Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...
RE: Building Codes Online?[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
- To: <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
- Subject: RE: Building Codes Online?
- From: "Structuralist" <dennis.wish(--nospam--at)verizon.net>
- Date: Mon, 7 Oct 2002 13:30:28 -0700
See my comments below: -----Original Message----- From: Cratylus Consulting Group [mailto:cratylus(--nospam--at)earthlink.net] Sent: Sunday, October 06, 2002 12:59 PM To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org Subject: Re: Building Codes Online? I have not heard a thing about this appellate decision, or of the content of the Veeck web site. However, I can think of several issues to support such a legal analysis: 1) Why would you bother to protect a copyright or 'intellectual' product that is obsolete in three years?, <Dennis> The publisher profits from the publication. In defense, ICBO, SBCCI and BOCA all provide a service to filter all work done on codes and to organize them into a final, publishable code that they invest in up front with hopes of retrieving in sales. Volunteers do not provide this service or this know how - however, with new technology to distribut codes electronically (granted not all engineers are capable of supporting new technology), the cost of publishing a paper product no longer makes sense unless the intent of these non-profit organizations is to profit or build a reserve of funds for future publication. In other words, the business and expense overhead - including employees who participate in the process. 2) How can anyone profit (financially and to ICBO's/SBCCI's/BOCA's detriment) by using and liberally publishing code provisions?, <Dennis> This is a not for profit proceeds that allow a non-profit company to maintain a certain amount of reserve as long as it is not intended to grow as profit but to be used to pay for expenses and overhead. I was on the board of directors of a non-profit group who purchased property that we held for construction of homes built entirely by students (high-school). We had a cash reserve in the bank and had to be very careful how we described the funds so that it did not appear to the government that this was profit. I think organizations like ICBO and the others work along similar lines. The question is whether or not it is needed based on current technology and the growing change in use by professionals of this media. Personally, owning the electronic copy of a code is far more convenient than a paper copy as it can accompany me anywhere I intend to go without no additional weight. 3) To what extent can the broad and liberal dissemination of public and life safety information harm these publishers? (it could only enhance the public interest I would think), <Dennis> None that I can see other than to seriously cut back their ability to represent building officials whos job it is to review and vote on the adoption of these codes. If the code is truly for their benefit to insure properly constructed buildings that perform well, then the cost should be transferred to either the homeowner or to the developer - not the designer. 4) Could anyone near the profit these publishers extract from the three year code cycle! For crying out loud, this 3 year cycle gives them new work-product to market so quickly - only a fool would attempt to plagiarize it for commercial purposes! <Dennis> Seriously, as I stated before, these organizations may build a reserve for the potential use as overhead and operational fees to apply to code creation and publication. As a non-profit organization, they are not allowed to maintain a reserve for the intent of hording profit. Steven A. Los Angeles One additional comment I'll make is that they could argue that they use the proceeds to create programs for the education of the profession. I have yet to participate in a free educational service by any non-profit organizations. Even SEA uses the funds they earn from sale of publications or earnings from educational seminars to support the transportation and hotel costs for those members of their committees authorized to participate on state or national meetings. Personally, I feel strongly this is overdone and while the argument for face to face meetings has been driven into the ground, those who argue in favor of it refuse to comprmise on the amount of work that can be accomplished prior of face on meetings and then organized to make these face-to-face conferences far more productive, must learn how to use the tools that are available to them to in a productive manner. I think this is the fault of those who will not allow themselves to use comprimise on this matter and those involved in committee work consider themselves too busy to take on any new education for use of internet based tools. This sets our profession back and wastes the money that members contribute in dues. It also is an excellent way to block those who have no other resources but the Internet to participate from becoming active members on these committees. Bill Polhemus' NCSEA Advocacy Sub-Committee is one of the only sub-committees of SEA which has been using the Internet as their main source of communication and as a means to assemble their work for publication. One primary consideration is the lack of funds available to this sub-committee to do their work as other committees would do. Still, I think that the work accomplish via the Internet is superior to the work done by other committees and in a much shorter period of time. The three year cycle, in my opinion as well as yours does nothing more than to insure the pockets of professionals can be tapped on a regular basis. The only positive point to make is that ICBO will give back the equivalency in codes with each year of renewal - which shows what the publications are actually worth. Dennis S. Wish, PE ******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* *** * Read list FAQ at: http://www.seaint.org/list_FAQ.asp * * This email was sent to you via Structural Engineers * Association of Southern California (SEAOSC) server. To * subscribe (no fee) or UnSubscribe, please go to: * * http://www.seaint.org/sealist1.asp * * Questions to seaint-ad(--nospam--at)seaint.org. Remember, any email you * send to the list is public domain and may be re-posted * without your permission. Make sure you visit our web * site at: http://www.seaint.org ******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********
- Re: Building Codes Online?
- From: Cratylus Consulting Group
- Re: Building Codes Online?
- Prev by Subject: Re: Building Codes Online?
- Next by Subject: RE: Building Codes Online?
- Previous by thread: Re: Building Codes Online?
- Next by thread: RE: Building Codes Online?