Les veritables enjeux de l'appropriation artistique au regard du droit d'auteur /
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Artistic appropriation constitutes a technique that has been widely used by artists for centuries. It seems to have transcended most artistic movements. Appropriation consists of reproducing a pre-existing work, or of being inspired by it, in order to create a new and distinct work of art. Appropriation poses several problems for copyright law because it challenges the basic principle of copyright which provides that a substantial reproduction of a work without the authorisation of the copyright owner amounts to an infringement. Unlike the United States where it was held that an appropriationist work infringed the copyright of a photographer, the Canadian jurisprudence has not decided the matter. While there has been no formal stand, it seems that artistic appropriation is prohibited by copyright law in Canada. The author argues that this form of censorship is mainly due to the current state of the law which is not adapted to visual arts. Therefore, important changes must occur. Considering their important place in the visual art's world, appropriationist works deserve to be protected by copyright 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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.040 | 0.003 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".