5 ms·

Carl Malamud’s Lawsuit-Fighting Kickstarter to Put Public Standards Online

63 points by tmoretti 13y ago

ChuckMcM 13y ago
This stuff is well worth supporting. It annoys the heck out of me when IEEE and ANSI hold standards hostage.
JessicaSWilliam 13y ago
============================== ==============================upto I looked at the check of $5108, I didnt believe that...my... friend woz like they say trully earning money part time on their apple labtop.. there aunt haz done this for only 22 months and as of now paid for the morgage on there condo and got a brand new Land Rover Range Rover. go to my blog ============================== WWW.Works23.Com =============================
thinkcomp 13y ago
The docket for the lawsuit Carl is fighting can be found here: http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2506677 http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2506677 Appropriately, PlainSite uses a lot of materials that Carl helped make possible (including Aaron Swartz's initial PACER data dump, which he still hosts).
sfall 13y ago
I am really torn on this lawsuit. I work with NFPA standards. Currently many standards are available online for free on the nfpa website. The issue with this being a completely free publication is how would we maintain the development? The people who sit on the committees already volunteer their time. NFPA still has to maintain the documents, handle grant application, research, publications, free resources (like fire safety month). Would they be able to solicit enough donations to handle even their core duties. Large companies could handle it but how many copies are sold to firms that would prefer not to spend anything on it?
- r0h1n 13y ago
  It would be great if you could add some context for readers who don't know about NFPA, or about how the US standards system currently works. Otherwise I'm (from India) having a hard time trying to figure out why public works standards would ever need to be monetized/paywalled/copyrighted?
  - reginaldjcooper 13y ago
    Starting halfway through the article: "To the SDOs [standards development organizations], the system works rather well. They take on the burden of developing standards, an obligation that in many other countries falls on government. They convene experts and build systems for collating and distributing these standards. They even offer limited free access... [Malamud] argues, the effect of these standards is felt on the ground each and every day, as well as in the pocketbooks of local governments. In a video posted by Malamud, the head building inspector for Sonoma County, Calif. testifies that the country spends about $30,000 during a code cycle buying copies of building code for staff." Everything the government uses as a standard should be freely available to the public in a machine readable format. By selling standards to the government I assert the SDO's should be required to forfeit their copyright. But that will never happen; it's the same bullshit as with PACER and court documents, some asshole has found a way to rent-seek on publicly owned IP and the system allows it because few people care out loud.
    - briancpotter 13y ago
      In fact, court rulings have upheld that once a standard becomes a law, the SDOs DO forfeit their copyright. "The law can't be copyrighted" has legal precedent dating back to the 1800's, and was most recently upheld (specifically with respect to building codes) in the vase of Veeck vs. SBCCI: http://www.studentweb.law.ttu.edu/cochran/Cases%20&%20Readings/Copyright-UNT/veeck.htm http://www.studentweb.law.ttu.edu/cochran/Cases%20&%20Readin... That's why Malamud hasn't been sued by the ICC, even though he makes their primary publications (The International Building Code, which every state uses some flavor of) freely available.
  - 13y ago
Fuxy 13y ago
He's setting himself up for failure everybody agrees with the fact that all public standards should be available on the internet however very few people are willing to pay for that to happen. We kind of think it's the government's duty to release and make public on the internet as well as everywhere else these standards without us having to spend our hard earned money on it. That's what we pay taxes for.

63 points by tmoretti 13y ago

This stuff is well worth supporting. It annoys the heck out of me when IEEE and ANSI hold standards hostage.

============================== ==============================upto I looked at the check of $5108, I didnt believe that...my... friend woz like they say trully earning money part time on their apple labtop.. there aunt haz done this for only 22 months and as of now paid for the morgage on there condo and got a brand new Land Rover Range Rover. go to my blog ============================== WWW.Works23.Com =============================

thinkcomp 13y ago

The docket for the lawsuit Carl is fighting can be found here: http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2506677 http://www.plainsite.org/flashlight/case.html?id=2506677 Appropriately, PlainSite uses a lot of materials that Carl helped make possible (including Aaron Swartz's initial PACER data dump, which he still hosts).

sfall 13y ago

I am really torn on this lawsuit. I work with NFPA standards. Currently many standards are available online for free on the nfpa website. The issue with this being a completely free publication is how would we maintain the development? The people who sit on the committees already volunteer their time. NFPA still has to maintain the documents, handle grant application, research, publications, free resources (like fire safety month). Would they be able to solicit enough donations to handle even their core duties. Large companies could handle it but how many copies are sold to firms that would prefer not to spend anything on it?

r0h1n 13y ago
It would be great if you could add some context for readers who don't know about NFPA, or about how the US standards system currently works. Otherwise I'm (from India) having a hard time trying to figure out why public works standards would ever need to be monetized/paywalled/copyrighted?
- reginaldjcooper 13y ago
  Starting halfway through the article: "To the SDOs [standards development organizations], the system works rather well. They take on the burden of developing standards, an obligation that in many other countries falls on government. They convene experts and build systems for collating and distributing these standards. They even offer limited free access... [Malamud] argues, the effect of these standards is felt on the ground each and every day, as well as in the pocketbooks of local governments. In a video posted by Malamud, the head building inspector for Sonoma County, Calif. testifies that the country spends about $30,000 during a code cycle buying copies of building code for staff." Everything the government uses as a standard should be freely available to the public in a machine readable format. By selling standards to the government I assert the SDO's should be required to forfeit their copyright. But that will never happen; it's the same bullshit as with PACER and court documents, some asshole has found a way to rent-seek on publicly owned IP and the system allows it because few people care out loud.
  - briancpotter 13y ago
    In fact, court rulings have upheld that once a standard becomes a law, the SDOs DO forfeit their copyright. "The law can't be copyrighted" has legal precedent dating back to the 1800's, and was most recently upheld (specifically with respect to building codes) in the vase of Veeck vs. SBCCI: http://www.studentweb.law.ttu.edu/cochran/Cases%20&%20Readings/Copyright-UNT/veeck.htm http://www.studentweb.law.ttu.edu/cochran/Cases%20&%20Readin... That's why Malamud hasn't been sued by the ICC, even though he makes their primary publications (The International Building Code, which every state uses some flavor of) freely available.
- 13y ago

Fuxy 13y ago

He's setting himself up for failure everybody agrees with the fact that all public standards should be available on the internet however very few people are willing to pay for that to happen. We kind of think it's the government's duty to release and make public on the internet as well as everywhere else these standards without us having to spend our hard earned money on it. That's what we pay taxes for.