Need a book? Engineering books recommendations...

Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

RE: Building Codes/US Supreme Court

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
As many have mentioned I think this could possibly be a slippery slope to
start walking on.  I as much as the next guy would love to have code
information provided for free.  And it is true that to date this case only
includes the building codes themselves and not the material standards but it
seems to make sense that they would be next.  If the code, which is now a
part of the law which is fact requires use of A36 or ASTM xx then should
that not also be included in the "free" part of the equation since it is
required and referenced by law (the building code)?

The comment that I think Scott had about the states paying a fee to use the
code seems to make sense except that it always seems that us the tax payers
would end up spending more money on the taxes or fess to cover the use of
the code then we would spend on buying the code itself.

This might be one of those cases were we want to be careful what we ask for.

my 2 cents worth
Greg Effland, P.E.
KC, MO USA


******* ****** ******* ******** ******* ******* ******* ***
*   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 
******* ****** ****** ****** ******* ****** ****** ********