a three-part empirical study seeking to establish whether legal intervention into harmonizing the law of secured transactions and intellectual property law is warranted from the business perspective. Results of the first empirical branch of the enquiry, a pilot survey of business people and their legal advisors, the second branch, a national teleconference consulting business leaders, and the third branch, a feedback consultation session with conference attendees, are reported against the backdrop of the Commission's subsequent report. It appears that the traditional devices of intellectual property are not adequately serving emerging business needs around knowledge assets. However, it seems to be too simplistic to characterize these inadequacies as exclusively, or even directly, related to the relationship between the law of secured transactions and intellectual property devices. Reactions from study participants in business suggest caution in undertaking law reform in this area - cognizant of changing the current balancing of interests in the knowledge-based business section. The Law Commission's report may serve as a catalyst for an emerging dialogue between legal experts from different fields of law but further direct consultation with the business community they serve appears to be necessary before changes are implemented.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".