MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4413242852 · doi:10.1386/josc_00176_1

Stories we sell: Intellectual property, ownership and the impact on Canadian screenwriters

2025· article· en· W4413242852 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Screenwriting · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicArtistic and Creative Research
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsScreenwritingCreative industriesContext (archaeology)SociologyIntellectual propertyMedia studiesPolitical scienceLawVisual artsHistoryArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article explores the shifting role of screenwriters, highlighting the increasing complexity and volume of work in modern scripted television production and interrogating why screenwriters do not participate in the creative and financial ownership of their projects. Rather than protecting artists, this article argues that copyright law, along with the ‘industry standard’ ownership structure, favours the profit-motive and disadvantages screenwriters. Specifically, this analysis is framed in an English–Canadian context amidst historic media policy reform that attempts to regulate foreign-owned streaming services and challenges how Canadian content is defined. By focusing on screenwriters, both historically and today, this article brings an under-represented perspective to light and captures the precarity of the screenwriting profession in Canada, a struggle that is mirrored in other international territories.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.979
Threshold uncertainty score0.977

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.080
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.246 · 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