Bibliographic record
Abstract
Telephone companies share with other public utilities a common law duty to provide their services on demand, at a reasonable price and without unreasonable discrimination. In Canada, this common law duty exists alongside statutory service obligations imposed on telecommunications carriers and regulatory policies promoting universal access to basic telecommunications services. Some argue that, in the modern environment, where a wide range of telecommunications services is available on a near-universal basis from a profusion of suppliers, the duty to serve has become an anachronism and that carriers should now be relieved of such obligations. There are others, however, who caution that the elimination of the duty to serve might jeopardize the continuation of service to geographically remote areas and should therefore be retained. Still others advocate expanding the duty to include broadband in order to facilitate wider access to high speed Internet services. The debates surrounding these issues reveal that there is no consensus about the scope of the duty to serve. This article seeks to clarify the parameters of the common law duty to serve and discusses how that duty interrelates with carriers’ statutory service obligations and regulatory policies promoting universal service.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.009 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".