The Administration, through the EAR, has attempted to maintain the fiction that there is a qualitative difference between intellectual works made tangible in paper and those in electronic form. Can a Federal court's introduction of evidence procedure be used to establish the interchageability of IP works in paper and elecronic form and if so can these rules be applied to the EAR? The ISBN is an identification system for books and other media which allows for order-processing by booksellers, libraries, universities, wholesalers and distributors. It identifies a title or edition of a title and is unique to that title or edition. The ISBN system was established in 1968 as a standard for books and other monographic publications. Today, the scope of the system has expanded to include other media such as calendars, spoken word audiocassettes, videocassettes and electronic media. Is anyone aware of a federal case, accepted into the SC, in which an work of intellectural property (esp. a book) admitted as evidence was referenced solely by its ISBN? Might this direction a legally fruitful way to overturn the EAR fiction? --Steve