Supreme Court Ruling on Building Codes

[CodeWarrior]

I question if the average person can pick up a code book and build a deck from it. It's not exactly a "how to" document. I feel the public is well served with practical, step-by-step, written in plain English documents on how to build something like a deck. The reality is if we make it easy to do it right, more people will do it right from the start.

I find it interesting about this whole argument about ICC is that ICC is providing a service to the government for free. The model codes created by ICC are turned into law by the state and local government, so ICC is essentially writing the laws for these entities for free. Yes, many of these entities also employ inspectors that buy code books and take courses, but maybe this business model is failing. Maybe a better model would be for any government agency that wants to adopt the code must pay ICC for the development of that code.

The ICC Foundation is already supporting the code development of ICC effort via grants. I don't believe ICC can accept donations but their foundation can. I have some experience serving a foundation, and raising funds is not easy, but it can be done and ICC would not have to have to rely in internally generated revenues as much toward the code writing. Anyone at ICC will likely tell you charging a fee to participate in the code writing might discourage participation. Most standards writing organizations in the US like ICC rely on paying members to write the codes, people who donate their time. In some cases, the SDO pays the travel expenses for the committee members, but that's about it.

 

[CodeWarrior]

You're killing me... are you a media journalist, Ha, ha!, because you quoted HALF my statement, which ended, in HA HA!!

Here's what I said and the bold part you missed. "You don't need UpCodes and lawsuits to learn deck codes. I got that one covered for everyone, ha, ha!"

How can I even have a conversation with someone that responds only to the "set up" and not the "punchline" of the joke...

FREE viewing of I-codes. www.codes.iccsafe.org

NADRA said there are 40 million decks over 20 years old in the country. Sounds like you have a lot of ground to cover, ha ha.

 

[tmurray]

The ICC Foundation is already supporting the code development of ICC effort via grants. I don't believe ICC can accept donations but their foundation can. I have some experience serving a foundation, and raising funds is not easy, but it can be done and ICC would not have to have to rely in internally generated revenues as much toward the code writing. Anyone at ICC will likely tell you charging a fee to participate in the code writing might discourage participation. Most standards writing organizations in the US like ICC rely on paying members to write the codes, people who donate their time. In some cases, the SDO pays the travel expenses for the committee members, but that's about it.

Ah, yes, pay to play.

I like to look at the standard development committees and count how many are representatives from manufacturers and special interests.

 

[CodeWarrior]

Ah, yes, pay to play.

I like to look at the standard development committees and count how many are representatives from manufacturers and special interests.

Several of the SDOs balance the membership to limit the number of manufacturers, which would otherwise over run the committees. The count may be high, but many attend as non voting observers.

 

[SCBO1]

The way the article reads to me is that the "code is law" and unprotected, but the notes or commentary are off limits....But obviously without all of the facts of the case it is tough to say...

I think you have that right, steveray.

I would think if an author of a book that indicates "the changes in a code commentary" would be able to have that book copyrighted, it's telling you the changes in code or the law. So books that are published by the ICC or others in this regard would be allowed to be copyrighted, IMO.

 

[code-fiend]

The code publishers should think about shifting away from a internally generated revenue model to one to partially relies more on public and private sources of funding. That way they can preserve their code development processes and make them financially viable. Focus on greater use of codes, not one with strings attached.

This is an old thread, but just joined this forum to give my 2 cents on this the case, which I have strong feelings about. You can't copyright the law, there it is.

Mentioned in other thread, but putting here too: if you look at their ICC 990, they make most of their money from program services anyway. And looks like in 2020 they made more money than the previous years, so business must be good, and their CEO gets paid over $900,000, lot more than I get paid I can tell you!

 

[ICE]

CEO gets paid over $900,000

Unless that's per decade, it is awful.

 

[tmurray]

Unless that's per decade, it is awful.

Well, if you're not interested, I suppose you could twist my arm and I would do it.