Les marques de commerce au Canada : analyse de certains points de droit international et de droit comparé
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Le présent mémoire de maîtrise a pour objet l'analyse du droit international des marques de commerce et du droit de certains pays industrialisés en comparaison avec la législation canadienne sur les marques de commerce. Il traite également des modifications qu'il serait nécessaire d'apporter à la loi canadienne en vue de l'adoption du Protocole de Madrid, du Traité sur le droit des marques et de l'Arrangement de Nice, et de la mise en application de la Recommandation commune sur les marques notoires. Le Canada devrait aussi modifier certaines dispositions de la loi sur les marques de commerce pour la rendre plus conforme à l'Accord sur les ADPICs et à la Convention de Paris. Compte tenu des lacunes du droit international en ce qui a trait à l'utilisation de la marque, le mémoire analyse et critique cette notion en droit canadien et la compare aux tendances actuelles qui ont cours aux États-Unis et au Royaume-Uni.
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 | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.000 |
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.
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".