Free 2008 NEC

Hv&Lv

Senior Member
Location
-
Occupation
Engineer/Technician
http://freenec.com/T1.html
The copyright note at the bottom left says the 2008 NEC is "law" and therefore part of the public record and therefore free.

Is the 2011 NEC law yet? If so, does anyone have a link to it similar to that above?
The 2011 is law here, and that link is aggravating to use. There are other links much better.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
Engineer
Many areas have adopted editions of the NEC by reference as "law" ... Does this action make it available without copyright restrictions?
Why would making it a law invalidate the copyright provisions?

Most laws only require you to be able to access referenced material for free somewhere in the jurisdiction that adopted it (e.g. the public library or the county courthouse).
 

kbsparky

Senior Member
Location
Delmarva, USA
Why would making it a law invalidate the copyright provisions?

Most laws only require you to be able to access referenced material for free somewhere in the jurisdiction that adopted it (e.g. the public library or the county courthouse).
Are you allowed to photocopy the laws? Does that include works adopted by reference?
 

G._S._Ohm

Senior Member
Location
DC area
There are other links much better.
Please post. My only hard copy is from '99.

One of my interests with this document is to use symbolic logic to decode what the NEC says and what it does not say and what is ambiguously worded no matter who reads it.

Thanks in advance.:thumbsup:
 

John120/240

Senior Member
Location
Olathe, Kansas
Please post. My only hard copy is from '99.

One of my interests with this document is to use symbolic logic to decode what the NEC says and what it does not say and what is ambiguously worded no matter who reads it.

Thanks in advance.:thumbsup:
Thank You for your ambitous undertaking, I think. I hope you are a young buck because you

might need several years. What is "symbolic logic" ? To quote Charlie's Rule The code says

what it says. Read it slowly one word at a time.
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
Please post. My only hard copy is from '99.

One of my interests with this document is to use symbolic logic to decode what the NEC says and what it does not say and what is ambiguously worded no matter who reads it.

Thanks in advance.:thumbsup:
Good luck, I applaud your effort. I'm starting to "flow chart" the sections on ampacity. I think there about 130 of them. I can only work so long on a section until my head hurts. Take for example: 210.19
  • Branch circuits 100/125%
  • 100% OCPDs
  • BC with more than 1 receptacle
  • Household ranges ...
  • Other loads
  • some tap conductors
  • over 600V
  • unsupervised
  • supervised
what a mish-mash!
 

renosteinke

Senior Member
Location
NE Arkansas
For a quick summary ....

"No man may own the law:" A basic principle of our society, one documented all the way back to the Magna Carta. Yup, King John nearly lost his head over this.

"Copyright:" Another old tradition, protecting the rights of the creator of a published work. A classic example is the way McDonalds gets to pay the architect every time they build a franchise, even though they're using the same set of plans as they used last time. Or, the way the music industry disputes whether you have the right to e-mail me a copy of your Dead Kennedy's CD collection.

Those two principles came into conflict the moment someone first wrote a 'model code,' specifically so that governments might adopt it. The issure really blossomed when Congress wrote legislation 'encouraging' federal agencies to adopt such standards, rather than write their own. Once that happened, "trade organizations" sprouted like mushrooms after a spring rain.

Matters came to a head when Bill Veeck decided to add on to his house. A bit of a computer geek, he was shocked at all the various codes and standards he encountered - and his difficulty in obtaining them. So, he did what any geek would do - he set up a web site and posted the codes used by every town around - and even managed to get paid for his efforts. The "National Furbie Shelf Code," adopted by the City of Despair, was now available, on-line and free, as the "City of Despair Furbie Shelf Code."

Long story short, the publishers of the various codes attempted to stop Mr. Veeck. By the time the dust settled, we had a decision bt Nr. Veeck's appellate court saying "Right On!" Alas, there is also another appellate court that once made a ruling that might be understood to support the various code groups. The US Supreme Court declined to settle the matter once and for all.

Since then, various groups have taken it upon themselves to put every imaginable public document on the web, somewhere. That traffic ticket you got in high school? Probably out there. There are entire organizations dedicated to posting such 'bulk resource' things.

Being poor losers - IMO, expressing all the anger of the kid caught with hs hand in the cookie jar - the NFPA has continues to assert their 'right' to anyone they can buffalo. This site seems to want to wait for the dust to settle.

The idea that code publishers can circumvent the court rulings that 'no man may own the law' by asking that the codes be adpoted 'by reference,' rather than by being simply adopted is, IMO, doomed to failure. Either something is law, or it's not. Couple that with the past few years' active campaigning to have the NEC adopted 'copmete, as is, without local ammendments,' and you further undermine any distinction between the 'code' and the 'law.'
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
Engineer
Are you allowed to photocopy the laws? Does that include works adopted by reference?
My city hall, county courthouse, and local public library have a per page photocopy charge.

http://fairuse.stanford.edu/Copyright_and_Fair_Use_Overview/chapter7/7-d.html
NOTICE WARNING CONCERNING COPYRIGHT RESTRICTIONS
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be ?used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.? If a user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of ?fair use,? that user may be liable for copyright infringement. This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law.

 

Dennis Alwon

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Chapel Hill, NC
Occupation
Electrical Contractor
Please post. My only hard copy is from '99.

One of my interests with this document is to use symbolic logic to decode what the NEC says and what it does not say and what is ambiguously worded no matter who reads it.

Thanks in advance.:thumbsup:
Be careful here as we generally do not allow links to free codes unless they are legit. There was a guy that had a site that had all the electrical codes, handbooks etc on line. I noticed it has been removed. This guy had it posted for years and they(NFPA) never found it till recently.
 

fmtjfw

Senior Member
For a quick summary ....

"No man may own the law:" A basic principle of our society, one documented all the way back to the Magna Carta. Yup, King John nearly lost his head over this.

Being poor losers - IMO, expressing all the anger of the kid caught with hs hand in the cookie jar - the NFPA has continues to assert their 'right' to anyone they can buffalo. This site seems to want to wait for the dust to settle.

The idea that code publishers can circumvent the court rulings that 'no man may own the law' by asking that the codes be adpoted 'by reference,' rather than by being simply adopted is, IMO, doomed to failure. Either something is law, or it's not. Couple that with the past few years' active campaigning to have the NEC adopted 'copmete, as is, without local ammendments,' and you further undermine any distinction between the 'code' and the 'law.'
There is a read-only version of 2008 on the internet -- you need to supply your name and an email address for access. Perfectly legal -- provided by NFPA to satisfy the principle stated above.
https://www.nfpa.org/catalog/services/Login/login2.asp?npg=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nfpa.org%2Fonlinepreview%2Fonline_preview_document.asp%3Fid%3D7008SB
 

G._S._Ohm

Senior Member
Location
DC area
Thank You for your ambitous undertaking, I think. I hope you are a young buck because you

might need several years. What is "symbolic logic" ? To quote Charlie's Rule The code says

what it says. Read it slowly one word at a time.
As to young, the mortality calculators on the Web give me 15 years. So I must be ambitious.

Here is a good example of symbolic logic.
http://www.earlham.edu/~peters/courses/log/tru-val.htm
With the NEC I'll assume all premises are true and just watch out for illogical conclusions.
 

G._S._Ohm

Senior Member
Location
DC area
Good luck, I applaud your effort. I'm starting to "flow chart" the sections on ampacity. I think there about 130 of them. I can only work so long on a section until my head hurts. Take for example: 210.19
  • Branch circuits 100/125%
  • 100% OCPDs
  • BC with more than 1 receptacle
  • Household ranges ...
  • Other loads
  • some tap conductors
  • over 600V
  • unsupervised
  • supervised
what a mish-mash!
I'd think there are computer programs you can buy where you just keep answering yes or no to the questions on the screen and the thing finally prints out a summary of what applies.

The computer questions should be arranged in some order such that you finish the fastest; that way it may not have to ask you all the questions. Some of the decision trees/flowcharts for these conditions are shorter than others.

Another way without a flow chart is with IF - THEN - ELSE statements. This is how the computer will be handling this problem and it's easily translatable from the NEC text.
It's too bad I donated my computer science books, there are other computer language statements and syntax that would help here.

Yes, it is tedious beyond belief.
Then you have to debug what you've done to make sure it works in all cases.
I guess I'd start with the ones you frequently deal with, and ampacity certainly meets that standard.
 
Last edited:

fmtjfw

Senior Member
I'd think there are computer programs you can buy where you just keep answering yes or no to the questions on the screen and the thing finally prints out a summary of what applies.

The computer questions should be arranged in some order such that you finish the fastest; that way it may not have to ask you all the questions. Some of the decision trees/flowcharts for these conditions are shorter than others.

Another way without a flow chart is with IF - THEN - ELSE statements. This is how the computer will be handling this problem and it's easily translatable from the NEC text.
It's too bad I donated my computer science books, there are other computer language statements and syntax that would help here.

Yes, it is tedious beyond belief.
Then you have to debug what you've done to make sure it works in all cases.
I guess I'd start with the ones you frequently deal with, and ampacity certainly meets that standard.
You might want to google logic analysis of legal text or variations on that theme. Other than some federal laws, I dare say the NEC with its interconnections and rules of precedence (1-4 general), (5-7 amend 1-4), and (8 ignore other unless reference) is pretty complex.

There are other statements: switch / case for instance. There are also concepts such as state machines and logic tables (rows all the binary possibilities, columns all the variables and the final column the attribute that applies to the row's values).

Decision trees are also applicable, but representing a decision tree as nested if/else statements gets difficult to follow as the nesting gets deeper.

For ampacity, my draft approach is to classify the general contributory attributes (for example):
  • duty cycle (welders, studios ...)
  • Environment -- temperature (ambient, underground, rooftop ...)
  • Environment -- dry, moist, wet
  • circuit -- feeder / branch / service
  • tap rules
  • special conditions -- dwelling
  • wire composition
  • insulation composition
  • raceway count derating
  • hot vs. neutral OCPD requirements
  • termination temperature limits
  • ...
 

G._S._Ohm

Senior Member
Location
DC area
I guess I'd look for the NEC 'atoms', those sections that do not refer to any other section. If these are unambiguous then the rest should follow logically. . . .famous last words. . .

Speaking of logic and the law, I think jurors should all know conditional probability like the back of their hand, but at least some judges are hostile to the idea. Maybe it's something along the lines of, "Real men don't need no new-fangled methods to dispense justice."
Misuse of Baye's Theorem, Venn diagrams, etc., is probably one of the things that kept OJ out of prison, at least for a while.
 

mivey

Senior Member
Be careful here as we generally do not allow links to free codes unless they are legit. There was a guy that had a site that had all the electrical codes, handbooks etc on line. I noticed it has been removed. This guy had it posted for years and they(NFPA) never found it till recently.
I think posting the handbook was out of line, but I guess posting the code alone is still being debated. But as renosteinke pointed out, there are bulk resource sites out there.
 

jim dungar

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Wisconsin
Occupation
Engineer
Because a court says so? See post #9.
There is no US law actually quoted in post #9, however my post #10 does provide a source of Title 17 US Code.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/202
Ownership of a copyright, or of any of the exclusive rights under a copyright, is distinct from ownership of any material object in which the work is embodied.


The fine point could be that NFPA is not copyrighting the law, rather they are copyrighting their presentation of that law.
 
Top