La nature du droit d'auteur: droit de propriété ou monopole? (The Nature of Copyright: Property Right or Monopoly?)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pour un avocat specialise en propriete intellectuelle, c’est une tâche laborieuse que de suivre l’ineluctable evolution de la technologie. C’est ainsi que nous en venons a passer outre les plus fondamentales des lignes directrices : les lecons du passe. Les regles de base du droit d’auteur sont inspirees de ce que nous appelons la prpriete ordinaire, ayant ses origines dans les droits romain et civil. Avec une comprehension complete de ces sources directes, nous pouvons anticiper de futurs developpements des droits d’Auteurs. La loi canadienne sur le droit d’auteur a herite du systeme anglais – et consequemment americain – de copyright et du systeme francais de droit d’auteur. Le premier a eu une grande influence sur l’interpretation du droit canadien. La question largement debattue au cours de la derniere decennie est celle de la reconceptualisation des droits d’auteurs, a partir des droits subjectifs et generalement coercitifs, de maniere a permettre l’expansion de l’autoroute de l’information. L’histoire nous dira que les choses ne changent pas radicalement et que le modele de propriete ordinaire demeure l’exemple par excellence d’une construction logique. Cet article met l’accent sur les premieres metamorphoses du droit de propriete qui ont graduellement ouvert la voie a l’inclusion des choses intangibles dans ce concept.For an intellectual property lawyer it is a laborious task to conscientiously follow the inevitable evolution of technology. However in doing so, lawyers are bypassing the most fundamental guidelines: the lessons of the past. The basic principles of copyright are inspired from property, with its origin in Roman and Civil Law. It is only through a comprehensive understanding of this primary source that further developments in intellectual property rights can be anticipated. The Canadian Copyright Act inherits from both the English – and consequently American – copyright system and the French droit d’auteur system. The latter (sic) has had a great influence on legal interpretation in Canada. An issue largely disputed over the last decade has been the expansion of the information highway and the requisite rethinking of copyright rules, based on subjective and generally coercive rights. History illustrates that things do not radically change and copyright is an example where the ordinary property model remains a perfect example of a logical construction. This article examines the early metamorphosis of the property right, and the gradual encompassing of incorporeal objects within it.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 0.002 |
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".