On the superiority of the incremental costing approach in IP account of profits
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article addresses the ‘deduction of expenses’ component of the account of profits remedy in intellectual property (IP) contexts. It aims at two primary objectives: 1) to distinguish the incremental costing approach from other competing costing approaches applied in the disgorgement process, particularly the proportional absorption approach with which is it often conceptually confused; and 2) to make a case for the superiority of the incremental costing approach over other competing ones, particularly in the area of IP. In pursuing this discussion, this paper relies on a cross-section of legal authorities and commentaries on account of profits, particularly relating to the IP context, across major Commonwealth legal jurisdictions (ie Australia, Canada and the UK). It also draws upon judicial decisions and academic discussions on the subject from the USA, particularly because of the sophistication in economic understanding exuded in the treatment of the subject.
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 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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it