Copyright and Information Privacy. Conflicting Rights in Balance (Introduction)
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
Federica Giovanella examines the on-going conflict between copyright and informational privacy rights within the judicial system in this timely and intriguing book. Adopting a comparative approach focusing on the United States, Canada and Italy, Dr Giovanella skilfully explores the strategies through which judges solve conflicts between Internet users’ data protection and copyright holders’ enforceable rights. Using research centred on a selection of lawsuits in which copyright holders attempted to enforce their rights against Internet users suspected of illegal file-sharing, this book analyses the cases and regulatory frameworks concerning both privacy and copyright. Copyright and Information Privacy demonstrates that these decisions were ultimately the by-products of different policy conceptions of the two conflicting rights. Whilst providing a comprehensive analysis of the conflict between copyright and data protection, this book also stimulates the debate surrounding the role that judges have in balancing conflicting rights, and examines their reasoning in resolving such conflict, taking into consideration the process of conceptual balancing. Perceptive and contemporary in topic, this book will be beneficial to both scholars and students of intellectual property, privacy and comparative law.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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