19 ms·

Being able to watch regular (SpaceX) rocket launches live - including deployment of satellites in orbit and landing of boosters - free, for entertainment purpos

Being able to watch regular (SpaceX) rocket launches live - including deployment of satellites in orbit and landing of boosters - free, for entertainment purposes, is in my opinion one of the most amazing things going at present. As a demonstration of how far technology has progressed to make this all possible it blows my mind.

chrisco255 7y ago
Yeah it's a good point, network television limited the amount of airtime things like this could get in prior decades.
sandworm101 7y ago
>> - free, for entertainment purposes, is in my opinion one of the most amazing things going at present. Except that it isn't. All that classic NASA space footage was shared because it was copyright-free. As products of the US federal government they were not subject to copyright protection. They were transmitted and used everywhere. When "The Six Million Dollar Man" or "Buck Rogers" wanted to use NASA launch footage (or USAF crash footage) they just did. No questions asked. SpaceX footage isn't from the US fed. It is private and therefore protected copyright. It cannot be used anywhere anytime. We all must ask SpaceX for permission. Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. You wont see the failure footage from SpaceX ever used as nasa footage was used by countless scifi productions. So no, this is no amazing thing. While modern footage is a visual feast, in terms of freedom it is a step down from what we once had. I think those running TV news networks (or youtube, or any other distribution network) would rather return to the old system whereby they could use footage however they liked. We won't ever see SpaceX crash footage used for much of anything. What I am talking about. Six Million Dollar Man opening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGO57y4td-c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGO57y4td-c Original NASA footage: (Crash at about 2:00) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50dDWT48b9M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50dDWT48b9M
- optimiz3 7y ago
  > But SpaceX footage isn't from the US fed. It is subject to copyright. It cannot be used anywhere anytime. We all must ask SpaceX for permission. Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. So much pessimism. I think it's great a private for profit corporation is doing as much as it is given it has no obligation to do so.
  - sandworm101 7y ago
    >> as it is given it has no obligation to do so. That's the big change, the lack of obligation. If SpaceX is going to be fulfilling government contracts, on government facilities/ranges, using countless government employees, resulting footage should be free. It hasn't happened yet, but with human spaceflight nearing we may see SpaceX drafting license deals in a manner NASA never contemplated.
    - MoronInAHurry 7y ago
      SpaceX recently relicensed their photos to an Attribution-NonCommercial license, when previously they were effectively public domain under Creative Commons Zero: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/88449p/spacex-just-retroactively-put-copyright-restrictions-on-its-photos https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/88449p/spacex-just-retroa...
      - sandworm101 7y ago
        Yup. The last thing SpaceX wants is to see somebody else make a buck from their footage. We have seen NASA logos in a thousand scifi productions. We will never see the SpaceX logo used in such a manner.
        mrtnmcc 7y ago
        Is that pure speculation? SpaceX isn't protesting the countless YouTube videos and derivative works from their launches.
        zlsa 7y ago
- shadowgovt 7y ago
  "Free as in advertising," not "free as in speech."
- tomphoolery 7y ago
  > I think those running TV news networks would rather return to the old system whereby they could show the footage whatever and whenever. I don't think the opinion of "those running TV news networks" really matters all that much when we're talking about space.
- jtms 7y ago
  Gadflies everywhere
- paulmendoza 7y ago
  I think he just means he likes watching rockets launch.
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    It's important for the future of our sci-fi movies. They ought to be using SpaceX-branded stock footage instead of what, rendering space scenes like a bunch of cavemen?
- Dylan16807 7y ago
  The quote says right there "for entertainment purposes". Stock footage is not that. And come on, being able to use NASA footage in your own works is one of the least exciting parts about space travel.
- nexuist 7y ago
  >Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. You wont see the failure footage from SpaceX ever used as nasa footage was used by countless scifi productions. SpaceX literally uploaded a video of all their crashes spliced together in a comedic montage. It's called How Not to Land an Orbital Rocket Booster. https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ Even crash footage is good PR for them. There are still millions of Americans who do not know what SpaceX is or what it does.
  - xingyzt 7y ago
    The crash compilation is public [1] because they were tests with minimal customer risks involved. You wouldn't find footage of CRS-7, with its dozens of NASA payloads, disintegrating on any of SpaceX's official media channels. [1] But not public domain. It's still copyrighted.
    - hartator 7y ago
      You mean this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAX7UFd70M8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAX7UFd70M8
      - kortilla 7y ago
        SciNews is not one of SpaceX’s channels.
    - KiwiJohnno 7y ago
      SpaceX have unlisted their CRS-7 broadcast, but they have not taken it down. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw
- yreg 7y ago
  >We won't ever see SpaceX crash footage used for much of anything. We will if SpaceX allows it. How can you be sure they won't?
  - anoncake 7y ago
    We can't be sure they will, that's the problem.
- johnghanks 7y ago
  Classic HN. Finding a way to spin something great into something negative.
  - EasyTiger_ 7y ago
    It’s tiring.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- rcw4256 7y ago
  > Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. This is probably true, but it's hard to be certain that they'd prevail. Has this actually been tested in court?
- growlist 7y ago
  > So no, this is no amazing thing. Putting the legal aspects to one side, do you not think it's amazing? If not, what would it take to impress you?
  - tripzilch 7y ago
    Everything major ever attributed to the USA for all eternity. And otherwise it's not amazing. Seems pretty obvious what they are about. Or maybe there are several people with very specific interests about what logos appear in the stock footage used in hypothetical documentary style near future science fiction movies ... Except technology achieved many other things besides shooting rockets into space, one of which is really good CGI, so it's really not about the ability to tell a good visual story.
- jcims 7y ago
  If you want SpaceX produced footage to be public domain, ask NASA to put it into the contract. Pretty simple.
- azernik 7y ago
  NASA broadcasts and public-domains all SpaceX launches where they're the customer.
- thelittleone 7y ago
  The fact the content is copyright makes it no less amazing to witness (at least for me and many friends). It has been a source of inspiration in a time of predominantly divisive news. The quality of the coverage has set a new bar for space companies / agencies. That alone is amazing because we all get to benefit.
- debrice 7y ago
  I've seen plenty of SpaceX crash footage used by others than SpaceX. While you might have a point when it comes to Intellectual Property, I think you're taking that a bit out of proportion.
- rolltiide 7y ago
  > As products of the US federal government they were not subject to copyright protection. This really is not a good assumption. The federal government has plenty of ways around this. The federal government can buy copyrights, and also enter into work for hire arrangements with contractors and employees. When naked and operating without contracts, the federal government does have this default status, simple boilerplate copy and pasted contracts change this.
- tjpnz 7y ago
  Go back and watch the livestream Boeing had when they were testing the Starliner.
- airstrike 7y ago
  > Except that it isn't. Except that it is. Free as in beer, not as in freedom.
- taneq 7y ago
  I can watch every launch live from my desk in glorious HD with multiple camera views, telemetry, and expert commentary. It costs nothing to watch. This is freaking amazing.
- ufmace 7y ago
  I don't much care for this take. In my opinion, a private and profitable space company is a massive, game-changing advancement in human progress. Maybe, just maybe, we'll actually send people to the planets when it's in somebody's direct financial interest and ability to do so, rather than have to beg a bunch of image-sensitive politicians to fund it. Against that possibility and chance, I honestly don't give a damn about whether or not some of the footage is public domain. I'd rather argue about who has the right to do what with various bits of launch footage from our Martian colony. Beats the heck out of having more public domain launch footage to use in sci-fi movies, and having our crowning achievement in human space exploration being a handful of short missions to the Moon that left behind absolutely no useful infrastructure, and was only done to show up our geopolitical rivals.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  > No questions asked. Unless it's critical or satirical of the military, like Starship Troopers.
elfexec 7y ago
It's amazing free entertainment for us and great free publicity for SpaceX. It's one of those rare win-win situations.
Jamwinner 7y ago
This has been a thing since the 1960s. Is this the elon tinted glasses I keep reading about?
- growlist 7y ago
  How do you mean? Very, very few launches would have been screened live in the UK, where I live.
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - iso1210 7y ago
    Nor did they have high quality on board cameras in near-real time, broadcasts from high altitude planes, or live pictures of second stage decoupling The Spacex presenters generally have a mix of knowlege and charisma that news presenters don't.
    - growlist 7y ago
      There's a community element to it as well via YouTubers restreaming it. Everyday Astronaut even had tracking cameras set up this time! It does feel like something special is happening. I don't think the wider public are really aware of the implications of all of it yet e.g. reusability, Starlink, Starship, BO, SLS (if that ever gets off the ground). I think it's a really exciting time and I absolutely intend to watch the first full stack Starship/Superheavy launch in person.
- greglindahl 7y ago
  Yes, except that SpaceX really is unusually nice about licensing their images and video, compared to other companies. For example, US TV networks don't put their broadcasts about NASA launches into CC0 or CC-A-NC. And here's Boeing's "Inside the Starliner Pad Abort Test" -- https://youtu.be/L9ifJzokFgA?t=98 https://youtu.be/L9ifJzokFgA?t=98 -- Copyright @ 2019 Boeing, All rights reserved. So sure, you can see whatever you like: SpaceX is worse than NASA, or SpaceX is better than almost every other company. Your call.
Rapzid 7y ago
It dawned on me today that this is in SpaceX's best interest based on their development philosophy. Think about all the bad publicity that Boeing got when Starliner was off course. But here SpaceX is constantly blowing things up and everyone is just like "Ah shucks, they will get it next time though." A lot of that has to do with how out in the open they have made a lot of these failures and tests. Everybody expects it now and views it in a positive light.
- azernik 7y ago
  Part of that is also based in reality - SpaceX follows a more Soviet-style, hardware-rich approach than Boeing or ULA, where tests (including failed ones) are much more frequent. In terms of PR, this has given them a record of public failures followed by later success, so the public is more primed to give them the benefit of the doubt when something goes wrong. (Even if the thing that goes wrong isn't actually part of a test.)
  - deleted 7y ago
    [deleted]
  - DataGata 7y ago
    Is that really Soviet style? Does that have a name or book or wikipedia article describing it?
- agloeregrets 7y ago
  You say this as if they actually are actually having things go wrong on stream. This test was exactly as planned. The one failure they did have unintentionally blow up (the dragon fueling explosion) was actually not on a live stream. All that did kinda work for their attempts at landing the first stage a few years back though, however that was heavily wrapped in “experiment” and Was PR covered at every moment.
  - mcbutterbunz 7y ago
    There was the 2016 explosion of a falcon 9 during a static fire. Also a falcon 9 explosion during flight in 2015. Not all accidents have been on an official live stream but I’ve seen more accidents from Spacex than I’ve seen launches from Boeing and friends.

chrisco255 7y ago

Yeah it's a good point, network television limited the amount of airtime things like this could get in prior decades.

sandworm101 7y ago

>> - free, for entertainment purposes, is in my opinion one of the most amazing things going at present. Except that it isn't. All that classic NASA space footage was shared because it was copyright-free. As products of the US federal government they were not subject to copyright protection. They were transmitted and used everywhere. When "The Six Million Dollar Man" or "Buck Rogers" wanted to use NASA launch footage (or USAF crash footage) they just did. No questions asked. SpaceX footage isn't from the US fed. It is private and therefore protected copyright. It cannot be used anywhere anytime. We all must ask SpaceX for permission. Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. You wont see the failure footage from SpaceX ever used as nasa footage was used by countless scifi productions. So no, this is no amazing thing. While modern footage is a visual feast, in terms of freedom it is a step down from what we once had. I think those running TV news networks (or youtube, or any other distribution network) would rather return to the old system whereby they could use footage however they liked. We won't ever see SpaceX crash footage used for much of anything. What I am talking about. Six Million Dollar Man opening: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGO57y4td-c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGO57y4td-c Original NASA footage: (Crash at about 2:00) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50dDWT48b9M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=50dDWT48b9M

optimiz3 7y ago
> But SpaceX footage isn't from the US fed. It is subject to copyright. It cannot be used anywhere anytime. We all must ask SpaceX for permission. Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. So much pessimism. I think it's great a private for profit corporation is doing as much as it is given it has no obligation to do so.
- sandworm101 7y ago
  >> as it is given it has no obligation to do so. That's the big change, the lack of obligation. If SpaceX is going to be fulfilling government contracts, on government facilities/ranges, using countless government employees, resulting footage should be free. It hasn't happened yet, but with human spaceflight nearing we may see SpaceX drafting license deals in a manner NASA never contemplated.
  - MoronInAHurry 7y ago
    SpaceX recently relicensed their photos to an Attribution-NonCommercial license, when previously they were effectively public domain under Creative Commons Zero: https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/88449p/spacex-just-retroactively-put-copyright-restrictions-on-its-photos https://www.vice.com/en_us/article/88449p/spacex-just-retroa...
    - sandworm101 7y ago
      Yup. The last thing SpaceX wants is to see somebody else make a buck from their footage. We have seen NASA logos in a thousand scifi productions. We will never see the SpaceX logo used in such a manner.
      - mrtnmcc 7y ago
        Is that pure speculation? SpaceX isn't protesting the countless YouTube videos and derivative works from their launches.
      - zlsa 7y ago
shadowgovt 7y ago
"Free as in advertising," not "free as in speech."
tomphoolery 7y ago
> I think those running TV news networks would rather return to the old system whereby they could show the footage whatever and whenever. I don't think the opinion of "those running TV news networks" really matters all that much when we're talking about space.
jtms 7y ago
Gadflies everywhere
paulmendoza 7y ago
I think he just means he likes watching rockets launch.
- tripzilch 7y ago
  It's important for the future of our sci-fi movies. They ought to be using SpaceX-branded stock footage instead of what, rendering space scenes like a bunch of cavemen?
Dylan16807 7y ago
The quote says right there "for entertainment purposes". Stock footage is not that. And come on, being able to use NASA footage in your own works is one of the least exciting parts about space travel.
nexuist 7y ago
>Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. You wont see the failure footage from SpaceX ever used as nasa footage was used by countless scifi productions. SpaceX literally uploaded a video of all their crashes spliced together in a comedic montage. It's called How Not to Land an Orbital Rocket Booster. https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ https://youtu.be/bvim4rsNHkQ Even crash footage is good PR for them. There are still millions of Americans who do not know what SpaceX is or what it does.
- xingyzt 7y ago
  The crash compilation is public [1] because they were tests with minimal customer risks involved. You wouldn't find footage of CRS-7, with its dozens of NASA payloads, disintegrating on any of SpaceX's official media channels. [1] But not public domain. It's still copyrighted.
  - hartator 7y ago
    You mean this? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAX7UFd70M8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OAX7UFd70M8
    - kortilla 7y ago
      SciNews is not one of SpaceX’s channels.
  - KiwiJohnno 7y ago
    SpaceX have unlisted their CRS-7 broadcast, but they have not taken it down. Here it is: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeiBFtkrZEw
yreg 7y ago
>We won't ever see SpaceX crash footage used for much of anything. We will if SpaceX allows it. How can you be sure they won't?
- anoncake 7y ago
  We can't be sure they will, that's the problem.
johnghanks 7y ago
Classic HN. Finding a way to spin something great into something negative.
- EasyTiger_ 7y ago
  It’s tiring.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
rcw4256 7y ago
> Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers. This is probably true, but it's hard to be certain that they'd prevail. Has this actually been tested in court?
growlist 7y ago
> So no, this is no amazing thing. Putting the legal aspects to one side, do you not think it's amazing? If not, what would it take to impress you?
- tripzilch 7y ago
  Everything major ever attributed to the USA for all eternity. And otherwise it's not amazing. Seems pretty obvious what they are about. Or maybe there are several people with very specific interests about what logos appear in the stock footage used in hypothetical documentary style near future science fiction movies ... Except technology achieved many other things besides shooting rockets into space, one of which is really good CGI, so it's really not about the ability to tell a good visual story.
jcims 7y ago
If you want SpaceX produced footage to be public domain, ask NASA to put it into the contract. Pretty simple.
azernik 7y ago
NASA broadcasts and public-domains all SpaceX launches where they're the customer.
thelittleone 7y ago
The fact the content is copyright makes it no less amazing to witness (at least for me and many friends). It has been a source of inspiration in a time of predominantly divisive news. The quality of the coverage has set a new bar for space companies / agencies. That alone is amazing because we all get to benefit.
debrice 7y ago
I've seen plenty of SpaceX crash footage used by others than SpaceX. While you might have a point when it comes to Intellectual Property, I think you're taking that a bit out of proportion.
rolltiide 7y ago
> As products of the US federal government they were not subject to copyright protection. This really is not a good assumption. The federal government has plenty of ways around this. The federal government can buy copyrights, and also enter into work for hire arrangements with contractors and employees. When naked and operating without contracts, the federal government does have this default status, simple boilerplate copy and pasted contracts change this.
tjpnz 7y ago
Go back and watch the livestream Boeing had when they were testing the Starliner.
airstrike 7y ago
> Except that it isn't. Except that it is. Free as in beer, not as in freedom.
taneq 7y ago
I can watch every launch live from my desk in glorious HD with multiple camera views, telemetry, and expert commentary. It costs nothing to watch. This is freaking amazing.
ufmace 7y ago
I don't much care for this take. In my opinion, a private and profitable space company is a massive, game-changing advancement in human progress. Maybe, just maybe, we'll actually send people to the planets when it's in somebody's direct financial interest and ability to do so, rather than have to beg a bunch of image-sensitive politicians to fund it. Against that possibility and chance, I honestly don't give a damn about whether or not some of the footage is public domain. I'd rather argue about who has the right to do what with various bits of launch footage from our Martian colony. Beats the heck out of having more public domain launch footage to use in sci-fi movies, and having our crowning achievement in human space exploration being a handful of short missions to the Moon that left behind absolutely no useful infrastructure, and was only done to show up our geopolitical rivals.
tripzilch 7y ago
> No questions asked. Unless it's critical or satirical of the military, like Starship Troopers.

elfexec 7y ago

It's amazing free entertainment for us and great free publicity for SpaceX. It's one of those rare win-win situations.

Jamwinner 7y ago

This has been a thing since the 1960s. Is this the elon tinted glasses I keep reading about?

growlist 7y ago
How do you mean? Very, very few launches would have been screened live in the UK, where I live.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- iso1210 7y ago
  Nor did they have high quality on board cameras in near-real time, broadcasts from high altitude planes, or live pictures of second stage decoupling The Spacex presenters generally have a mix of knowlege and charisma that news presenters don't.
  - growlist 7y ago
    There's a community element to it as well via YouTubers restreaming it. Everyday Astronaut even had tracking cameras set up this time! It does feel like something special is happening. I don't think the wider public are really aware of the implications of all of it yet e.g. reusability, Starlink, Starship, BO, SLS (if that ever gets off the ground). I think it's a really exciting time and I absolutely intend to watch the first full stack Starship/Superheavy launch in person.
greglindahl 7y ago
Yes, except that SpaceX really is unusually nice about licensing their images and video, compared to other companies. For example, US TV networks don't put their broadcasts about NASA launches into CC0 or CC-A-NC. And here's Boeing's "Inside the Starliner Pad Abort Test" -- https://youtu.be/L9ifJzokFgA?t=98 https://youtu.be/L9ifJzokFgA?t=98 -- Copyright @ 2019 Boeing, All rights reserved. So sure, you can see whatever you like: SpaceX is worse than NASA, or SpaceX is better than almost every other company. Your call.

Rapzid 7y ago

It dawned on me today that this is in SpaceX's best interest based on their development philosophy. Think about all the bad publicity that Boeing got when Starliner was off course. But here SpaceX is constantly blowing things up and everyone is just like "Ah shucks, they will get it next time though." A lot of that has to do with how out in the open they have made a lot of these failures and tests. Everybody expects it now and views it in a positive light.

azernik 7y ago
Part of that is also based in reality - SpaceX follows a more Soviet-style, hardware-rich approach than Boeing or ULA, where tests (including failed ones) are much more frequent. In terms of PR, this has given them a record of public failures followed by later success, so the public is more primed to give them the benefit of the doubt when something goes wrong. (Even if the thing that goes wrong isn't actually part of a test.)
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
- DataGata 7y ago
  Is that really Soviet style? Does that have a name or book or wikipedia article describing it?
agloeregrets 7y ago
You say this as if they actually are actually having things go wrong on stream. This test was exactly as planned. The one failure they did have unintentionally blow up (the dragon fueling explosion) was actually not on a live stream. All that did kinda work for their attempts at landing the first stage a few years back though, however that was heavily wrapped in “experiment” and Was PR covered at every moment.
- mcbutterbunz 7y ago
  There was the 2016 explosion of a falcon 9 during a static fire. Also a falcon 9 explosion during flight in 2015. Not all accidents have been on an official live stream but I’ve seen more accidents from Spacex than I’ve seen launches from Boeing and friends.