Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study investigates the policies and practices of Canada’s national, provincial, and territorial archives when they are making copies for users. In many cases, these repositories attempt to control further uses under the rubric of copyright, even though they may not be the rights holders and/or interests other than copyright may be at issue. Referencing the data available on their websites, the study looks at copyright ownership and the conditions imposed on copies for users. The study reveals a wide range of practices across institutions and internal inconsistencies within a single repository’s practice. From a legal perspective, certain practices are somewhat problematic, although they may not pose a great legal risk. More significantly, by confusing users and inappropriately restricting access and use, some archives are compromising their core mission to make their holdings available. These institutions’ policies and practices for making copies for users need review to ensure that they are comprehensive, internally consistent, and up to date. RÉSUMÉCette étude examine les politiques et pratiques des archives nationales, provinciales et territoriales canadiennes par rapport à la création de copies pour les utilisateurs. Dans plusieurs cas, ces centres d’archives tentent de contrôler d’autres utilisations du matériel en prétextant le droit d’auteur, même s’ils ne sont parfois pas les détenteurs du droit d’auteur, et/ou des questions autres que le droit d’auteur peuvent entrer en jeu. En faisant référence à l’information disponible sur leurs sites web, cette étude examine l’établissement du droit d’auteur et les conditions que l’on impose sur les copies pour les utilisateurs. Cette étude révèle une grande étendue de pratiques entre les institutions et des inconsistances de pratiques au sein d’une seule institution. Du point de vue légal, certaines pratiques sont quelque peu problématiques, quoi qu’elles ne constituent pas un risque légal majeur. Plus important encore, en semant la confusion auprès des utilisateurs et en restreignant l’accès et l’utilisation de façon inappropriée, certains centres d’archives mettent à risque leur mission de base de rendre leurs collections disponibles. Les politiques et pratiques de ces institutions par rapport à la création de copies pour les utilisateurs ont besoin d’être revues afin d’assurer qu’elles sont complètes, consistantes et à jour.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.022 | 0.077 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.023 | 0.035 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.024 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".