First of all, copyright applies only to original material. The rules makers of the various USAn codes started with a single rule book and by degrees amended them, sometimes differently, and sometimes borrowing language from each other. Over most of that time nobody thought of putting a copyright notice on; that was a recent development. (The USFL rule book was 99% verbatim NFL's, yet they each had a copyright notice. You'll notice neither tried to sue the other over infringement!) When a work has very little original content, and that which is original is interleaved in such a way that it can't be easily picked out from the old material, even the original content is not protectable. What Fed and the other rules makers do have is some original stuff printed in the same volume as the rules, at the beginning and the end of the book, sandwiching the rules themselves, and those are the only parts copyright could legitimatelhy apply to -- but who even wants those parts?

Second, copyright is for literary expression, not for useful items such as instructions. A proprietary game or equipment for it can be patented, either utility or design patents, but the instructions for it cannot effectively be protected by copyright.

Third, when it comes to rules writing, the nature of it is such that there are usually very few says to say a thing differently and have it mean the same thing yet be as concise. In such cases, copyright has been held not to apply, because we know you're allowed to copy ideas, but it would be silly in such a case to insist on altering their wording.

Go ahead, compare the language in contemporary Fed & NCAA football rules in many passages. How could they possibly stand together if copyright applied to them? Each one could say they were being infringed by the other, but we know the truth, which is that copyright does not apply to their actual rules. It may apply to some ancillary material in their rule books, but not the rules themselves.

An expert legal opinion. http://www.runemasterstudios.com/gra...es/roflmao.gif

Robert, we've been rounds on this before so I'm not really interested in doing it again. That said the Fed claims a copyright and until somebody challenges them legally over it, they're going to continue to enforce it.

It's as if I've seen this argument from the same person before...hmmmm http://elouai.com/images/yahoo/33.gif

Then NFHS should come into the 21st century & offer them electronically as an option to the paper books. They would then be able to make immediate corrections/interpretations without the time delay that exists now.

Save a tree!

Have you ever heard of them enforcing it regarding the body of the rules? Obviously they don't enforce it against the biggest "infringers", the NCAA & NFL. And if they fail to enforce it against a notorious infringer, they lose it.

They are in the 21st centrury, that is why you can have an app on an Iphone or IPad (which I have) and you can buy their membership on Arbiter.

BTW, the Rulebook App is outstanding and very easy to navigate. I am glad I have that kind of access to the rulebooks.

The NCAA give access to their rulebooks too, but they only use a PDF model and offer them for free. But keep in mind they get more revenue sources surrounding their books as they require every official to pay for their membership and they send our rulebooks and mechanics manuals as a part of the membership. And the NF Rulebook is a lot easier to navigate and find stuff than the NCAA PDF version. The NF cannot make anyone be a member or any state use their stuff as an official. Remember it is up to each state to what extent they are members and who are members. My state does not include the officials because the IHSA would have had to raise fees to accomplish this, so they decided to leave us out and do their own thing.

Peace

Did you not see where I said "as an option to the paper copy"?

I'm not asking for something for nothing. Give us the choice of paper or electronic version at no additional cost, please!

Isn't that your state association's responsibility. Not everyone owns an IPad like I do and not sure why they would give the either/or option with such a limited group at this point. I am sure this will come down the line, but I doubt it now.

Peace

Do you want citations of court decisions? I'm a keen follower of intellectual property issues as an inventor and one involved in other creative fields.

No truer statement has ever been posted on this board.

Congratulations. We're all very impressed.

The OP was asked and answered. I think this thread has run its useful life.