Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- From: Jonathan Silverlight <jsilverlight@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 8 Aug 2005 08:38:55 +0100
In message <419df198kc5q9hrk9bfv41jgfsf5tohd3s@xxxxxxx>, "Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)" <reunite.gondwana@xxxxxxxxx> writes
But isn't the problem that spaceflightnow is claiming copyright, not that they are selling it? No-one objects to their making a profit.On Mon, 01 Aug 2005 13:58:09 +0200, Jochem Huhmann <joh@xxxxxxx> wrote:
"Steven Young" <steve@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
> Michael, > > Just to clarify something about our video. We do not claim copyright on > the original NASA footage only on our encoded video files. Anyone is > entitled to capture the video and encode it for themselves.
So someone could get your video, re-encode it in another format and distribute it? The *content* isn't copyrighted after all.
That's sort of what has happened with the SR-71 Dash-1. It was classified, so it wasn't marked as being for official use only. A fellow got Dryden to give him a copy of the declassified version, by saying he was working for one of the museums that received one. He slapped a fancy color cover onto it and sold it for about a hundred bucks a copy. He even copyrighted his cover, which was the only original part of the document.
Someone subsequently put out a PDF version on the Web, which isn't copyrighted at all. There was absolutely no consequences, because the PDF version used the public domain parts, not the copyrighted cover.
Mary
.
- References:
- Spaceflightnow.com
- From: Michael Shaffer
- Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- From: Steven Young
- Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- From: Jochem Huhmann
- Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- From: Reunite Gondwanaland (Mary Shafer)
- Spaceflightnow.com
- Prev by Date: Discovery de-orbit burn rescheduled for 0915 hrs UTC/GMT
- Next by Date: Re: Simple solution to foam problem
- Previous by thread: Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- Next by thread: Re: Spaceflightnow.com
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|