MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3126412349

The Impact of Implementing a 25-Year Reversion/Termination Right in Canada

2021· article· en· W3126412349 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Paul J. Heald

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCopyright and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegislationCopyright ActGovernment (linguistics)LawWelfareOffset (computer science)BusinessConsumer Protection ActPolitical scienceLaw and economicsEconomicsIntellectual propertyCopyright law
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Canada is actively considering legislation to limit the enforceable length of copyright transfers. Under current proposals, authors would either automatically get back their copyrights twenty-five years after a transfer or would have the opportunity to exercise an American-style termination right at year 25. This paper reports previously unpublished data from UK and Canadian book markets on the negative effect of term length on the in-print status of titles and also presents new data on the market effect of existing reversion rules deriving from the 1911 Imperial Copyright Act. Data on Canadian musicians who have used the US termination right to regain their US copyrights is also presented. The report concludes that some portion of consumer welfare losses caused by term extension in Canada may be offset by the adoption of a termination right. Although the report was prepared at the request of Canadian Heritage, a branch of the Canadian government, it represents only the views of the author.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.029
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.907
Threshold uncertainty score0.677

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.029
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.004
Scholarly communication0.0080.001
Open science0.0030.003
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0060.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.232
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicCopyright and Intellectual PropertyFrench-language works237,207