MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2794090268

A Global Injunction Against Google

2018· article· en· W2794090268 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Michael Douglas

Bibliographic record

VenueUWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia) · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsIntellectual propertyInterlocutoryThe InternetSupreme courtOrder (exchange)LawPolitical scienceIndex (typography)BusinessComputer scienceWorld Wide WebAppeal
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Discusses the Canadian Supreme Court judgment in Google Inc v Equustek Solutions Inc on whether the court lacked jurisdiction to issue a global injunction requiring Google to de-index all webpages advertising counterfeit products, given that: (1) Google was not a party to the intellectual property infringement claim; and (2) it was a foreign company without a base in British Columbia. Considers whether the injunction was just and equitable.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.006
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.791
Threshold uncertainty score0.420

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.006
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.002
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0160.008
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0020.003
Research integrity0.0190.013
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.002

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.

Opus teacher head0.123
GPT teacher head0.367
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUWA Profiles and Research Repository (University of Western Australia)Same topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207