Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

cnet.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–139 of 139 posts

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#131

Post by kirillseva »

TallGuyShort wrote: post #98
kirillseva wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as US military satellites take pictures of Russian and Chinese facilities as well. Both can play this game

So it would be pretty silly for Russia to ban similar cameras for fear of state secrets being uncovered, right?

Oh no, don't get me wrong, I think the regulation is totally stupid. Why bother regulating something over which you have no control of? It is just putting unnecessary barriers for domestic innovators while your real competition is not wasting precious cycles.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#132

Post by akira2501 »

twtw wrote: post #49

It's a bit of a farce to classify these cameras stuck on the side of a rocket with horrible resolution and which are clearly not designed to effectively image the surface of the earth as "remote sensing systems." The definition in the law even specifically excludes "Small, hand-held cameras shall not be considered remote sensing space system," i guess so that astronauts don't have to get a license 12 months before ev…

> Remote sensing systems are a thing, and there are good reasons to regulate them.

I'm curious. What do you consider those to be? More importantly, do you consider the First Amendment to supersede these laws?

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#133

Post by WiseWeasel »

jordz wrote: post #15

No entity should be able to license or control broadcasting of the Earth. Whoever said it made them wince, I am also in a state of wincing.

We should attack the problem from the other direction, and for entities without special exemptions, require proof of consent from any identifiable people and organizations whose activity can be discerned in the recordings they retain or make commercial use of.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#134

Post by Rebelgecko »

jefe_ wrote: post #105

Functionally, these all seem very similar: SpaceX broadcasting from a camera attached to a Rocket Boeing broadcasting from a camera attached to a Plane Toyota broadcasting from a camera attached to a SUV James Cameron broadcasting from a camera attached to a Submarine

Toyota would have a hard time driving their SUV to Area 51

It would probably not go over well if James Cameron broadcasted from directly under an American aircraft carrier, or next to a nuclear submarine

SpaceX put a camera up in orbit against the law. I suspect that NOAA was willing to look the other way when they did something borderline (2nd stage cameras), but now that they've pushed it too far they're not willing to cut them as much slack

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#135

Post by Rebelgecko »

jerkstate wrote: post #53

So SpaceX either knew about the regulation and ignored it (without clarifying with the regulatory body if it applied to them), or didn't know about the regulation. I'm not sure which is worse but both are bad. I think SpaceX is doing cool, groundbreaking stuff, but they should be following the rules.

SpaceX applied for these licenses in the past, so someone knew about them. Either they lost some institutional knowledge due to attrition or miscommunication, they didn't think the law applied to these particular cameras, or someone thought they could get away with it.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#136

Post by IAmEveryone »

emiliobumachar wrote: post #117
IAmEveryone wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your narrow-minded anger is ill-informed. First, there are quite a few very obvious reasons why it's in humanity's interest to regulate space missions. You want to minimise space debris, for example, because it could result in a series of collisions making near-earth orbits a wasteland you can't cross. That's why there are rules on the size, structure, orbits, data sharing, disposal mechanisms and other features of s…

It seems to me that you're arguing broadly that space regulation, generally speaking, could, in principle, be good. I agree with that. Now, do you have any arguments in favor of the regulatory restrictions on SpaceX lauch videos?

No, not really. SpaceX's usage is obviously far too trivial to trigger any of the concerns motivating the regulation.

BUT: Exhaustively specifying all possibilities in law is rather impossible, and any attempt would make legal texts even more verbose. Giving an agency the leeway to waive regulations on a case-by-case basis may however appear (or be) arbitrary. Although I suspect the latter may still happen once the agency has had more than three days to think about it.

Otherwise, it may just be preferable for SpaceX to spend a few hours submitting the application. It's really not rocket science.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#137

Post by drharby »

jonknee wrote: post #100
MBCook wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re not under the jurisdiction of a US agency.

Which makes it even more dumb, the people we don't want taking pictures do so at will while the people we don't mind taking pictures are banned.

Speak for yourself - i dont want companies taking pictures.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#138

Post by jonknee »

drharby wrote: post #137
jonknee wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which makes it even more dumb, the people we don't want taking pictures do so at will while the people we don't mind taking pictures are banned.

Speak for yourself - i dont want companies taking pictures.

But they do, commercial satellite imagery is a big business (anyone who has used Google Earth knows this). It's just not the business SpaceX is in so it's not worth going through the hassle.

Re: SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky license

#139

Post by drharby »

jonknee wrote: post #138
drharby wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speak for yourself - i dont want companies taking pictures.

But they do, commercial satellite imagery is a big business (anyone who has used Google Earth knows this). It's just not the business SpaceX is in so it's not worth going through the hassle.

That wasnt the main idea of my statement.

I contend that my desire differs from parent comments claim

Post reply on HN