Are You Licensing MasterFormat 2004?

Specification & Product Discussions MasterFormat 2004 Discussions
1

Are You Licensing MasterFormat 2004?

Sound like a silly question, but CSI has informed me that 4specs comes under their Proprietary Use of MasterFormat requirements. That requires us to sign an agreement and to pay a mimimum of $1.600 the first year. This appears to be targeted at 4specs and other print and online publications.

Roger Grant in his email to me December 14, 2009 said:
http://www.4specs.com/license/2009_12_14_CSI_2_4specs.pdf

“Our long standing practice is to enter into a license agreement with organizations that are employing MasterFormat in a Proprietary Use as defined in the Terms of Use.”

I can find no one who has a license agreement. CSI has not provided a copy of the license agreement to sign and there are many conditions to the documents I have that make it difficult for 4specs to accept the license.

I spoke with about 10 print and Internet publishers at GreenBuild. No one had signed such a license nor paid the $500 application fee and $1,100 minimum annual fee.

The proprietary use definition is very broad:

Terms and Use and Licensing for MasterFormat™
http://www.4specs.com/license/CSI_MF_Terms_of_Use_2009-07-31.pdf

Proprietary Use of MasterFormat™
http://www.4specs.com/license/CSI_MF_Proprietary_Use_2009-07-31FINAL%20Commercial.pdf

This proprietary license requirement could include the following:

  1. Publisher such as 4specs, ARCAT, First Source, Design Guide, TODL and the like
  2. Plan rooms issuing lists of projects and the MF2004 sections in the specs
  3. Instructing manufacturers about the use of MF2004 even in a free class such as providing a free service or application that helps to market or position an organization or individual by association.
  4. A university teaching an architectural or CM materials class using MF2004. Schools still need to have a public use license for classes are presented without cost to the participant.
  5. An estimating service providing takeoffs for local projects
  6. An architect making CAD and BIM details for a manufacturer.
  7. Local architectural library service using MF2004 to classify manufacturer’s binders for use by their architect, contractor and material supplier members.
  8. While the use by a manufacturer of MF2004 numbers on their literature is ok, it is not clear that they can use the numbers on their website.
  9. A distributor or multi-line rep listing the MF2004 numbers he represents on his business website may require a proprietary license.
    “… and the marketing efforts are not provided as a means of indexing or providing access to the products of multiple manufacturers.”

“Use of MasterFormat for the purposes of organizing master guide specifications, design details, or cost information for the purposes of generating revenue through license, sale, or presentation to third parties is a Proprietary Use.”

Public Use is the presentation or other use of MasterFormat for the purpose of education or training, in any format live, recorded, web, or other provided by a university or other non-profit institution without cost to attendees. Public Use licenses may also be granted for educational uses where the education is provided for a fee which does not exceed the costs of presenting the education."

The potential list of covered business practices and licensees could be significant. CSI has quoted me a $1,600 cost to get the first year’s MF2004 license, and has not provided a schedule of fees so I can see what the cost would be the second year. I have not been able to determine what the basis of the fee is - percentage of revenues? profit?

I talked with an Intellectual Property attorney in Salt Lake City on Monday and have an outline of why CSI has very limited rights to mandate licensing MF2004. Ill provide this information later when I heard from your about the 2 questions below.

The questions today to the 4specs Discussion Forum are:

  1. Have you or anyone you know received a written license for Organizational, Public or Proprietary use of MF2004?

  2. Have you or anyone you know received any type of license for MF1995?

2

No and No but we are forgiven as architects. however at the CSI chapter level we use it in presentations to make money - is that a violation?

I’ll trade them, I’ll bill for every volunteer hour in trade for the use of the license when I’m out giving MF’04 chats to businesses - for money - which I have done for the local chapter for 4 years now. (we’re mostly done now but for a while there we did a lot of these.)

I’d also like to see McGraw-Hill’s bill prior to coughing up any cash. how many years have they used MasterFormat numbers?

M

3

No and No. Why would CSI single out 4specs? Is someone at CSI trying to shut down one of the best reference web sites on the www?

If CSI is serious about charging 4specs for using Masterformat 2004, then CSI will have to prepare a license agreement for every architect, specifier, contractor, manufacturer, educator, estimator, engineer, and the list goes on and on.

I call FOUL. Shame on CSI.

4

read carefully, architects/engineers/contractor and cost estimators doing projects and or organizing internally are allowed.

the discussion is about companies like 4specs, arcat, bsd, crsf, arcom, McGraw Hill and others.

let’s talk about plan rooms? they do it for money and it’s public not internal.

Colin, I believe has #5 wrong. Estimators are covered as they are on the project.

There are a BUNCH of “Public Use” licenses that need to be granted and currently are not.

I’d put the money in escrow and tell the Power’s that Be to show me everyone elses checks then I’d release the money.

As Colin asks; Has any other organization received their bill? has anyone else payed it?

M

5

Mark’s comment reminds me of all the volunteer work that Chapter/Regional Technical Committees spent writing Green Sheets and CSI took them and created SpexText for a profit.

6

This is similar to AISCs attempt to copyright the dimensions of the rolled steel sections thus requiring authors of computer programs that have the dimensions in a data base pay a fee.

It is well established that you cannot copyright the phone numbers in the phone book. You can copyright the way that phone numbers are presented in the phone book meaning you cannot copy the page but you can format them differently on a page. Similarly CSI cannot copyright the MasterFormat numbers. What they are doing is using the threat of legal action to blackmail people to pay this extortion.

We should not forget that CSI is an organization. If the membership and better yet chapters were to yell loud enough I believe that this craziness will go away.

7

Ron

You have your facts wrong. SPECTEXT was not created from the Green Sheets. Its base was the consultant’s master.

8

Bob:
I stand corrected. It was a long time ago. I do remember that both the Baltimore and DC CSI Chapters were really up in arms about what CSI was doing. I can’t remember the exact details nor the years.

9

Mark,

Actually you can copyright the numbers. Please follow this logic:

CSI has a copyright on the MF2004 book. You cannot copy the book.

CSI cannot copyright the list of section titles.

CSI can copyright the numbers ending in 13, 16, etc. Those are unique to their MF2004 classification system.

CSI may have lost the right force licensing of MF2004 and to sue under latches - delaying taking action. 5 1/2 years is a long time not to take action, especially considering the efforts to promote the MF2004 system with the MasterFormat Accredited Instructor program and the many presentations at CSI, AIA, and who knows where else.

MF2004 is derived from MF1995 and each edition was derived back to MF1978 when the 5 digit numbers were introduced. The 16 divisions were introduced even earlier. CSI probably cannot claim infringement on the MF2004 numbers where they just added a zero to the MF1995 number.

There is more complexity and this will sketch out the problems.

10

To answer Colin’s questions, no and no; however, I’m caught up in this with a document that I was preparing called “A Code Checklist for Construction Specifications.” The document is a breakdown of building code requirements in a MasterFormat 2004 structure. But the licensing document, as posted by Colin above, states:

“‘Revenue’ is not limited to direct financial gains, and may also include indirect gains that may accrue from such an application, such as providing a free service or application that helps to market or position an organization or individual by association.”

I was not planning on selling the document, but, of course, I planned on putting my consulting business name on it, which could (and probably will) be interpreted as helping “to market or position an organization or individual by association.”

I’m not about to pay a $1,600 initial and a $1,100 annual fee for a “free” document, and I don’t think there is a substantial paying market for this type of document to recoup the licensing fees. Thus, my “Checklist” project is on hold.

11

what do you mean on hold! i need a copy now! you will force me to read more code book never as fun as fiction or even specs.

Marc

12

Colin - 1) yes, 2) no

13

Hope CSI is not intending to follow AIA in the publishing business where mere casual use of documents is a big deal and costly. Like payng $4,000 for docs marked SAMPLE, so you can include them in a text book [and all you wished to do was show the cover sheet to ID the doc]

Oh, and too, needing a VP/Corporate Counsel in charge of docs, so nasty letters and threats can be issued.

If we are trying “to make things better and easier” can’t see how this complication helps things. Maybe we need some creative thinking on the part of CSI’s legal eagles!!!

Is it still true that “too many cooks spoil the broth”?

14

Colin

You could make a similar argument with regards phone numbers which have an area code and which are presented as in a unique format developed by ATT (111-111 1111). Do not concede this point. It is my understanding that the phone number issue is well established and the similarities to the MasterFormat numbers is so direct.

15

Marc:

I’ll finish it and sell you a copy for $1,600. :wink:

16

I wonder if this has anything to do with the new BPM service. ( I think that’s the name) It’s advertised as a construction materials search engine similar to 4specs. I can’t find it in my inbox anymore, probably because I prefer 4specs and deleted the ads, but got the impression they were associated with CSI.
Kinda wondered what was going on as 4specs has such a strong connection to CSI, (I thought).

17

give me the info, I’ll publish and they can sue me, I’ll go bankrupt, and ask for a federal bailout

18

We are not licensing MF 2004 and do not believe that we are obligated to do so. I agree with most of the previous comments; many of us have expended huge amounts of time and expertise on CSI’s efforts. I really resent this current effort by CSI, and believe that it will ultimately backfire on them.

19

From what Colin has posted, it sounds like we (as an architectural firm) would have to pay this licensing fee if we teach an in-house education unit on MasterFormat 2004?

So in other words … CSI has spent all this time (including hundreds and thousands of volunteer hours) and money to develop and then promote MasterFormat 2004 but if you use it or want to educate how to use it, you have to pay them, right?

20

So CSI has its best marketing tool in years with MF04 and now theyve decided to effectively restrict or limit its use by charging a fee. What a concept !