Personal Property Law and Information Assets: Rehabilitation and Relevance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
More attention should be paid in both teaching and research to the issue of original acquisition in common law property, with particular emphasis on information assets. Personal property law provides sophisticated legal and equitable rules for the allocation and transfer of both tangible and intangible property, but has few doctrines capable of governing competing interests in information transactions. Whether by unconscious omission or intentional design, the common law presents no consistent legal response to claims for proprietary protection of information assets. Accordingly, if personal property law is to remain relevant, research efforts should be directed towards rehabilitation sufficient to take account of the economic, social and political significance of information assets. This will require development of an appropriate conceptual framework for analyzing the legal issues implicated in requests for commodification of information. In particular, rehabilitation in these circumstances must address the prevailing view that information assets are within the exclusive domain of statutory intellectual property regimes.
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 | 0.007 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.085 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.023 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.010 | 0.009 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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".