Should standards that become a part of a law be free to the public?

[cpisz]

Transmitterdan is correct. Companies are generally required to license required patents according to FRAND law. Fair, reasonable, and non-descrimatory. They do not lose rights to those patients not should they. Imagine if you owned a company that spent millions of dollars in research and development and then the government said that was the standard so you lose your patent or copyright. It just can not work that way. Nobody would take the risk of investing if the investment could just go away like that. So innovation would stifle.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

A professional in any field should know and understand the standards and best practices of their field.

Agreed 200%!

And this is why I always recommend requesting to see relevant trade credentials and insurance certificates of anyone hired to perform boat work.

But I am really curious about something...

For all those people who claim that to have something done right it must be done by one’s self, how is this even possible, if they do not acquire, learn, and apply the relevant standards and best practices, to assure the safety of vessel and crew?

On this forum, almost every boater will swear up and down that the DIY work they have performed was done safely, and yet most have proceeded without referencing applicable marine safety standards, and the work will be cited on the next survey as non-compliant to the minimum standards determined by a committee of some of the industries best experts.

Any individual, who believes they know better than the collective of one of these standards technical committees, I’ve got some earth shattering news for ya; not even close.

It seems to me that too many boat owners wish to assume responsibility for vessel and crew safety, ONLY WHEN IT SUITS THEM.

My position is that it doesn’t matter, not even one little bit, if marine standards compliance is required by law, it is simply the right thing to do.

[transmitterdan]

Rod,

Stop lumping all DIY boaters into the stupider than thou category. It’s wrong and not fair. Many of us “DIY” boaters have tons more training and experience than any marine electrician. I won’t go into my personal background but suffice to say it covers a lot of ground no marine electrician will ever see but I’ll bet everyone reading this knows about several projects I have done. Just because we don’t thump our chests about how smart we are does not make us ignoramuses.

The complaint the OP makes is that a DIYer who wants to DIR (do-it-right) probably needs access to the standards. The debate is how to get that access on a reasonable basis. I should not have to pay $200 to know whether or not the $10 fuse i need to add is adequate. We all know when something gets stamped “marine grade” the price goes up by 10x. Not because of cost, but because the market is captive and low volume. And the ratio of good to bad marine electricians is pretty low in my experience so hiring a pro isn’t easy in many cases.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by cpisz

Transmitterdan is correct. Companies are generally required to license required patents according to FRAND law. Fair, reasonable, and non-descrimatory. They do not lose rights to those patients not should they. Imagine if you owned a company that spent millions of dollars in research and development and then the government said that was the standard so you lose your patent or copyright. It just can not work that way. Nobody would take the risk of investing if the investment could just go away like that. So innovation would stifle.

Agreed 100%.

I don’t believe there is any law that dissolves copyright or patent protection, solely because a law referenced a not-for-profit standard.

I don’t believe their is any law that mandates a law referenced standard by a not for profit organization must be distributed on the interweb for free.

If there is, please show me.

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

To achieve this theoretical benefit, you would seriously upend the whole current system of standards bodies. Boating is small potatoes; think of UL, CE, ISO, the electrical and plumbing codes.

Absolutely. But just because a system exists doesn’t mean it is right/correct. And this has indeed been changing. Because of legal cases related to standards becoming law you can now go to the NFPA website and read a full and complete copy of the NEC, something the NFPA resisted vociferously.

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

A professional in any field should know and understand the standards and best practices of their field.

They should. But are they even applying the right standard? Case in point, the Boeing 737 Max. Boeing and the FAA both accepted a one-out-of-two (1oo2) voting system for their angle of attack sensors and related safety programming. 1oo2 doubles the number of potential false alarms. In the chemical processing industry there are standards that prohibit 1oo2 except where complete shutdown is a safe state and the process can tolerate additional false alarms. Not the conditions that are found in a plane in flight. At a very minimum a 2oo3 system would be required under conditions similar to flight conditions. Clearly both the company engineers and the regulatory reviewers (both classes of people that should know best practices) applied inadequate standards. But without free access to those legal standards those of us outside the industry cannot reasonably access, and possibly critique, those standards.

As a person who has been a passenger on a commercial airplane I think I can reasonably argue that I am a member of the “class of persons affected” and thus even under current law I should have reasonable access so I can evaluate the applicability and effectiveness of the standard for myself.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by Exile

It's been stated several times during the course of the thread that most (all?) of the ABYC standards, despite being incorporated into US law, do not apply to recreational boaters. They are certainly recommended, and are often required by surveyors per private insurance contracts, but compliance with them doesn't generally appear to have the force of law.

And this is why I prefaced my comment with "if" a standard is required by law. To be honest the whole discussion has gotten so convoluted that I have not personally followed and read all the links that address this so don't really know if any, some or all of ABYC standards or any other standards for that matter are legally required on boats or under what circumstances.



However, as has been pointed out, if there is a problem on a boat that results in an injury or insurance claim then I think it highly likely that standards, whether mandated by law or not, could come into play in any legal action.

[transmitterdan]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

Agreed 100%.

I don’t believe there is any law that dissolves copyright or patent protection, solely because a law referenced a not-for-profit standard.

I don’t believe their is any law that mandates a law referenced standard by a not for profit organization must be distributed on the interweb for free.

If there is, please show me.

Profit or not-for-profit has nothing to do with this issue. There are many for-profit companies that have their technology embedded in US and EU law. Case in point, US digital televisions operate under a license from a Korean company you know as LG. Under an agreement with the US FCC LG must license its technology to all comers on a fair and equitable basis. This was a condition of getting their IP into the US standard. And the standard documents are available freely on the web. But because LG owns certain patents they have a right to collect royalties. Probably the patents are close to expiration now so we can expect a "new and improved" digital television standard real soon now.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

But just because a system exists doesn’t mean it is right/correct.

If a system has been around for a while, and meets the needs of the vast majority of users (industry, government and consumers), and the alternatives do not yet exist and would be prohibitively difficult to establish and maintain under a different framework, then for all practical purposes it is right/correct.

Your concept of what would be "right/correct" offers very little upside and a whole lotta downside. I'd say that it's an example of "perfect is the enemy of good"... but what you're in favour of is nowhere near perfect.

... Case in point, the Boeing 737 Max. ...Clearly both the company engineers and the regulatory reviewers (both classes of people that should know best practices) applied inadequate standards.

The 737 Max is a case of economics trumping testing and safety, a failure of self-certification, and the FAA asleep at the switch.

But without free access to those legal standards those of us outside the industry cannot reasonably access, and possibly critique, those standards.

As a person who has been a passenger on a commercial airplane I think I can reasonably argue that I am a member of the “class of persons affected” and thus even under current law I should have reasonable access so I can evaluate the applicability and effectiveness of the standard for myself.

The vast, vast majority of airline passengers wouldn't have the knowledge or attention-span to be able to understand the sea of regulations and standards in commercial aviation.

This is a nice post-christmas thought exercise, but massively impractical.

[skipmac]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Rod,

Stop lumping all DIY boaters into the stupider than thou category. It’s wrong and not fair. Many of us “DIY” boaters have tons more training and experience than any marine electrician. I won’t go into my personal background but suffice to say it covers a lot of ground no marine electrician will ever see but I’ll bet everyone reading this knows about several projects I have done. Just because we don’t thump our chests about how smart we are does not make us ignoramuses.

The complaint the OP makes is that a DIYer who wants to DIR (do-it-right) probably needs access to the standards. The debate is how to get that access on a reasonable basis. I should not have to pay $200 to know whether or not the $10 fuse i need to add is adequate. We all know when something gets stamped “marine grade” the price goes up by 10x. Not because of cost, but because the market is captive and low volume. And the ratio of good to bad marine electricians is pretty low in my experience so hiring a pro isn’t easy in many cases.

Exactly.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by skipmac

And this is why I prefaced my comment with "if" a standard is required by law. To be honest the whole discussion has gotten so convoluted that I have not personally followed and read all the links that address this so don't really know if any, some or all of ABYC standards or any other standards for that matter are legally required on boats or under what circumstances.

However, as has been pointed out, if there is a problem on a boat that results in an injury or insurance claim then I think it highly likely that standards, whether mandated by law or not, could come into play in any legal action.

Sorry if I missed your "if" skipmac. And yes, a convoluted discussion and once again mostly off-topic from what the OP was raising. As a boatowner with a non-technical background, I was actually surprised to learn that (apparently) none of the ABYC standards that are mandated for commercial & inspected vessels appear to be required for recreational ones. Notwithstanding, and like many who sail offshore, I've always considered ABYC the "gold" standard for maintaining my boat. Mainly to adhere to best practices whenever possible, but also to satisfy insurance requirements and, yes, for reasons that go to personal liability.

There are also very practical reasons as well. I've always felt it's just as easy to get a job done correctly as incorrectly. Taking shortcuts on a boat always seems to come back & bite me. And there are just too many systems to try and maintain to have to go back and repair a previous repair. I've also had to learn the hard way that noncompliance with ABYC-recommended best practices is not always the fault of a boatowner. I have found out the hard way that a professional certified ABYC technician is hardly any guarantee of proficient work, and that problems can also derive from original factory installations that did not meet the standards in place at the time or, in some cases, any relevant standards at all.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

OK, I am still having trouble understanding your 3rd paragraph.

Who says?

If you offer something as a public document (law is public), logically it is no longer private. Like life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, I believe this is self-evident.

Why do public standards bother you? Is there a down side? I feel you are stubbornly defending an untenable position, so there must be some reason.

Remember I am ONLY referring to those portions of standards that have been OFFERED as available for adoption by reference. Not the entire standard or the body of standards. ONLY that portion that has been OFFERED for adoption by reference.

Law should be transparent.

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

It cannot be that if a law mandates use of a patented or copyrighted work that the work immediately falls into the public domain and the IP holder loses their monopoly. Such a determination would have an immediate chilling effect on many aspects of the economy. It would also be inconsistent with international treaties governing intellectual property rights.

The US government goes to some pains to ensure that the monopoly powers created by patents or copyrights cannot be used when making laws incorporating intellectual property. They invariably require the IP holder to give up their monopoly rights by signing an agreement with the government that they will license their IP to anyone and everyone on a non-discriminatory and equitable basis. I am not aware of any IP incorporated into law that does not have such an agreement. But that’s as far as the government needs to go. To go further would stifle innovation, break international agreements and wreck the economy. The courts will see it that way too.

You exaggerate to create a straw man. You have not explained how providing a standard, not proprietary corporate information, would chill the economy. More likely the opposite. I believe your argument, as it relates to adopted by reference standards, is fabricated. Produce one concrete example, limited ONLY to adopted by reference standards. I feel certain this will be impossible, because the adopted portions are ALREADY, by LAW, available to your business competitors. How can you make a case that confidential business information has been revealed?

I think you will find the courts are slowly moving to make more standards public. Time will tell.


[By the way, I hold several patents, created much confidential process information, and write for a living. I respect IP very highly.]

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by thinwater

Law should be transparent.

... yet we still need lawyers.

If a consumer is not responsible for meeting a given adopted boating standard, and they follow sensible precautions - eg professional survey of a used boat they're considering, using professionals for safety-critical repairs -OR- learning enough about applicable standards to effect their own repairs... then where is the need/benefit to making referred standards free to the public?

It's a whole lotta effort and disruption to save one person in 20 from having to do a bit of research or coughing up the price of a good dinner out to get the entire specs from the horse's mouth.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by transmitterdan

Rod,

Stop lumping all DIY boaters into the stupider than thou category.

I have done no such thing.

The ABYC standards, as I have demonstrated, are easily accessible on the ABYC.org site, and their cost is quite reasonable for the value they represent.

Anyone who does not know how to add a fuse in compliance with ABYC standards may choose to:

1. Avoid modifying the marine electrical system. (Nobody is holding a gun to anyone's head to modify their boat.)
2. Consult someone who is knowledgeable with the standards for advice and follow it. (This has risks; if you don't know the standards, how do you know that they know the standards?)
3. Hire someone who is knowledgeable with the standards to do it.
4. Acquire the standards, learn them, and apply them.
5. Do it without reference / compliance with marine standards, and risk causing a hazard such as fire or explosion that could cause bodily injury or property damage, and could result in a liability claim, that may cause them to lose their boat and all worldly possessions in a law suit.

Every boater is free to make their choice.

Every choice will have an associated risk, reward, and cost.

The cost to learn the standards is US$185 membership (for a rec boater), and spend some time reading AND understanding them.

If you can't understand them, that should tell you, you have inadequate background to learn them, and you either need to acquire that background, or choose another option.

Make no mistake, whatever choice you choose, YOU are responsible and accountable for it.

I hear/see people all the time claim, "My boat, my money."

I couldn't agree more, but if something bad happens, it still holds true, until someone takes it from you in a liability suit.

FWIW, I see lots of vessels with fuses that are not in compliance, and without fuses that are not in compliance.

And this is just fuses.

When I conduct a marine electrical seminar for a boating group, I start as follows:

Q1. Who here performs DIY electrical work on their boat; show of hands?

A1. About 50% of the hands go up (but based on my experience I believe it is actually 90% or higher).

Q2. Of you with your hands up, who believes that work is safe?

A2. All of the hands stay up.

Q3. Of you with your hands up, who will authorize me to inspect your vessel; no charge if I find no safety issue, $200 for the inspection if I find one?

A3. All of the hands go down.

Interesting...

Then I begin the presentation, introducing the audience to ABYC, and cover some of the faults I commonly encounter.

At the end of the seminar, I typically have 4 or 5 come up with a cheque for $200, to pay up front for the deficiency they know I am going to find, because they just learned that their boat that they thought was safe, isn't, and why.

FYI, the best boat I have ever inspected under this "challenge" was a boater who swore up and down his boat was "safe" in every aspect and was absolutely positive I would not find a single issue.

I have to admit that the vessel wiring was better than the vast majority I inspect , and possibly the best I have ever seen.

I found 3 unsafe issues, that were not in compliance with ABYC standards; 2 that could result in an easily avoidable fire, and 1 that could result in an easily avoidable electrocution.

The reality is, NOBODY can possibly know what they don't know until they learn so.

It is not that they are "stupid" as you claim; it is that they are not "learned" in that specific area. Two completely different things.

To err is human, but not everyone will forgive.

My recommendation?

Protect yourself, your loved ones, your boat, and others; choose option 1 to 4 above.

I really don't care which one you choose, but please choose from 1 to 4 and not 5 above, especially if you don't have the resources to cover someone else's losses due to your personal choice.

[Exile]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

I have done no such thing.

Of course you have, and just did it again. Nothing wrong with emphasizing why boatowners should try and always adhere to ABYC standards without all the constantly repeating drama over electrical fires, lawsuits, portable generators blowing up, "protecting your loved ones," yada, yada, yada. Or the egotistical "I know better than anyone" superiority rants that occasion the majority of your posts. You're probably more often than not talking to a crowd of pretty accomplished people in their respective fields, many of whom are coming from backgrounds which make even sophisticated DIY work on their own boats seem quite trivial I'm sure.

Just like the topic the OP presented in the last thread had nothing to do with portable generator safety, this one had nothing to do with whether boatowners should adhere to ABYC standards, why they are considered best practices, or all the scary consequences of not adhering. Instead, it's about whether those standards -- created by non-governmental, private industry & other experts -- should be freely available to the public when they are adopted, i.e. incorporated by reference, under the law. This is obviously a complex issue or it wouldn't now be before the courts, invokes tensions if not conflicts between private interests and the public good, and probably involves interpretation of statutory and (maybe) even constitutional (due process) dictates.

In other words, you're in over your head (as am I), and have already repeatedly made your important but nevertheless off-topic points ad nausem (and are mostly preaching them to the choir). How about we now let others who actually have some professional insight into the relevant matter weigh in without your constantly making the issue some sort of disregard of ABYC standards, boatowners being incompetent or too cheap to purchase the standards, the threat of lawsuits, or your marginally cloaked implication that the services you offer will avoid all such problems, etc. etc., etc. You are always free to discuss topics that you feel are more important by starting a new thread.