MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1520233397

International Copyright Regulation and the Music Industry

2012· article· en· W1520233397 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Keith Nurse

Bibliographic record

VenueCaribbean dialogue · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicWorld Trade Organization Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyEnforcementConventionBusinessInternational tradeLawTRIPS AgreementRentingLaw and economicsPolitical scienceEconomics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The international regulatory framework for intellectual property rights has been strengthened by the conclusion of the Uruguay Round of the General Agreement for Tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the establishment of the World Trade Organization (WTO). In terms of copyright, the new regulatory framework calls for all member countries to comply with the substantive provisions of the Berne Convention (1971) for the protection of literary and artistic works, but it does not require the observance of moral rights.The agreement enhances the monitoring capacity and enforcement capabilities on a global scale. Many of the countries which were not party to the Berne Convention have been brought into copyright law under the WTO framework. Thus, for the first time in International Law, member states are to provide within their national law effective procedures and remedies for the enforcement of intellectual property rights, either through the normal civil judicial process or through other appropriate measures. The main additions to the area of copyright as it relates to music and related rights (e.g., neighbouring rights) are: provisions that require authors and composers of sound recordings to be given the right to authorize or prohibit the commercial rental of their works to the public; provisions that require performers to be given protection from unauthorized recording and broadcast of live performances (e.g., bootlegging); the protection for performers and producers of sound recordings have been expanded from a prior minimum of 20 years under the Rome convention to no less than 50 years; provisions that require that broadcasting organizations would have control over the use that can be made of broadcast signals wthout their authorization, for at least 20 years.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.068

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.004
Science and technology studies0.0040.018
Scholarly communication0.0150.008
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0090.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0200.003

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.

Opus teacher head0.021
GPT teacher head0.262
Teacher spread0.241 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2012
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCaribbean dialogueSame topicWorld Trade Organization LawFrench-language works237,207