Introduction to Part Two of <em>New Fronts in the Copyfight</em>
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p id="d1e44">This article introduces the second part of <em id="d1e46" class="title">New fronts in the copyfight: Multidisciplinary directions in critical copyright studies</em> (the first part of which appeared in <em id="d1e49" class="term">DSCN</em> Vol. 4 [2014]). The article surveys recent and ongoing developments of note in the global intellectual property regime, such as the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and relates these to the articles included in this second instalment of this series: "It's creativity, Jim, but not as we know it" by Carolyn Guertin; "Transproperty" by Daniel Downes; and the guest editor's review of Rosemary Coombe et al's collection <em id="d1e52" class="titlem">Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian culture online</em>. <p id="d1e55"> Cet article présente la deuxième partie de <em id="d1e57" class="title">New fronts in the copyfight: Multidisciplinary directions in critical copyright studies</em> (dont la première partie a paru dans <em id="d1e60" class="term">DSCN</em> Vol. 4 [2014]). L'article enquête sur l'évolution récente et les développements actuels qu'il convient de remarquer au sein du régime mondial de la propriété intellectuelle, comme le partenariat transpacifique, et les rattache aux articles inclus dans la deuxième tranche de cette série : « It's creativity, Jim, but not as we know it » de Carolyn Guertin; « Transproperty » de Daniel Downes; et la critique de l'éditeur invité de la collection <em id="d1e63" class="titlem">Dynamic Fair Dealing: Creating Canadian culture online de Rosemary Coombe et al</em>.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".