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

From: Paul Grace (
Date: Sat May 14 2011 - 01:58:09 UTC

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

    I wasn't really arguing, I was only asking for clarification.
    My votes (if I get to) are:
    I think it's reasonable to ask for source and an explanation of processes,
    so others may learn and replicate it.
    I think it's unreasonable to *require* source.  If anyone isn't comfortable
    with an image, ignore it.  (For example Mr. Legault may believe Mr.
    Vandebergh's photos are only artifacts, but I am interested in seeing the
    accomplishment (tracking a sat long enough to take a photo), the
    limitations, and following the discussion.  If posting images were not
    permitted because source was required, we would not know Mr. Legault's nor
    Mr. Vandebergh's opinions)
    I think it's unreasonable to ask people to forfeit their rights of ownership
    to the public domain.  I don't see that it serves any purpose within the
    context of the maillist.
    I think it's unreasonable to require people to upload images rather than use
    links to other sites.  It takes storage and bandwidth to do that, and I
    don't feel that I would want to pay for either.
    I think it's unreasonable to have differing rules for images than text.  I
    don't understand why.  Under US Copyright law, images are no more or less
    protected than text.  In the US each is presumed to be copyrighted by its
    author automatically.
    -----Original Message-----
    [] On Behalf Of
    Sent: Friday, May 13, 2011 18:07
    To: SeeSat
    Subject: Re: Admin: policy for reporting high resolution ground-based
    imagery of Earth satellites
    Paul Grace wrote:
    > Brian, if I understand you, you propose that it would be improper to
    > 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?
    First, I'm suggesting it needs to be discussed, because images -
    at least in the US - are automatically copyright to the creator and
    cannot be used by others without express permission.
    Second, I do NOT suggest to have the best answer. That will come
    through discussion and consensus of the group.
    For example look at Wikipedia. The images that are uploaded there
    must be released to some degree in order to be used. In some cases
    the photographer is placing the image 100% in the public domain.
    There may be a middle ground where the originator retains their
    copyright but gives permission for certain uses.
    As for the text (articles and commentary) on this list, copyright
    only applies to the format. As far as I know, data per se cannot
    be copyrighted, as it is factual information. I could be wrong,
    though, but from what I've read (including on the US copyright
    web site), this is my understanding.
    It has been my experience that the general public is unaware of
    what copyright is and what it applies to. Again, I claim no expertise
    as I'm not a copyright lawyer. I'm only relaying what I've found
    through research for my own needs.
    -- - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
    Seismic FAQ:
    Quake "predictions":
    Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
    Seesat-l mailing list
    Seesat-l mailing list

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Sat May 14 2011 - 01:58:58 UTC