MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W811677781

When Contract Negotiations No Longer Protect Your Business Interests: The Strange World of Third Party Business Interests Under Freedom of Information Legislation, 26 J. Marshall J. Computer & Info. L. 455 (2009)

2009· article· en· W811677781 on OpenAlexaff
Emir Aly Crowne-Mohammed

Bibliographic record

VenueUIC Law Open Access Repository (University of Illinois at Chicago) · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicBusiness Law and Ethics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Windsor
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNegotiationLegislationPolitical scienceLaw and economicsBusiness informationBusinessLawEconomicsMarketing
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freedom of information legislation is designed to promote access to governmental information. The Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act of British Columbia (“BC Act”) is no different. The BC Act views access to governmental information as promoting democracy, transparency, and citizenry, thereby making “public bodies more accountable to the public and…protect[ing] personal privacy by…giving the public a right of access to records” inter alia. The right to access governmental information, however, is not unfettered. There are certain protected instances where the public good may actually be harmed by undue access to governmental information such as policy recommendations developed by or for a Minister, legal advice, or disclosures harmful to law enforcement or individual safety. Therefore, an applicant requesting a record may receive a redacted copy of the contract that only exposes the information that is not exempt under the BC Act. The focus of the article is section 21(1) of the BC Act, entitled “Disclosure harmful to business interests of a third party” which outlines the kinds of disclosures prohibited by public bodies. The author explains that principles of equity and justice demand that third party business interests should be better protected. The author notes that as of now, the only real information that is exempted from disclosure is the government’s own information. Even now, pricing information is not immune from disclosure. According to the author, the release of pricing information completely ignores the realities of modern business and competitive bidding. The author further explains that only if a government body deems some (or most) of the third party’s business interests to also represent confidential governmental information will it be protected. The author proposes a revised version of the BC Act to better protect third party business interests.

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)0.034
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.044
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: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.049
Threshold uncertainty score0.178

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0340.044
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0310.046
Scholarly communication0.0490.053
Open science0.0040.014
Research integrity0.0390.028
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.002

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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.252
Teacher spread0.218 · 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
GenreOther

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
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueUIC Law Open Access Repository (University of Illinois at Chicago)Same topicBusiness Law and EthicsFrench-language works237,207