Federal Court of Canada: York University’s fair dealing guidelines not fair
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
Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency v York University, 2017 FC 669, 12 July 2017 Canada’s Federal Court has ruled that York University’s Fair Dealing Guidelines were not fair. The fair dealing provisions are set out in section 29 of the Canadian Copyright Act, RSC 1985, c C-42 (the ‘Copyright Act’). Until 2012, section 29 provision provided that: 29. Fair dealing for the purpose of research or private study does not infringe copyright. After the Copyright Modernization Act (or, more formally, An Act to amend the Copyright Act, SC 2012, c 20), the reformed, broader provision states that: 29. Fair dealing for the purpose of research, private study, education, parody or satire does not infringe copyright. The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (known as ‘Access Copyright’) is a collective society under the Copyright Act set up to administer the rights of authors and publishers of literary and artistic works. It sought to enforce an interim tariff of the Copyright Board for restricted activities undertaken by York University during the period 1 September 2011–31 December 2013 (para. 1).
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 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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