Page:ASTM v. PRO (D.D.C. 2022).pdf/58

 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. However, the court finds that the incorporated standard does not provide information essential for a private entity to comprehend its legal duties, because the entity could rely on the procedures set forth in NFPA 750-2003 to comply with the regulation. Accordingly, “while knowing the content of this incorporated standard might help inform one’s understanding of the law,” it “is not essential to complying with any legal duty,” and thus, Defendant’s use is less transformative and “its wholesale copying, in turn, less justified.” ASTM, 896 F.3d at 450.
 * 1) * 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.
 * 2) * 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.
 * 3) * 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).
 * 4) * Conclusion : Defendant may fairly reproduce this incorporated standard in its entirety.
 * 5) NFPA 25 (2002): Inspection, Testing and Maintenance of Water-Based Fire Protection Systems (Title of work on certificate of registration is “National Fire Codes Vol 1–12 and Master Index”):
 * 6) *The parties identify 29 C.F.R. § 1915.5 (2015) as the incorporating by reference regulation, see Becker Decl. ¶ 57, Ex. 91; Wise Decl., Ex. 175, which states that the incorporation by reference is “approved for § 1915.507(d).” See § 1915.5(i)(11). Section 1915.507(d), in turn, requires that when dealing with “Fixed extinguishing systems,” an employer must “select, install, maintain, inspect, and test all fixed systems required by OSHA,” including [a]utomatic sprinkler systems according to NFPA 25-2002 …, and either (i) NFPA 13-2002” or “(ii) NFPA 750-2003.” 29 C.F.R. § 1915.507(d). The regulation does not specify that only certain provisions of NFPA 25 (2002) are incorporated by reference into law, nor does it indicate which specific provisions of NFPA 25 (2002) are relevant for compliance with the regulation.
 * 7) * 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