Slashdot Mirror


NOAA Requires License For Photos of the Earth

Teancum writes "In an interesting show of the level of regulations private spacecraft designers have to go through, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has demanded that American participants of the Google Lunar X Prize obtain a license if their spacecraft are 'capable of actively or passively sensing the Earth's surface, including bodies of water, from space by making use of the properties of the electromagnetic waves emitted, reflected, or diffracted by the sensed objects.' What prompted NOAA to ask for this license came from a visit by the XPrize staff to the NOAA offices in Maryland. What is going to happen when 'space tourists' bring their private cameras along for the ride?"

5 of 311 comments (clear)

  1. Notice from NOAA to Lunar X Prize Participants by xmas2003 · · Score: 5, Informative

    Here's the letter from NOAA to the Lunar X participants that outlines how this is pursuent to the Land Remote Sensing Policy Act of 1992 - says it may take up to 120 days to obtain the license - think about that before you take your first picure! ;-)

    In the meantime, you can use existing satellite photos to image your house and here's a cool way to get a nifty Earth view.

    --
    Hulk SMASH Celiac Disease
    1. Re:Notice from NOAA to Lunar X Prize Participants by k33l0r · · Score: 5, Informative

      I'd call that a broken window fallacy.

    2. Re:Notice from NOAA to Lunar X Prize Participants by tricorn · · Score: 5, Informative

      Actually, the interest seems to be in PROMOTING it by making it available and regulating it so it is not a free-for-all, not "protecting it" it the way you're saying. There certainly needs to be SOME regulation, you don't want people sending up satellites in any-old-orbit, transmitting on any-old-frequency, shining laser lights down at your favorite observatory, or whatever...

      Without such regulations, you'd be in a situation where they'd probably simply prohibit all such activities. Regulations like this are designed to PERMIT things to happen, while retaining enough control that it isn't chaotic. I didn't see any reference in the regulations to a fee for such a license.

      The regulations in this part are intended to:
      (1) Preserve the national security of the United States;
      (2) Observe the foreign policies and international obligations of the United States;
      (3) Advance and protect U.S. national security and foreign policy interests by maintaining U.S. leadership in remote sensing space activities, and by sustaining and enhancing the U.S. remote sensing industry;
      (4) Promote the broad use of remote sensing data, their information products and applications;
      (5) Ensure that unenhanced data collected by licensed private remote sensing space systems concerning the territory of any country are made available to the government of that country upon its request, as soon as such data are available and on reasonable commercial terms and conditions as appropriate;
      (6) Ensure that remotely sensed data are widely available for civil and scientific research, particularly environmental and global change research; and
      (7) Maintain a permanent comprehensive U.S. government archive of global land remote sensing data for long-term monitoring and study of the changing global environment.

      As for the space tourist taking along a camera, that's not "remote sensing".

  2. This is actually for real by Steve1952 · · Score: 5, Informative
    This is actually for real. See:

    http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/F?c102:1:./temp/~c1029W3AOE:e25773:

    SEC. 202. CONDITIONS FOR OPERATION.

    (a) LICENSE REQUIRED FOR OPERATION- No person who is subject to the jurisdiction or control of the United States may, directly or through any subsidiary or affiliate, operate any private remote sensing space system without a license pursuant to section 201.

    (b) LICENSING REQUIREMENTS- Any license issued pursuant to this title shall specify that the licensee shall comply with all of the requirements of this Act and shall--

    (1) operate the system in such manner as to preserve the national security of the United States and to observe the international obligations of the United States in accordance with section 506;

    (2) make available to the government of any country (including the United States) unenhanced data collected by the system concerning the territory under the jurisdiction of such government as soon as such data are available and on reasonable terms and conditions;

    (3) make unenhanced data designated by the Secretary in the license pursuant to section 201(e) available in accordance with section 501;

    (4) upon termination of operations under the license, make disposition of any satellites in space in a manner satisfactory to the President;

    (5) furnish the Secretary with complete orbit and data collection characteristics of the system, and inform the Secretary immediately of any deviation; and

    (6) notify the Secretary of any agreement the licensee intends to enter with a foreign nation, entity, or consortium involving foreign nations or entities.

  3. NOAA is the good guys by daemonburrito · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is law, and is totally out of the control of NOAA.

    I've done a lot of work with NOAA and NOAA datasets and this sort of thing happens a lot, because of businesses who believe that "the government should not be in the business of distributing data". Predictably, they lobby congress. FWIW, I've witnessed NOAA passively resist this bullshit as much as they can.

    BTW, if you find this sort thing disgusting (as I do), stop going to weather.com and accu-weather. They are the worst offenders. Every couple of years they try to shut down NOAA ftp servers so they can be the gatekeepers of taxpayer-funded data (like maps).

    This law, in particular, is a piece of a strategy that didn't work in the early 90s, thanks in large part to career people at NOAA. They got this law passed, but they weren't able to shut down the ftp servers.

    Please don't blame the NOAA people. Blame the businesses like weather.com and accu-weather, and blame a bribable congress.