Current Copyright Law and Fair Use: The Council of Editors of Learned Journals, Keynote Address, MLA Convention 2000
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
For its keynote address at the 2000 MLA Convention, the Council of Editors of Learned Journals asked two experts in the area of publishing and copyright law to update editors and publishers about issues of copyright and fair use facing us in the digital age. Robert Spoo, a former academic journal editor and now a lawyer specializing in intellectual property law, warns that editors must be more mindful than ever, in light of new forms of digital publishing and republishing of scholarly work, to take care of their professional interests. He examines some problems we can expect to confront as the analogue world is further ‘consumed’ by the digital world. The doctrine of fair use must be intelligently applied to support scholarly interests. Harold Orlans, a long-time observer of the publishing world as editor of The Independent Scholar and a columnist for Change, the bimonthly magazine of the American Association for Higher Education, responds to Spoo's presentation and suggests how those in the scholarly publishing field might effectively stand behind fair use by providing sound directives for both upholding fair use and reducing the growing chaos surrounding copyright permissions. Both Spoo and Orlans would like to see scholarly editors and publishers avoid timidity before the law and instead lead in the area of copyright and fair use.
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.
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 | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.081 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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 it