MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W239474047 · doi:10.3138/jcs.35.3.199

Looking Back To the Future - Creators and Cultural Policy in the Era of FreeTrade: A Commentary

2000· article· en· W239474047 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Susan Crean

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Canadian Studies · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyTRIPS architectureTRIPS AgreementEnforcementSovereigntyPoliticsLaw and economicsLawPolitical scienceSociologyPolitical economy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The author of this article outlines how public funds and interest in Canadian cultural policy decreased during the financial cuts of the 1990s, resulting in the decline of the role of public enterprise and regulation in the area of cultural policy. The article goes on to examine the impact of international treaties such as the Free Trade Agreement (FTA), the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) and the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) on cultural policy in Canada. The author considers how Intellectual Property Rights (IPEs) are affected by the TRIPs, arguing that the stricter enforcement of IPR was instigated by transnational businesses and corporations who are themselves Intellectual Property (IP) holders and are anxious to stem the losses due to piracy around the world. It was created with their concerns in mind, and specifically excludes measures (such as moral rights) of prime concern to creators. These corporations acquire rights by employing creators or by acquiring IPRs, and they often infringe on the rights of individual creators of IP. The issue of copyright on the Internet is another example of the dilemmas considered in this discussion of how international IP regulations fail to serve the individual creator or to protect the cultural sovereignty of the nation. The article concludes by emphasizing the need and opportunity for new participation and directions as the traditional concepts and approaches to cultural policy are challenged by technical and political changes.

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 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: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.550
Threshold uncertainty score0.653

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
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 head0.039
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.273 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations3
Published2000
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Canadian StudiesSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207