Recalibrating Copyright Law?: A Comment on the Supreme Court of Canada's Decision in CCH Canadian Limited et al. v. Law Society of Upper Canada
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
The Supreme Court of Canada’s unanimous decision in CCH Canadian Ltd. et. al. v. Law Society of Upper Canada marks a second recent decision by the Court that has major implications for the development of copyright law in Canada. In Théberge v. Galerie D’Art du Petit Champlain, the majority of the Court provided a significant articulation of the balance to be struck between the rights of creators and the rights of users of copyright-protected works. In doing so, it embraced an approach to copyright typical of U.S. copyright law in its heyday. The unanimous Court in CCH Canadian makes it clear that Théberge was not an isolated case; in an area of law where Parliament has been strongly lobbied to restrict users’ rights, the Court seems poised to take an interpretive approach that places limits on the scope of the rights of owners of copyright. In CCH Canadian, the Court does this on a number of fronts. The decision sets a new standard for originality in Canadian copyright law, reigns in the scope of certain acts of infringement in the technological context, and signals an open and expansive approach to interpreting the fair dealing defences.
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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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