Properly Protecting Code: Solving Copyright and Patent Rights Overlap via Computer Software Suitability in Copyright
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
Over the past several decades an expansion of coverage has evolved in individual intellectual property rights, especially copyright and patent. This expansion has caused overlap to occur between rights, thus allowing for an inefficient intellectual property regime that permits overreaching protection, ultimately running counter to the bargain agreed to for each individual right. The overlap between copyright and patent has especially proven to be problematic when applied to computer software. A theoretical solution to this overlap is the exclusion of copyright protection to computer software, due to its unsuitability to be considered copyrightable material and the obtuseness when applying traditional “physical” copyright qualification to it. Despite the practical difficulties of implementing this expungement, it is crucial that options such as this be considered in order to better foster innovation, competition, and creativity in this technical 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.
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 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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