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

Re:SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky li... by notahacker on Friday April 06, 2018 @10:26AM (#16773459)

> More likely: they just woke up to the possibility of showing the world they exist.

I mean, the only evidence we've got is an article which quite clearly states that (i) SpaceX were the ones who contacted NOAA (ii) NOAA did not contact SpaceX regarding other launches, say it was SpaceX's responsibility to contact them and they don't think they have the resources to go chasing unlicensed remote sensing companies anyway (iii) Cameras on launches SpaceX carries out for government don't actually need permits anyway, which probably applies to a lot of SpaceX launches

So I'm not sure what gives you the confidence to confidently assert that it's "more likely" the precise opposite happened?

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky li... by jacquesm on Friday April 06, 2018 @10:30AM (#16773491)

You are conveniently leaving out the bit from TFA that states that NOAA only recently started to enforce this particular part of their charter.

That is why SpaceX contacted them. If they had not and they had launched without obtaining permission and streamed the footage there would have been a nice 'gotcha' moment and they tried to avoid that.

> Cameras on launches SpaceX carries out for government don't actually need permits anyway.

So what's the point on restricting them on other launches? That proves this whole thing is high grade bullshit.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:SpaceX can't broadcast Earth images because of a murky li... by notahacker on Friday April 06, 2018 @11:02AM (#16773751)

I am "conveniently" leaving it out because it is a vaguely worded "appears..." piece of journalese which contradicts the rest of the article and established fact. Nobody has disputed that SpaceX contacted NOAA first, there's no dispute that they process 40-odd applications every year, no dispute that the policy of licensing remote sensing has been in effect for a long time, amended more than once and that recent moves in the legislature (recent as in a couple of years ago, so SpaceX really had time to notice) have been proposals to relax it rather than to strengthen it.

And yeah, also no dispute that the government grants missions planned by its own agencies a remote sensing license - can't imagine why you would expect it to be otherwise tbh? But agreed, enough indents :-)

[ Parent | on HN ]