Investigating the Civil Liability of Tobacco' Propagandists in Iran: A Comparative Viewpoint toward American Legal System
Bibliographic record
Abstract
One of the most important signs of a dynamic economy is commercial advertisement and presentation of products. Advertisement in fact, helps consumers to become aware of various goods and make a move for buying those needed. However, it should be noted here that whatever intended to be advertised should not be harmful to people and society; advertisement, if restricted to goods and products, would not lead to so much negative criticism, but in reality it embraces selling of imaginations, dreams, and idealistic life styles. Therefore wrong components can lead to a liability. On the other hand advertisement is increasingly related to society's health. This study aims at investigating propagandists' liability in light of the theories of civil liability. Therefore, in facing the fundamentals of civil liability in this area, the theories of guilt and strict liability are able to be examined. Studied the running rules of national and transnational domain, however, the approach considered as the basis of civil liability in this area is the theory of guilt. In the legal system of Iran, according to what was pointed out and considering the exclusive nature of tobacco, the guilt theory is ruling on the process and cycle of tobacco including production, distribution, and promotion. Considering American rules have also revealed that some rules suggest the fact that the theory of strict liability has executive capability in light of damage compensation, but the recent approach of American legislator has deviated from this standpoint and inclined toward the theory of guilt. In any case, the writer strives at investigating the position of damage compensation and fundamentals of advertisement liability, through explaining the ruling theories in this area.
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 | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".