«Orphan Works» as Objects of Copyright: Concept, Legal Regime of Use (Continuation. The beginning of the article is in № 2(231) for 2022)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of the work is to study the legal regime for the use of «orphan works» in the European Union, Great Britain, Canada, and the United States. In order to achieve the goal, there is analyzed the basic regulatory legal act of EU copyright – Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain permitted uses of «orphan works», and the positive consequences of its provisions for ensuring a unified approach to recognizing the legal status and legal certainty of the use of these works in within the EU, the peculiarities of its application in the legislation of Great Britain. The legal mechanisms of legalization of «orphan works» in Canada and the USA are also described. The European Integration Law of Ukraine «On Copyright and Related Rights» (№ 5552-1), adopted on December 1, 2022, aimed at harmonizing Ukrainian legislation in the field of copyright and related rights with European legislation, which regulates the recognition of works and objects of related rights as «orphan works».The research methodology is based on the application of general scientific (historical, logical, systemic, structural-functional, logical-semantic) and special scientific (comparative legal, terminological analysis, source analysis and synthesis) methods. The scientific novelty, given the lack of research in Ukrainian archival studies of the mentioned topic, consists in the comprehensive coverage of the foreign experience of determining the legal status and establishing the legal regime for the use of «orphan works». In the conclusions, taking into account the transition of archival institutions to digital standards of activity, the World and European experience of law enforcement practice, the work of Ukrainian and foreign scientists, changes in legislation, it is recommended to prepare an appropriate regulatory document in cooperation with lawyers for the regulation of archival work with «orphan documents». References: 1. Аndroshchuk, H. O. (2014). Ekonomichni zasady innovatsiino-investytsiinoi modeli rozvytku [Economic foundations of the innovation-investment model of development]. Law and innovation, 1–2(5–6), 68–79. [in Ukrainian].2. Bzhar, A. A. (2020). Orphan Works Situation Under Canadian Copyright Act. Journal of Law, Policy and Globalization, 95, 93−98. URL: https://www.iiste.org/Journals/index.php/JLPG/issue/view/4430 [in English]. 3. Bzhar, A. A. (2021). The Situation of Orphan Works under Different Jurisdictions. Chicago-Kent Journal of Intellectual Property, 20(1), 1−34. URL: https://scholarship.kentlaw.iit.edu/ckjip/vol20/iss1/5/ [in English].4. Digital Opportunity. A Review of Intellectual Property and Growth : An Independent Report by Professor Ian Hargreaves. 2011. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/digital-opportunity-review-of-intellectual-property-and-growth [in English].5. Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society. Retrieved from http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2001/29/oj [in English].6. Directive 2012/28/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 October 2012 on certain permitted uses of orphan works. Retrieved from http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2012/28/oj [in English]. 7. Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2013/24/pdfs/ukpga_20130024_en.pdf [in English].8. Government policy statement : Consultation on Modernising Copyright. Retrieved from https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/modernising-copyright-government-policy-statement-on-consultation [in English].9. Intellectual Property Act 2014. An Act to make provision about intellectual property. 14th May 2014. Retrieved from https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2014/18/enacted [in English].10. Orphan Works and Mass Digitization. A report of the register of copyrights. June 2015. Retrieved from https://www.copyright.gov/orphan/reports/orphan-works2015.pdf [in English].11. Pikhurets, O. V., Lytvyn, S. Y. (2017). Rozvytok pravovoho rehuliuvannia vidnosyn, poviazanykh iz vykorystanniam «syritskykh tvoriv» v Ukraini ta krainakh Yevropeiskoho Soiuz [Development of legal regulation of relations related to the use of «orphan works» in Ukraine and the countries of the European Union]. Naukovyi visnyk Uzhhorodskoho natsionalnoho universytetu. Seriia Pravo, 44(1), 81−86. [in Ukrainian].12. Shtefan, A. S., Drobiazko, V. S., Shabalin, A. V. et al. Myronenko, N. M. (Ed.) (2018). Avtorske pravo i sumizhni prava v umovakh yevrointehratsiinykh protsesiv [Copyright and related rights in the context of European integration processes]. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].13. Shtefan, O. (2017). Pravovyi rezhym vykorystannia syritskykh tvoriv [Legal regime of use of orphan works]. Mizhnarodnyi naukovyi zhurnal «Internauka», 2(2). 184–191. [in Ukrainian].14. Tokareva, V. (2019). Okremi aspekty syritskykh tvoriv v umovakh intehratsiinykh protsesiv [Certain aspects of orphan works in the context of integration processes]. Jurnalul juridic național : theory and practice, 3, 97–101. Chisinau. [in Moldova].
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
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".