MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3201081592

Cinq décisions d’intérêt en droit du numérique en 2020

2021· article· fr· W3201081592 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Florian Martin-Bariteau

Bibliographic record

VenueLes Cahiers de propriété intellectuelle · 2021
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIntellectual Property and Patents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceHumanitiesPhilosophy
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cette chronique presente cinq decisions d’interets en droit du numerique rendues par les tribunaux canadiens en 2020. La chronique s’ouvre sur la decision de la Cour supreme du Canada dans l’affaire Uber Technologies Inc c. Heller qui a opere un recalibrage inattendu du droit des contrats au regard des nouvelles realites socio-economiques du contexte numerique. Dans un second temps, la chronique aborde l’affaire CompuFinder (3510395 Canada Inc) c. Canada dans laquelle la Cour federale a notamment confirme la constitutionnalite de la Loi canadienne anti-pourriel. La chronique se poursuit avec la decision de la Cour federale dans l’affaire Choueifaty c. Canada qui est revenue rappeler au Commissaire aux brevets le test devant s’appliquer en matiere de brevetabilite de logiciel. Ensuite, la chronique discute de l’enregistrement par le Tribunal de concurrence de l’entente entre le Commissaire a la concurrence et Facebook Inc qui marque une etape majeure pour le droit de la concurrence a l’ere numerique et la protection des canadiennes et canadiens en ligne. Enfi n, la chronique se conclut avec la decision de la Cour superieure de l’Ontario dans l’affaire Sole Cleaning c. Chu au sujet de denonciation sur les reseaux sociaux d’actes racistes dans le milieu de travail. Pour chacune de ces decisions, la chronique en presente les faits, les conclusions, pour ensuite en discuter la portee eu egard aux enjeux du contexte numerique.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesResearch integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.417
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.002
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0410.011

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 head0.025
GPT teacher head0.216
Teacher spread0.192 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLes Cahiers de propriété intellectuelleSame topicIntellectual Property and PatentsFrench-language works237,207