Orphan Works Situation Under Canadian Copyright Act
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the orphan works solution under the Canadian Copyright Act. This article introduces the type of solution adopted by the Canadian Copyright Act. The author undertake a qualitative approach to a thorough investigation that discloses that Canada has adopted centrally granted licensing model which enables a public body to issue licenses for users of orphan works. The author also revealed that under the Canadian system a prospective user is required to carry out a reasonably diligent search prior to using orphan works. It is understood that the type of solution adopted by the Canadian law may not function well at the moment, due to technological advancements that allow public libraries and other public institutions to digitise the whole collections that they own. However, compulsory licenses model could be considered a barrier before such institutions to have all their collections digitised, therefore, it is preferred for the Canadian law to adopt extended collective licenses model in addition to the compulsory licensing model. Keywords: orphan works, centrally granted licenses, license, section 77. DOI: 10.7176/JLPG/95-12 Publication date: March 31 st 2020
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 | 0.005 | 0.016 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".