Hebert, Francoise and Wanda Noel.Copyright and Library Materials for the Handicapped. IFLA Publications 21. Munich. FRG. K.G. Saur Verlag, 1982.
2.
Keplinger, Michael S. "Copyright and Information Technology." Annual Review of Information Science and Technology, Vol. 15, pp. 3-33. Edited by Martha E. Williams. White Plains. New York: Knowledge Industry Publications, 1980
3.
Saltman, Roy G.Computer Science and Technology: Copyright in Computer-Readable Works: Policy Impacts of Technological Change. Washington, D.C.: National Bureau of Standards, October 1977.
4.
Squires, Jeffrey. "Copyright and Compilations in the Computer Era: Old Wine in New Bottles." Bulletin of the Copyright Society of the USA, 24:1:18-46 (October 1976).
5.
Webster, Duane E. and Lenore S. Maruyama . "Ownership and Distribution of Bibliographic Data: Highlightsof A Meeting Held by the Library of Congress Network Advisory Committee." Washington, DC.: Library of Congress, December 1980.
6.
Avram, Henriette E. "The Impact of Technology on Legislation Affecting Libraries." IFLA Journal6:1:8-12.
7.
Avram, H.D. and S.E. McCallum. "Directions in Library Networking." Journal of the American Society for Information Science31:6:438-444 (November 1980).
8.
Carlile, Huntington. "The Diversity Among Legal Structures of Library Networks." In: Networks for Networkers. Edited by Barbara E. Markuson and Blanche Woolls.New York: Neal-Schuman Publishers , 1979.
9.
Epstein, H. "Network Technology Today". Journal of the American Society for Information Science31:6:425-437 (November 1980).
10.
Kilgour. Frederick G. "Increased UAP Effected by an On-Line Union Union Catalog." Interlending Review7:1:20-22(1979).
11.
Robinson, B.M. "Cooperation and Competition Among Library Networks ," Journal of the American Society for Information Science31:6:413-424 (November 1980).
12.
Chartrand, Robert Lee and Jane Bortnick.International Information Exchange: A Theme Conference Summary. Report on the White House Conference on Library and Information Services: Pre-Conference Meetings on Special Themes. July 31, 1979. Washington, DC.: National Commission on Libraries and Information Science, October 1979.
13.
Elrod, J. McRee. "Universal Availability of Bibliographic Records ." IFLA Journal4:4:347-350 (1978).
14.
Gotlieb. Allan , Charles Dalfen and Kenneth Katz. "The Transborder Transferof Information by Communications and Computer Systems: Issues and Approaches to Guiding Principles." American Journal of International Law68:227-257 (1974).
15.
IFLA International Office for UBC. "The International Congress on National Bibliographies, Paris, 12-17 September 1977: Report and Recommendations." IFLA Journal4:1:10-16 (1978).
16.
International Access to MARC Records: A Summary Report with Recommended Text for a Bilateral Agreement for the International Exchange of MARC Records. IFLA International Office for UBC, Occasional Papers, No. 7. London: IFLA International Office for UBC, 1980.
17.
Line, Maurice. "Universal Availability of Publications: Progress and Development." IFLA Journal4:4:345-346 (1978).
18.
Brandhorst, Ted and Martha Williams. "Machine-Readable Data Bases: Copyright Status." Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science4:4:31 (April 1978).
19.
Braunstein, Yale M. et al. Economics of Property Rights As Applied to Computer Software and Data Bases. Report prepared for the National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works (CONTU ). New York: New York University, June 1977.
20.
Massil, S.Resource Sharing for National Bibliographic Services. Report of the International Congress on National Bibliographies, Paris, September 12-15, 1977. Paris: Unesco, 1977.
21.
Wells, A.J. "The International MARC Network: A Study for An International Bibliographic Data Network."The IFLA Office for UBC, Occasional Papers, No. 3. London: IFLA Office for UBC, 1977 .
22.
World Intellectual Property Organization. Model Provisions on the Protection of Computer Software, Report No. 64. Geneva. Switzerland: WIPO, 1978.
23.
McDonald, Dennis D., Rodger, Eleanor J. and Squires , Jeffrey L.The IFLA International Study of Copyright of Bibliographic Records in Machine-Readable Form: Final Report. Rockville, Maryland: King Research, Inc., 1982.
24.
Czechoslovakia; Bulgaria; Austria; Canada; Denmark; Finland; France; Italy; Japan; Korea; Malaysia; Nigeria; Philippines; Republic of Singapore; South Africa; Spain; Sweden; Taiwan; Thailand; United Kingdom: United States.
25.
These individuals were interviewed: Henriette Avram, Library of Congress; Toni Carbo Bearman, National Commission on Libraries and Information Science; Bill Bucanan, Carrollton Press: Richard M. Dougherty, University of Michigan; Warren J. Haas, Council on Library Resources; Joanne Harrar, University of Maryland; Madeline Henderson, Consultant, Bethesda, Md.; Lee Jones, Council on Library Resources; Michael S. Keplinger, U.S. Copyright Office; Emery Koltay, R. R. Bowker Company; Joseph Kuney, Informatics, Inc.; Susan K. Martin, Johns Hopkins University; Sandra K. Paul, SKP Associates; Carol Risher, Association of American Publishers; Edward Shaw, Research Libraries Group, Inc.; Robert Wedgeworth, American Library Association; Robert Willard, Information Industry Association; James Woods, Chemical Abstracts Service; Peter Young, Library of Congress; Roderick Duschesne, National Library of Canada.
26.
Both the Berne Convention and the Universal Copyright Convention ("UCC"), to which most survey respondents are signatories (the notable exception being the United States, which is a signatory of the UCC only), appear to recognize that copyright may exist for works regardless of the medium in which the works are recorded. Significantly, these international conventions do little to create substantive copyright law with respect to what works are protectable; rather. they recognize reciprocal treatment among member nations.
27.
For example, via current exchange agreements' inclusion of a prohibition against the publication by one agency of another agency's national bibliography.
28.
New York Times Co. v. Roxbury Data Interface, Inc., 434 F. Supp. 217 (D.N.J. 1977).
29.
We note here that "free flow" can take two meanings, the first being "free of cost" and the second being "free of impediments other than costs".