Tradesmen don't pay taxes???? News to me.
Amplifying on the other respondent's observation I'd carry it even further--
If you live in or anybody you do business with or whose products you use
are located in a jurisdiction which uses NEC as a basis for local code
you're a user.
In the US, there's virtually nowhere that doesn't use NEC as a basis for
local code but it is not, afaik, formally legislated to be legislative
It's pervasive but doesn't actually have an legal standing as law, only
as a basis for Code.
GET SOME MORE PARK KEEPERS, GARDENERS AND SANITATION CREWS TO WATCH
YOUR KIDS WHILE THEY ARE PLAYING IN THE PARK AND TO BEAUTIFY AND KEEP
YOUR DIRTY NEIGHBORHOODS CLEAN WHEN YOUR DIRTY KIDS AND WIVES LITTER
THE PLACE ALL UP LIKE THEY'RE FROM THE GHETTO AFTER WORK, SCHOOL AND
Wow. How about some more people to harvest whatever it is you're smokin' in
If we're going to subsidize electricians by making complete files or
printouts of the code -- an essential tool of their work -- free, and if we
justify that by saying that everyone benefits, then when I write a tutorial
on wringing gage blocks or grinding high-speed steel, why shouldn't someone
pay for my dictionaries and stylebooks?
In other words, I don't necessarily object to the idea, it's just that I
don't think much of the selective nature of the subsidies. d8-)
At least if you wrote an article on wringing gage blocks, you would
not add a paragraph every couple of years and require everyone that
wanted to wring gage blocks to buy the latest edition.
Well technically you are not required to buy the latest edition of the
NEC, but they sure do not sell a slim volume of the pen and ink
changes to bring a previous edition up to the current edition. If
they did sell something that had the differences in the latest edition
it would make understanding the code too easy and the NEC would not be
a barrier to reduce competition.
On Tue, 26 Apr 2011 20:56:00 -0700 (PDT), " email@example.com"
That is becoming a common gripe about the NEC. They produce a new
cycle every 3 years. The proposal period for changes is only open
about a year of that and it usually takes the municipalities more than
a year to get the new code adopted. This means that by the time the
real users get familiar enough with the new code to find problems it
is too late to get it changed for the next cycle. As you pointed out
it also generates a lot of money for NFPA being able to sell new books
every 3 years. Most of the professionals end up with a code book, a
handbook and a summary of changes book ... at least.
Now they also want to charge you for the PDF too, even if you bought
the book (there were a few early additions with a coupon for a free
PDF load included but they stopped that)
I served time and gladly for 8 or 9 years as an active member
of a standards group multiple committees and the group was under
EIA. We met to make standards and get tasks to do for the next
meeting - presenting results and suggesting changes to the infant
The various member companies paid rather large sums to be active
members. They also had specs early on in the design - often changing
after every meeting - often only the input and output pins with the
core a dummy until the combinatorial logic was sorted out by groups.
I served on memory (e.g. DDR DDR I, DDR II) DIMM (pc modules) SoDim
(laptops) and custom modules, motherboards and the I/O spec groups.
The members paid for the joint development, standards got to get us
to make the standard and then they maintain them.
One standard that enjoyed a long changing life was USB. Not only
levels but physical shape and protocol as well. Members could
call a special meeting to start off a spec. Often a large company
would have a spec and then work to make it a standard.
Martin IEEE, JEDEC former spec member. And yes specs are down loadable.
On 4/24/2011 12:32 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
Well, I read the case, annotations, commentary and footnotes. It was a 5th
Circuit Court of Appeals case heard in 2002 and it reversed an appellate
I follow their reasoning, but I liked the dissenting opinion much better.
Thanks for that bit of information.
My main objection to the NEC is that it is poorly organized. I expect
that is intentional to make following the code to be hard and not
easily done by homeowners. In Washington State the courts found that
homeowners can work on their own property without having a license.
The work still has to meet all the requirements. And the building
departments of cities and counties will help owners understand what is
Furthermore, the Bible talks about sharing one loaf of bread with
5,000 people. I believe that it is a cryptic reference to free
software and free information sharing. I am pretty sure that Jesus
would disapprove of copyright.
The difference is that having the ability to download it for free eliminates
all incentive to buy it. That's the straw that's breaking the back of many
niches in publishing. Electrical tradesmen at some level can easily afford
to buy it, and their incentive to do so keeps the business of producing it
in balance, while still allowing people to read it for free if they make a
To me, it's the difference between borrowing something and stealing it.
Actually, you can read it at home very much like you can read it at
library. NFPA makes it available online for free. You can read it
online via their reader, but you can't download it, for obvious
Also, I'd say the folks who try to make the case that because it's
by most municipalities as part of their code, that it should therefore
be available for free or very low cost. That argument doesn't fly
very well because I can show you plenty of municpalities that charge
fees similar to what NFPA charges for a copy of their zoning laws,
land use rules, EPA rules, etc.
Yes, I pointed that out in an earlier message. Some people think they should
be able to download it.
It's the "user should pay" idea that took hold among conservatives when they
started cutting support for free services. We've always had some of that.
Either the user (the electrical tradesman) pays for what he has to use in
his business, or the taxpayer pays. Someone has to pay, in any case.
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.