"The danger is not that industrialism has destroyed the Professor David Truman considered the question raised above and concluded that "multiple memberships in potential groups based on widely held and accepted interests"80 prevents the culmination of a situation such as that suggested by Ferkiss. That is, while groups may contend over specific property rights, the members of the groups share common fundamental views that prevent the erosion of individual rights that would have the effect of hurting everyone. Truman calls these shared attituded the "rules of the game" and quotes others as describing them as a "general ideological consensus" and as "a broad body of attitudes and understandings regarding the nature and limits of authority." As a further description, Truman states that "....the 'rules' would include the value generally attached to the dignity of the individual human being, loosely expressed in terms of 'fair dealing'...."81 For the purposes of proposing recommendations on computer-readable works, this study has enumerated in Section 1.3 those "Findings of Basic Principles" which it conceives to be the applicable "shared attitudes" and "rules of the game." As stated in Section 1.2, these findings are not be be taken as the final, definitive view. Other analyses may reveal different interpretations. Additional contributions to the literature are welcomed. 1. REFERENCES Walter L. Pforzheimer, "Historical Perspective on Copyright Law and Fair Use" in Lowell H. Hattery and George P. Bush, (eds.) Reprography and Copyright Law, Washington, D.C., American Institute of Biological Sciences, 1964, p. 25. 2 Emmette S. Redford, American Government and the Economy, New York, The Macmillan Co., 1965, p. 13. 3 4 Saxe Commins and Robert N. Linscott (eds.) Man and the State: Political Philosophers, New York, Random House, Inc., 1947, p. 56. The Walter L. Pforzheimer, op. cit., p.24. 5P. L. 94-553, Section 301, 94th Congress, October 19, 1976. 6 Emmette S. Redford, op. cit., pp. 6, 7. 7 8 Peter 0. Steiner, "The Public Sector and The Public Interest" in and Policy Analysis, Chicago, Rand McNally Publishing Co., 1970, p.21. ibid,. p. 21. 9ibid,. p. 25. 10 Robert M. Hurt and Robert M. Schuchman, "The Economic Rationale of Copyright" in The Economics of Publishing, American Economic Rev., May 1966, pp. 421-432. 15, 16 17 18 Hurt and Schuchman, op. cit., p. 424. Joseph Taubman, "Creation, Copyright and the Constitutional Clause," Bulletin. Copyright Society of the U.S.A. (1959), vol. 6, pp. 163164. ibid. Paul Goldstein, "The Private Consumption of Public Goods: A Comment on Williams & Wilkins Co. v. United States, Bulletin. Copyright Society of the U.S.A. (1974), vol. 21, p. 204. 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Association of American Publishers, Inc., "Program for the Provision of Copies of Technical-Scientific-Medical Journal Articles and for Related Information Service Copies," March 17, 1977, One Park Avenue, New York, N.Y. 10016 National Commission on New Technological Uses of Copyrighted Works Preliminary Report, Oct. 1976, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, Va. 22161, Report No. PB 260373. Kenneth J. Arrow, "The Organization of Economic Activity: Issues Pertinent to the Choice of Market Versus Non-Market Allocation," in Robert H. Haveman and Julius Margolis (eds.), op. cit., p. 68. ibid. Peter 0. Steiner, op. cit., p. 30. Hurt and Schuchman, op. cit., p. 425. ibid., p. 428. Stephen Breyer, "The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies and Computer Programs" Harvard Law Review, vol. 84, no. 2, Dec. 1970, pp. 281-351. ibid., p. 348. Calvin Mooers, "Preventing Software Piracy" COMPUTER, March, 1977, p. 30. Edwin Mansfield, Microeconomics: Theory and Applications, Second 30p. L. 94-553, Section 115. 31 P. Melville Nimmer, "Copyright vs. The First Amendment" Bulletin. 32 Paul Goldstein, op. cit., pp. 206-208. 41 42 Copyright Law Revision (1967), Hearings before the Subcommittee on ibid., p. 71. 43 ibid., p. 85. 45 46 Julius J. Marke, Copyright and Intellectual Property, New York, Fund for the Advancement of Education, 1967. Copyright Law Revision (1967), op. cit., p. 609. 47 Julius J. Marke, op. cit., p. 89. 53 54 Copyright Law Revision (1967), op. cit., p. 71. Julius J. Marke, op. cit., p. 91. National Academy of Sciences, Information Systems Panel, Computer Science and Engineering Board, Libraries and Information Technology: A National System Challenge. Report to the Council on Library Resources, Inc. Washington, D.C., 1971, p. 10. *Copyright Law Revision (1967), op. cit., pp. 570-578. 61 Cambridge Research Institute, Omnibus Copyright Revision, Comparative Analysis of the Issues, Washington, D.C. American Society for Information Science, 1973, pp. 87-100. 62 Federal Management of Scientific and Technical Performation (STINFO) Activities: The Role of the National Science Foundation, Special Subcommittee on the National Science Foundation of the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare, United States Senate, July, 1975, p. 22. 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 Daniel Bell, "Remarks of the Moderator," in The Management of Information and Knowledge, Committee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. House of Representatives, 1970, p. 14. Peter F. Drucker, The Age of Discontinuity-Guidelines to our Changing Society, New York, Harper & Row, 1968. Gerald M. Weinberg, The Psychology of Computer Programming, New York, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co., 1971. Dennie Van Tassel, Program Style, Design, Efficiency, Debugging, and Testing, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1974. Frederick P. Brooks, Jr., The Mythical Man-Month, Essays on Software Engineering, Reading, Mass., Addison-Wesley Pub. Co., 1975. Walter Lippmann, The Public Philosophy, New York, Mentor Books, 1956, p. 127. 3 Walter Lippmann, op. cit., p. 92. 74. 75 76 Thomas R. Dye, Understanding Public Policy, Englewood Cliffs, N.J., Prentice-Hall, 1972, p. 23. Theodore J. Lowi, "American Business, Public Policy, Case Studies, and Political Theory," World Politics, vol. 16, n.4, July 1964, p. 689. bibid., p. 691. 77 quoted in Joseph Weizenbaum, Computer Power and Human Reason, San Francisco, W. H. Freeman and Co., 1976, p. 26. |