Ryan, The issue is all of those 9 issues you mentioned is far more difficult to deal with legislature-wise. You would have multiple factors such as jurisdiction, lobbyist opposition, and etc to worry about. Deep space objects is a more simpler problem. This could be the start towards those other 9 items you have mentioned.
-- とある白い猫 (To Aru Shiroi Neko) On Tue, Sep 18, 2012 at 2:22 AM, Ryan Kaldari <[email protected]>wrote: > Personally, I would prefer that people pursue freedom of panorama before > we pursue "freedom of deep space objects". The later I would put pretty far > down the priority list, actually. How about the following agenda: > > 1. Freedom of orphaned works > 2. Freedom of panorama in U.S. > 3. Get Library of Congress to digitize all U.S. copyright records > 4. Get U.S. to apply rule of the shorter term > 5. Get U.K. to officially kill sweat of the brow > 6. Repeal database rights in EU > 7. Repeal Sonny Bono Copyright Extension Act > 8. Fix absurd copyright terms in Mexico > 9. Get works by U.S. states added to public domain > 10. Freedom of deep space objects > .... > 99. Profit > > Ryan Kaldari > > > On 9/17/12 6:22 AM, John Vandenberg wrote: > > Where is the onwiki discussion about this? I could find '[1]' > > Or a wikipedia page that describes the copyright status of imagery of DSOs? > > John Vandenberg. > sent from Galaxy Note > On Sep 15, 2012 1:25 PM, "とある白い猫" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I am not seeking legal advice. I am asking the pursuit of the issue. I >> am >> not a US citizen so I do not have a congress person to contact. The laws >> governing copyright can be amended to address the issue of deep space >> objects (DSO). I do not expect a result next week, I merely want the issue >> to enter into an agenda of some sort. If the Foundation is going to take >> the lead, this probably would only be possible through a board decision. >> In >> such a case I want to work with people to come up with such a draft >> proposal to the board. >> >> I realize this is an unusual request but there seems to be a lack of >> clarity on this issue[1]. Argument is that copyright can be an issue since >> not every organization observing or assisting NASA's observations are >> PD-USgov compatible. We may be forced to permanently delete all deep space >> objects as a result. >> >> I'd like to provide a short technical explanation why copyright of deep >> space objects or DSOs (objects outside of the solar system) are >> meaningless. For ordinary photographs copyright is determined by factors >> such as lighting, perspective, exposure and other such settings that >> creates a different image of the same object. You can distinguish the >> difference between a daylight photo and an evening photo. >> >> With deep space objects however, even the stellar parallax[2] has a very >> small value. The closest object outside of the solar system is 4.24 light >> years (268,136 AU's) away. The semi-major axis of earth is about 1AUs. The >> difference in perspective is like looking at a 2cm (width of a nickel) >> wide >> object 5.3km (3.29 miles) away and the perspective difference is switching >> left eye to the right eye. We lack scientific instruments to even detect a >> stellar parallax for objects much further. In other words our perspective >> of the nearest star and beyond is more or less constant and the objects >> themselves look the same for hundreds of years. >> >> So any photo of a deep space object I or someone else takes from the >> solar system will look identical regardless of when and where on earth I >> take it within multiple lifetimes. I think this can bring legal precedent >> for us to either disregard any copyright claim or at least pursue >> lawmakers >> in congress to amend the copyright law to make an exception in the law. >> People who worked with congress such as Neil Degrasse Tyson could be >> consulted to this end. Also international treaties[3] can be consulted to >> this end as copyrighting photos of deep space objects could be interpreted >> as an unfair exploitation of resources. >> >> I realize this reads like something out of Star Trek but this is growing >> to be quite a problem as we see more and more weird copyright claims even >> when dealing with NASA which traditionally had a PD-USgov mentality. NASA >> regularly contracts its more recent projects and to be fair we do not know >> how NASA contracts these projects which could potentially lead >> to legitimate copyright claims in the future. >> >> >> [1]: >> >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#Potential_deletion_of_all_deep_space_objects >> >> [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stellar_parallax >> >> [3]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_law#International_treaties >> >> -- とある白い猫 (To Aru Shiroi Neko) >> _______________________________________________ >> Wikimedia-l mailing list >> [email protected] >> Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Commons-l mailing > [email protected]https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l > > > > _______________________________________________ > Commons-l mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l > >
_______________________________________________ Commons-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/commons-l
