MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2334895450 · doi:10.1177/1527476414542880

We Like Copies, Just Don’t Let the Others Fool You

2014· article· en· W2334895450 on OpenAlexaff
Fenwick McKelvey

Bibliographic record

VenueTelevision & New Media · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCopyingLegitimacyIntellectual propertyPoliticsSociologyParallelsProperty (philosophy)Media studiesLawLaw and economicsPolitical scienceEpistemology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Facebook page of the anti-copyright The Pirate Bay (TPB) explains much about the group in few words. “We like copies,” it explains, “just don’t let the others fool you.” The paradoxical phrase reveals the contradictions of TPB. Their use of “copies” deliberately chaffs with their opponents who equate piracy with theft of intellectual property. Pirates copy digital bits; they do not steal intellectual property. Championing copying is problematic for a group at the center of the Piracy Movement. The warning that “others [might] fool you” acknowledges the tensions brought about by celebrating copying while depending on their privileged voice. This article addresses these contradictions by describing TPB as an assemblage defined by conflicting forces of centripetal pull and centrifugal push. Understanding the contradictions of TPB offers greater insights into the challenges faced by other Hacktivism groups as they struggle for political change and legitimacy.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.072

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.016
Scholarly communication0.0090.009
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0040.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.008

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.290
Teacher spread0.255 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations8
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTelevision & New MediaSame topicDigital Games and MediaFrench-language works237,207