Bibliographic record
Abstract
Sometimes, Goliath wins."Such was the assessment of journalists Rick Weiss and Justin Gillis on Canada's 2004 Supreme Court ruling over Monsanto Canada versus Saskatchewan farmer Percy Schmeiser (see Weiss & Gillis, 2004).At the heart of this landmark case pulsed the issue of intellectual property protection and ownership versus individual rights-rights rooted in a long cultural tradition among farmers of saving and recultivating their seeds.For scholars interested in developments within Canadian jurisprudence, the details of Monsanto Canada Inc. v. Schmeiser (2004) will be quite familiar: in 1998, it was discovered that a large percentage of the farmer's canola crop contained Roundup-resistant seeds-seeds that Monsanto had genetically engineered (and patented) to resist the company's own Roundup herbicide.Schmeiser surmises that the seeds must have blown onto his property either from passing trucks that had been improperly tarped or from neighbouring farms, five of which had signed Technology Use Agreements with Monsanto.These agreements require farmers to exclusively use Monsanto's seeds and herbicide, and to also pay a $15 per acre licensing fee to use the technology.Farmers, furthermore, are not allowed to save any seed for replanting and must buy new Monsanto seed each year. 1 Now, Schmeiser did not purchase Roundup Ready ® canola seeds from Monsanto, nor did he sign a Technology Use Agreement-and, in March of 1998, the company warned Schmeiser against planting any Roundup-resistant seed that he might have culled from his own crops.This, Monsanto claimed, would constitute patent infringement.Schmeiser planted his saved seed anyway, setting off a spate of lawsuits and appeals that would eventually reach the Supreme Court of Canada.In a contentious ruling, and with a slim 5-4 margin, Canada's Supreme Court found Schmeiser guilty of violating Monsanto's patent.The details of this ruling, and its profound implications for Canadian patent law, merit a journal article in itself.But the case also presents a different, rather intriguing, opportunity for communication analysis-one that is more limited in scope, and more focused on
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.008 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 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; 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".