>> It would be a violation of NFPA's copyright in these documents to
>> give you a copy. NFPA makes the money to continue operation,
>> creating and
> Actually that is not literally true. If TRA has adopted NFPA-1127
> either partially or in full as "model code" and reprints it on their
> web site as "their" code it becomes a TRA copyright material which
> can be resent unlimited as a non-profit.
> While the ORIGINAL NFPA document may be copyrighted and they would
> certainly like you to buy copies from them directly, one must
> consider the central purpose of model codes before declaring them
> uncopyable under all circumstances.
The "central purpose" of model codes is to make money for the "model
Jerry, your speculation is not true in the case of these codes -- they
are copyrighted and *any* other entity is expressly prohibited from
duplication, in whole or in part, ANY such code. Every single one of
these model codes (including the work of SBCCI, BOCA, ICBO, ICC as well
as NFPA) have, typically, a "sample ordinance for adoption" of the
particular subject code. There is no entity nor jurisdiction that can
do anything OTHER than simply 'adopt' the code as their own -- and they
cannot even print the index without permission (which I doubt they'd
get). The 'Standard Codes' (i.e. SBCCI) have at the bottom of *every*
single page "Standard xxxx (Building, Plumbing, Fire Prevention, etc)
Code?199x" and it is not there accidentally -- they want you to *know*
that *they* own this code and all any one entity can do is adopt it by
(You will not see any effective difference with the likes of ASTM or
As to "providing this 'law' for the public", the various govt.
jurisdictions are only required (by law) to "make available" copies of
those codes adopted into law -- and that they do -- at the State Fire
Marhsal's offices in the (typically) state capitol. Want to see what
the California Fire Prevention Code says?? Fine -- there's a copy for
you to peruse in Sacramento. (of course, CA typically feels they don't
"need no shtinking model codes" <g>, so they just draft their own
(which, as I remember, are on their state website)). However, most
(normal <g>) states will typically adopt one of the three model codes --
or NFPA codes directly (which are most times cited (again, "by
reference") in the three model codes). There is *no* state jurisdiction
that has ever secured (and doubtful ever will) the 'permission' to
reprint those codes. They can only "adopt", they cannot "reprint".
Insofar as Tripoli has reprinted NFPA 1127, I think it reasonable to
conclude that they are doing so in violation of NFPA's copyright on that
document. They can, of course, present some documentation justifying
their illegitimate behavior here -- but we've already seen what they do
when asked to confirm their actions with "documentation". Dang hard to
provide something one does not have.
Same here with 1127.
No. Tripoli is printing (or, has printed) that code in violation of
NFPA's copyright - plain and simple.