MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211099363 · doi:10.1017/9781107338012.006

Functional Fair Use

2020· book-chapter· en· W4211099363 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Emily Hudson

Bibliographic record

VenueCambridge University Press eBooks · 2020
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicCopyright and Intellectual Property
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSection (typography)Fair usePolitical scienceFair dealingCopyright lawFocus (optics)LawSociologyLaw and economicsPublic relationsBusinessAdvertisingIntellectual property

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Doctrinal analysis suggests that the US copyright exceptions most relevant to cultural institutions are fair use in section 107 and the libraries and archives provisions in section 108. The latter were analysed in detail in Chapter 4, where it was observed that they are limited in various ways, most notably by their exclusion of museums and galleries and their focus on preservation, replacement and fulfilling some external requests. But as will be discussed in this chapter, the US fieldwork also revealed how cultural institutions have used section 107 in ways that overlap with, and extend far beyond, the activities contemplated in section 108. Indeed, fair use was the predominant exception amongst participants in this study, and was used more often and in a broader range of circumstances than the fair dealing exceptions of Australian, Canadian and UK 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.

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)0.015
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: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.021
Threshold uncertainty score0.070

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0040.014
Scholarly communication0.0080.009
Open science0.0020.005
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0210.002

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 head0.058
GPT teacher head0.171
Teacher spread0.113 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCambridge University Press eBooksSame topicCopyright and Intellectual PropertyFrench-language works237,207