Free 2008 NEC

[renosteinke]

Please, Roger, do not mis-represent the NFPA's intent with the link that's 'been available for years.'

The NFPA was one of the most strident opponents in the Veeck case, and filed a 'friend of the court' brief that argued that their copyright trumped Mr. Veeck's 'public law' position. There was no 'internet copy' of the NEC available at the NFPA prior to Veeck's eventual (and limited) triumph. The NFPA itself has announced, several times, their intent to raise the issue again, in another venue, "under the right circumstances."

The NFPA takes that stand, according to them, on behalf of it's members. Well, they never asked me! Maybe some members are 'more equal' than others?

Another asks 'why would making something law cancel the copyright?" The question has it backwards .... what should be asked is: How can someone assume ownership of the law? Gee, that would be a lovely way to make money .... in every court action, both sides would have to pay royalties! Tea party, anyone? (For that -the 'Stamp Act'- is exactly what the Boston Tea Party was all about).

 

[Flatpad]

The NFPA is worse than the NRA! I ordered a book on fire protection from them and ever since I get crap in the mail from them at least every other day! NO, I don't want to join and give you my money, not even after the 353rd time that you asked!!! :rant:

 

[Dennis Alwon]

The NFPA is worse than the NRA! I ordered a book on fire protection from them and ever since I get crap in the mail from them at least every other day! NO, I don't want to join and give you my money, not even after the 353rd time that you asked!!! :rant:

I joined also and got bombarded with mail. I didn't re-join because of that.

 

[Hv&Lv]

The NFPA is worse than the NRA! I ordered a book on fire protection from them and ever since I get crap in the mail from them at least every other day! NO, I don't want to join and give you my money, not even after the 353rd time that you asked!!! :rant:

That is the reason I order NFPA books from Amazon or something like that. I used to get them at the local college, until on-line became cheaper.
After 2 years of unsubscribing and asking to be removed from the mailing lists, I only get 1 or 2 e-mails from them a week. I can handle that.

 

[fmtjfw]

Please, Roger, do not mis-represent the NFPA's intent with the link that's 'been available for years.'

The NFPA was one of the most strident opponents in the Veeck case, and filed a 'friend of the court' brief that argued that their copyright trumped Mr. Veeck's 'public law' position. There was no 'internet copy' of the NEC available at the NFPA prior to Veeck's eventual (and limited) triumph. The NFPA itself has announced, several times, their intent to raise the issue again, in another venue, "under the right circumstances."

The NFPA takes that stand, according to them, on behalf of it's members. Well, they never asked me! Maybe some members are 'more equal' than others?

Another asks 'why would making something law cancel the copyright?" The question has it backwards .... what should be asked is: How can someone assume ownership of the law? Gee, that would be a lovely way to make money .... in every court action, both sides would have to pay royalties! Tea party, anyone? (For that -the 'Stamp Act'- is exactly what the Boston Tea Party was all about).

I wasn't suggesting that the NFPA put up the web versions out of the goodness of their heart. They put them up as a way of possibly preempting individuals putting it up. The argument in court would be "Joe Schmoo should not be allowed to put up a copy, because we already supply free access via our website." Their website carefully restricts access to "Display-Only" no copying. It is unlikely that Joe Schmoo would have access to the technology, nor have the inclination to make it "Display-Only". My guess is that the NEC is the NFPA's golden goose in terms of revenue.

And, by the way NFPA will sell you old versions of NEC for about $25 each, even those out of copyright.

My personal opinion is that for good of all, all standards and codes should be available -- for free -- on the Internet.

Don't get me started on the "Sonny Bono" grab of the public Domain law.:rant:

 

[Flatpad]

My personal opinion is that for good of all, all standards and codes should be available -- for free -- on the Internet.

Agreed. And to add to that, the people running a private organization shouldn't be making money selling the law to the people who need it for $80+.

 

[roger]

Please, Roger, do not mis-represent the NFPA's intent with the link that's 'been available for years.'

The NFPA was one of the most strident opponents in the Veeck case, and filed a 'friend of the court' brief that argued that their copyright trumped Mr. Veeck's 'public law' position. There was no 'internet copy' of the NEC available at the NFPA prior to Veeck's eventual (and limited) triumph. The NFPA itself has announced, several times, their intent to raise the issue again, in another venue, "under the right circumstances."

The NFPA takes that stand, according to them, on behalf of it's members. Well, they never asked me! Maybe some members are 'more equal' than others?

Another asks 'why would making something law cancel the copyright?" The question has it backwards .... what should be asked is: How can someone assume ownership of the law? Gee, that would be a lovely way to make money .... in every court action, both sides would have to pay royalties! Tea party, anyone? (For that -the 'Stamp Act'- is exactly what the Boston Tea Party was all about).

Reno, I didn't represent anything about the intent or reason, I simply stated a fact. I am well aware of the Veeck case and regardless of whether the NFPA makes it available for free or not, any jurisdiction that does adopt the NEC as rule or law would make it available but not neccessarily easy to access.


Roger