4 ms·
IANAL and I wish those who aren't either mention that. But with that line of argument images from Hubble telescope wouldn't be copyrightable either but they are
by gerash 6y ago
IANAL and I wish those who aren't either mention that. But with that line of argument images from Hubble telescope wouldn't be copyrightable either but they are:
http://hubble.stsci.edu/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=92&cat=hubbleimages http://hubble.stsci.edu/reference_desk/faq/answer.php.id=92&...
- sio8ohPi 6y agoAre they actually copyrightable? STScI is of course free to assert that they are, but that doesn't make it so.
- javagram 6y agoIANAL either but the images from the Hubble have “artistic” work that goes into them just like a landscape photograph does. Choices like the the framing, color saturation levels, etc.
- CamperBob2 6y agoHow does that make sense for a taxpayer-funded resource? I'm sure that some projects that rent time on Hubble have private funding, but does that apply to all of them?
- Beldin 6y agoThat images taken by hubble aren't used commercially without paying a license fee to NASA? I imagine the tax payer is okay with getting some money back.
- ben_w 6y agoNASA stuff isn’t copyrighted, and only the logo is even trademarked. > NASA content - images, audio, video, and computer files used in the rendition of 3-dimensional models, such as texture maps and polygon data in any format - generally are not copyrighted. (https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/guidelines/index.html https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/guidelines/index.html) I believe the reasoning is that everything paid for by your tax money should be free for everyone. I think some state-level governments prefer your argument.