RE: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based imagery of Earth satellites

From: Paul Grace (paulgrace@lookoutranch.com)
Date: Fri May 13 2011 - 22:23:43 UTC

  • Next message: Brad Young: "Re: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based imagery of Earth satellites"

    Brian, if I understand you, you propose that it would be improper to provide
    any links to any external image in this forum?  And that any image posted
    must be surrendered to the public domain?
    In this regard 
    What about other forms of data, such as articles or commentary?  Since we
    can not surrender copyright, then no links to that either?
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: seesat-l-bounces+paulgrace=lookoutranch.com@satobs.org
    [mailto:seesat-l-bounces+paulgrace=lookoutranch.com@satobs.org] On Behalf Of
    Skywise
    Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 14:52
    To: SeeSat
    Subject: Re: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based
    imagery of Earth satellites
    
    Ted Molczan wrote:
    > Last August, I initiated a discussion regarding policy options for
    reporting high resolution ground-based imagery of
    > Earth satellites to SeeSat-L:
    > 
    > http://satobs.org/seesat/Aug-2010/0134.html
    
    At that time I gave my opinion that raw data should be required, but
    I caught so much flack from others about it that I backed off.
    
    In light of Thierry's excellent commentary which is backed with
    factual evidence, I now go back to my original position that raw
    imagery data should be provided. Hopefully my arguments below will
    generate reasonable discussion, flack free.
    
    It's much like someone reporting orbital elements without providing
    the position reports that resulted in that TLE. How do we resolve
    5 different people posting 5 different TLE's for the same object?
    How do we know a mistake hasn't been made? And I do recall a few
    corrections being posted on this list from time to time. Mistakes
    happen. No big deal. But by sharing the raw information, mistakes
    can be caught, and all can learn. Further, it allows an analysis
    from multiple sources of data. A TLE developed from the reports
    of 5 individuals will be more reliable than 5 independent TLE's.
    
    Although it appears the reporting of imagery observations is still
    in it's infancy, it will only grow. Eventually we may have a sub-group
    here that specializes in imagery of, for example, classified satellites
    much in the same way as we have now those who report their positions.
    
    In the end it will be much better as a whole when folks have access
    to the raw imagery from multiple sources in order to form a, pardon
    the pun, a much clearer picture of what we are looking at.
    
    To put it more bluntly, since there are questions being raised
    regarding the results of analysis of imagery, the only way to
    alleviate that is to have independent analysis done, and that can
    only be done with access to the raw data. I think we could call this
    a form of "peer review".
    
    Further, since the purpose of this list is to formally report
    observations and data, the raw images and enhancements (analysis) are
    a form of data. Any arguments regarding ownership and copyright status
    of the images will need to be dealt with. To that end I propose that
    any imagery officially reported to this list be required to come with
    a statement to the effect that such imagery is being released to the
    public. There are many existing licenses already in existence which may
    be applicable, for example copy-left, or maybe a specialized one for
    this list can be developed. By way of example, are those who report PPAS
    data going to assert ownership and copyright over the data they report
    to this list? If a person is unwilling to agree to the terms then they
    simple must choose not to post.
    
    I am familiar with issues regarding imagery copyright, as I am in the
    process of growing a photography/graphic arts business. There are many
    web sites I have looked into for selling my work. Some I hove chosen NOT
    to use because I cannot agree with their terms of service. Others I do
    choose to use because they respect my rights as owner of the imagery.
    Admittedly, this is a quite different form of publication than would
    be applicable to this venue. In my case, I am doing the work for profit.
    In the case of SeeSat imagery, it is scientific data.
    
    Finally, an issue I see regarding imagery as data is, where the data
    is stored. Right now those who have posted to the list about imagery
    are only providing links to their own websites, whereas those who report
    position observations do so as text and it becomes archived in this list
    as raw data. The imagery does not become part of the archive. It is my
    suggestion that if imagery data is to become an official part of SeeSat,
    consideration needs to be made to having some form of independent
    archive of this imagery. In other words, the images need to be uploaded
    to SeeSat (or some official SeeSat image hosting account) rather than
    kept all over the web on personal websites, which may not be reliable
    as websites can come and go, or whose contents may be in flux.
    
    Brian
    -- 
    http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
    Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
    _______________________________________________
    Seesat-l mailing list
    http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
    
    _______________________________________________
    Seesat-l mailing list
    http://mailman.satobs.org/mailman/listinfo/seesat-l
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Fri May 13 2011 - 22:35:50 UTC