Jumping the shark!
The NSA or Hacker News?
NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
21–30 of 36 posts
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#22Earlier quoted context omitted.
IANAL, but I suspect there's a difference between uploading a video and saying "I didn't mean to" vs just copying massive quantities of data. For example offering a backup service.
A backup service means you're acting as a dumb pipe/dumb disk. You're copying bytes without knowing the contents at the request of your user. This doesn't apply when you're seeking out data to copy on your own. In some situations you're still fine, like if you're requesting files from public web servers. But I'm not aware of any protection that would blanketly apply to intercepted connections.
If you're operating a dragnet then really you're close enough to a dumb pipe. If you're doing very targeted capture then you can filter stuff out anyway.
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#23Interesting that someone did a nice job photoshopping the image into a logo, since he graphics on he rest of the deck are so bad.
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#24"Dear Mr. XXX, this is the NSA. We'd like to use the image we've found on your homepage as the logo for a secret massive surveillance and spying program called 'prism'. Could you please sign the attached 20 page license and send it back to us: NSA, Maryland. Thanks in advance, Mr Smith, Chief Officer for Domestic Affairs."
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
A backup service means you're acting as a dumb pipe/dumb disk. You're copying bytes without knowing the contents at the request of your user. This doesn't apply when you're seeking out data to copy on your own. In some situations you're still fine, like if you're requesting files from public web servers. But I'm not aware of any protection that would blanketly apply to intercepted connections.
If you're operating a dragnet then really you're close enough to a dumb pipe. If you're doing very targeted capture then you can filter stuff out anyway.
Being a dumb service works because you're acting on behalf of someone else. Someone has to order the data to be copied, and they are the ones responsible for ensuring there is sufficient licensing.
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#26Office worker uses Google Images to find photos for a Powerpoint. News at 11.
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#27Can't believe they would do something like this, maybe the author is credited on the final slide of the presentation?
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you're operating a dragnet then really you're close enough to a dumb pipe. If you're doing very targeted capture then you can filter stuff out anyway.
Being a dumb service works because you're acting on behalf of someone else. Someone has to order the data to be copied, and they are the ones responsible for ensuring there is sufficient licensing.
I suppose you could send them a DMCA notice, but then you would have to prove such data existed.
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#29The photographer, Adam Hart-Davis is great. He does history/sciencey shows on the BBC.
Local Heroes was great, but seems to have avoided being uploaded to YouTube.
Here's an episode of What the Romans Did for Us:
Re: NSA Prism logo is a copyright infringment
#30It says "Free to download and use" So how is that copyright infringement?
Right after that it says ‘© Author’, which links to a Terms page, which states “If you make money from using our stuff, share it with us!” and “You acknowledge the author, including in derivative works, if possible with a caption” and “You make an effort to contribute similar material of your own creation to the Web under similar terms, if and when you can.” http://gallery.hd.org/terms.html
The license has enough holes to drive a tank through. They're clearly not using the image to make money. Acknowledgement is done "if possible". Contributing is done "if and when you can".
The "if possible" line is left up to the interpretation of the licensee (in this case, the NSA) and they can simply argue that it wasn't possible because the program was classified and including the name of a civilian who has no clearance might have impacted the classification status. Regarding contribution, that too is left to the discretion of the licensee... "Sorry, we couldn't".
As much as one might like to find fault with their use of the logo, I fail to see how this is infringement.