MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7006346356

Two Minutes for Unfair Restraint: How the NHL-CHL Player Transfer Agreement Serves as a Catalyst for Abuse of Dominance

2021· article· en· W7006346356 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueeYLS (Yale Law School) · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicBiological and pharmacological studies of plants
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLeagueClubRedressCompetition (biology)Dominance (genetics)Offensive
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

I. INTRODUCTION\nThe NHL-CHL Player Transfer Agreement (“Agreement”) is an arrangement between the National Hockey League (“NHL”) and Canadian Hockey League (“CHL”). It stipulates that an NHL club must return any CHL player drafted and signed to an NHL entry-level contract (“ELC”) to his CHL club if the NHL club does not retain that player on its active roster at the start of the season. The Agreement applies solely to CHL players ages 18 and 19. Its language limits the ability of these players to play in alternative leagues around the world and thus capture adequate compensation pursuant to their market value. With this restriction on the major junior hockey labor market, the Agreement violates Section 79 of the Canadian Competition Act (“Act”), which prohibits market-dominating entities in Canada from engaging in practices that lessen or prevent substantial competition in a market. This Comment will explore the CHL’s background, the Agreement itself, as well as the Act, which is Canada’s equivalent to the Sherman Antitrust Act. This Comment will primarily focus on Section 79 of the Act, which provides civil redress against entities engaging in “abuse of dominant position.”\nThis Comment will also compare various “abuse of dominant position” cases brought before the Competition Tribunal (“Tribunal”), and examine how the Tribunal’s reasoning in cases where it found abuse applies to the CHL’s stranglehold on major junior hockey in Canada. Essentially, by maintaining total market control over major junior hockey and engaging in contractual terms that create an exclusionary effect on the class of player it targets, the Agreement has prevented or lessened competition substantially in both Canadian/North American hockey markets and markets abroad. This Comment will conclude by offering recommendations as to how the League or the Tribunal can alleviate the restrictive conditions placed upon these players.

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)0.011
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.395
Threshold uncertainty score0.786

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0110.030
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0350.017
Scholarly communication0.0200.011
Open science0.0050.008
Research integrity0.0200.024
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0290.007

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 head0.045
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.255 · 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 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 venueeYLS (Yale Law School)Same topicBiological and pharmacological studies of plantsFrench-language works237,207