Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Continental notion of moral rights dominates the academic literature and even legal practice. Under this model, moral rights are seen as personal rights which are innate to authors. Canada’s copyright laws are said to be entirely ‘a creature of statute’, and therefore one need only look to the Copyright Act to locate the boundaries of Canadian copyright law. The Canadian Copyright Act expressly deems corporate owners of certain photographic works to be ‘authors’ of that work. And since there is nothing within the Act which requires authors to be natural persons, it appears as though corporations can hold moral rights (with respect to photographic works) under Canadian copyright law. The provisions in the Copyright Act (and even the Berne Convention for the Protection of Literary and Artistic Works) also permit corporate ownership of moral rights (in general) upon the death of ‘flesh and blood’ authors, thereby further defeating the notion that moral rights were never intended to be held or enforced by corporate entities.
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 | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.041 | 0.051 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".