Twenty Years of Legal History (Making) at the Copyright Board of Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
During the past 20 years, more or less, copyright has evolved from a relatively obscure area of specialized legal practice to a topic at the forefront of public consciousness and policy debates. This metamorphosis might be due to technolog- ical innovation, social practices, commercial developments, or, most likely, some combination of those and other things. Mainstream media coverage is probably the best barometer of copyright’s growing importance, but there has also been a discernable increase in the judiciary’s attention to the issues.Professor de Beer’s presentation seeks to underscore the crucial contributions of the Copyright Board on some of the most inter- esting and important copyright law matters decided during the past two decades. From concep- tual challenges to the integrity of the collective management system to policy choices about the balancing of stakeholder interests to technical disputes about over statutory interpretation, the Board has been instrumental in defining the shape of copyright practice in Canada today. As new copyright challenges continue to arise over the coming decades, the Board’s role is predicted to grow even larger.
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 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.033 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.024 | 0.003 |
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".