MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Intellectual property and the licensing of Canadian government geospatial data: an examination of GeoConnections' recommendations for best practices and template licences

2010· article· en· W2158732163 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Elizabeth F. Judge, Teresa Scassa

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennes · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGeographic Information Systems Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyBest practiceGovernment (linguistics)Geospatial analysisBusinessProperty rightsQuality (philosophy)Scope (computer science)Property (philosophy)Political scienceLawGeographyComputer scienceCartography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In Canada, Crown copyright permits government to assert control over its works. These Crown rights have often been justified on the basis that government must assert intellectual property rights so as to be better able to control the accuracy, integrity and quality of any information that reaches the public through Crown works. In this article, the authors examine GeoConnections' template agreements for the licensing of government geographic data. They argue that not only is the basis and scope of claims to intellectual property rights uncertain, the objectives of quality control, data integrity and accuracy do not appear to motivate the licence terms. The uncertainty as to the legal basis of the intellectual property claims is significant, as licences of this kind may give support to otherwise weak downstream claims by third parties to copyright in data products generated through the use of geographic data provided by the Crown .

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.477
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0030.004
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.056
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.226 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designQualitative
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

Citations3
Published2010
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Geographies / Géographies canadiennesSame topicGeographic Information Systems StudiesFrench-language works237,207