Bibliographic record
Abstract
This book explores the scope of copyright user rights through the lens of property, copyright, and contract law. It proposes a taxonomy and hierarchy of copyright user rights that makes a distinction between user property, user rights, and user privileges. The book looks at user rights from an international law and multijurisdictional perspective (including the European Union, United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, and Australia) with a particular focus on Canada, given the significant amount of jurisprudence of the Supreme Court of Canada on copyright user rights. Unlike other works that look at copyright user rights through concepts of public law and policy, this book explores user rights through concepts of private law (personal property, goods, services, sales, licences) and copyright law (exceptions to copyright infringement such as fair dealing and fair use, the first sale or exhaustion doctrine, and the impact of technological protection measures on how users experience copyright works). The book develops a pluralistic theory of copyright user rights that recognizes their diversity and myriad ways users experience copyright works, while emphasizing the importance and role of copyright users within copyright law. The book calls for the re-evaluation of the dichotomy between tangibility and intangibility and for greater cohesion between copyright law and traditional concepts of private 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 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 | 0.002 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.197 | 0.119 |
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".