MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2889553110

Marques de commerce en 2017: cinq décisions d’intérêt

2018· article· fr· W2889553110 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ismaël Coulibaly

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de propriété intellectuelle · 2018
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntellectual Property Law
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesSloganArtPolitical scienceSociologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article represente une selection editoriale de cinq decisions d’interet rendues en 2017 par les tribunaux canadiens en matiere de marques de commerce abordees en ordre chronologique. Elles fournissent un eclairage utile sur les meilleures pratiques a adopter dans certains contextes, tout en illustrant la panoplie des outils a disposition des detenteurs de marques de commerce pour faire valoir leurs droits, et ce, en presence de marques enregistrees ou non. A cet egard, 2017 marque une certaine tendance aux recours en commercialisation trompeuse (passing-off) au titre des pratiques de concurrence deloyale. La variete de ces decisions est une illustration frappante de la diversite des problematiques juridiques soulevees par les marques de commerce, dans un environnement en constante evolution ou certains enjeux gagnent en importance : arrangement visuel et habillage commercial de produits (trade dress), referencement publicitaire en ligne, slogan publicitaire, ou encore modernisation de l’image de marque (re-branding). Il sera aussi interessant de suivre les developpements a venir ayant trait aux exigences relatives a l’emploi des marques de commerce, ainsi qu’a l’extension de la definition de marque de commerce, a l’aune des modifications a la LMC dont l’entree en vigueur est prevue pour debut 2019. This article represents an editorial selection of five 2017 Canadian court decisions in chronological order. They provide useful insights on best practices to be adopted in certain contexts, while illustrating the range of tools available to trademark holders to assert their rights, in the presence of registered or unregistered trademarks. In this regard, 2017 marks a certain trend towards the use of misleading marketing as unfair competition practices. 458 Les Cahiers de propriete intellectuelle The variety of these decisions is a striking illustration of the diversity of issues and advances that trademarks raise, in a constantly changing environment where certain elements are gaining importance: visual arrangement and product line marketing, advertising slogan, or further modernization of the brand image. It is interesting to follow the upcoming developments regarding parental requirements for the use of trademarks, the extension of the trademark definition, as well as the changes to the CMA that force is scheduled for early 2019.

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)0.017
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.034
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: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.058
Threshold uncertainty score0.130

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0170.034
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0160.009
Scholarly communication0.0280.010
Open science0.0030.009
Research integrity0.0100.018
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0150.006

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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.303
Teacher spread0.271 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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 venueLes Cahiers de propriété intellectuelleSame topicIntellectual Property LawFrench-language works237,207