MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2263057021

Internet Intermediaries Liability. A North American Perspective or Perspectives from the United States and Canada

2015· article· en· W2263057021 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSSRN Electronic Journal · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicDispute Resolution and Class Actions
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNoticeIntermediaryThe InternetLegislationLiabilityBusinessPerspective (graphical)Internet governancePolitical scienceInternet privacyLawComputer scienceMarketingWorld Wide Web
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Marco civil da Internet establishes a brand new framework for liability of Internet intermediaries regarding third parties’ contents and activities. Besides providing general immunity schemes for Internet access providers and Internet application providers, Section III frames two derogatory regimes regarding revenge porn and copyright. The latter still needs to be designed. This chapter compares this new piece of legislation within both Canadian and United States frameworks. The analysis suggests Brazil is not the first to set different frameworks for varying matters. Based on fact that it is the only one to be consistent with principles set by the Marco civil da Internet, this paper will argue that Brazil should frame the upcoming copyright scheme with regards to Canada’s notice-and-notice framework.

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.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.710
Threshold uncertainty score0.376

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.212 · 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