Page:ASTM v. PRO (D.D.C. 2022).pdf/174

 materials shall be tested according to the procedures of ASTM G 21–90.” Id. § 1755.910(d)(5)(iv), (e)(1)(vii). The regulation does not specify that only certain provisions of ASTM G21 (1990) are incorporated by reference into law, nor does it indicate which specific provisions of ASTM G21 (1990) are relevant for compliance with the regulation.
 * 1) * First Factor : There is no indication that Defendant stands to profit from republishing this standard; Defendant’s apparent purpose is to inform the public about the law and facilitate public debate. See ASTM, 896 F.3d at 449; Def’s 2d Mot. at 16. Defendant’s “attempt to freely distribute standards incorporated by reference into law qualifie[s] as a use that further[s] the purposes of the fair use defense.” ASTM, 896 F.3d at 449. Further, the incorporated standard provides information essential for a private entity to comprehend its legal duties, which weighs heavily in favor of permitting Defendant’s reproduction. See ASTM, 896 F.3d at 450.
 * 2) * Second Factor : The “express text of the law falls plainly outside the realm of copyright protection.” ASTM, 896 F.3d at 451. Here, the standard is incorporated into law without limitation such that “the consequence of the incorporation by reference is virtually indistinguishable from a situation in which the standard had been expressly copied into law.” Id. at 452. Accordingly, “this factor weighs heavily in favor of fair use.” Id.
 * 3) * Third Factor : The incorporating regulation does not specify that only certain provisions of this standard are incorporated by reference into law, nor does it indicate which specific provisions of the standard are relevant for regulatory compliance, suggesting that “a greater amount of the standard’s text might be fairly reproduced.” Id.
 * 4) * Fourth Factor : Defendant’s reproductions have not had a “substantially adverse impact on the potential market for the originals,” nor have Plaintiffs shown by a preponderance of the evidence that there is a meaningful likelihood of future harm.” Memo Op. at 30–36 (internal quotation and citation marks omitted).
 * 5) * Conclusion : Defendant may fairly reproduce this incorporated standard in its entirety.
 * II. 
 * 1) ASTM A611-72 (1979)
 * 2) *Defendant identifies 24 C.F.R. § (Parts 200 to 499) (2005) as the incorporating by reference regulation, see Becker Decl. ¶ 57, Ex. 90 at 18, which incorporates ASTM A611-72 for 24 C.F.R. § Part 200, Subpart S. See 24 C.F.R. § (Parts 200 to 499). While the regulation incorporates ASTM A611-72, not the 1979 version that Defendant published, the text of the two standards is identical. See Pls. 2d SMF ¶ 35 (“Standards that have been reapproved without change are indicated by the year of last reapproval in parentheses as part of the designation number (e.g., C5-79 (1997) indicates that C5 was reapproved in 1997.”) (citing O’Brien Decl. Ex. 3 at 1349); ECF No. 203-3, Def. Statement of Disputed Facts at ¶ 35 (no objection); Def. Mot. at 10 (contending that the “only difference between what was posted and the document cited