EF Cultural Travel v. Explorica: The Protection of Confidential Commercial Information in the American and Canadian Contexts
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Commercial information, once relegated to paper files stored in cabinets, is now more likely to be in digital form, allowing a myriad of people to access its contents. These electronic storehouses can subsequently be stored on the Internet, providing a handy but some- what risky means of archiving valuable information. The United States Court of Appeals (1st Circ.) judgment EF Cultural Travel v. Explorica1 is a clear indicator of the way in which the advent of the Internet has completely changed the constructive meaning of the traditional ‘‘office file’’. This paper attempts to provide an under- standing of the scope and potential impact on policy relating to confidential information and the use of Internet robots. In addition, this paper will provide an assessment of whether or not the same — or similar — facts of the Explorica decision could be successfully argued under all relevant and equivalent Canadian law relating to the protection of confidential commercial information.
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 | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.023 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".