[FPSPACE] copyright infringement?

[agzak at optonline.net]

Ed, everybody:

Thank you so much for the comments and the interest in this case. I should've clarified this from the beginning that Boeing copied the 2002 revision of the map, which had been updated since then on RussianSpaceWeb.com. I do have all original date-stamped files of numerous revisions dating back to 1998.

In fact, this makes our case even stronger since the 2002 revision contained number of inaccuracies, (later corrected), which obviously would never be made by "topographic devision" of Roskosmos, who allegedly produced this graphic.

Also note that Sea Launch displays only a static fragment of my much large zoomable file. So it is impossible that I copied their graphic, but it is 100 percent obvious that they took a screenshot of my map.

Again, thank you everybody for the interest and advice,

Anatoly Zak
http://www.russianspaceweb.com




----- Original Message -----
From: Edwin Cameron <nodin at sbcglobal.net>
Date: Friday, May 16, 2008 8:18 am
Subject: [FPSPACE] copyright infringement?
To: friends partners <fpspace at friends-partners.org>

> Anatoly (and Dave),
>   
>  I've repeated both entries below.  As I was once told herein -- 
> be careful!  I do not know where the underlying map was originally 
> produced, OR BY WHOM.  I also did an overlay making the background 
> from the interactive map transparent, and they are NOT THE SAME.  
> There are features (the river and some roads) which are clearly the 
> same, but many and significant features which are not.  The map 
> with added labels is clearly not a "screenshot" of the interactive 
> map.  If the underlying topogrphical map is the copyrighted work of 
> Anatoly, it may be a different matter.  Such maps tend to look 
> alike with many identical features, as one would expect.  But, I 
> ask, if Boeing started with Anatoly's map, why is Leninsk such a 
> different looking place on the two maps (look at them, you'll see), 
> even the road to the airport is different.  Then go north and check 
> sites 21, 23, 3K, 3P, and 3G, and go on northward -- many 
> significant differences can be seen over the entire map -- not
> merely erasures and relabeling.
>   
>  I argued a copyright problem with the Scientific American 
> publication over the use of some photographs that I took at 
> Baikonur of the sheds made from an N1/L3 shroud -- the photos were 
> and are mine, copyrighted in 1992, one of them even published in 
> Aviation Week & Space Technology in November that year.  The photos 
> were later used with John Logsdon's June 1994 article in Scientific 
> American with no permission and no attribution.  I can understand 
> how you feel, though much of what I did and what I presented in 
> past years was without attribution.  I wasted a lot of time over my 
> photos, and also money on a copyright lawyer, and got nothing for 
> it -- not even so much as an apology from Scientific American or 
> Professor Logsdon -- though on this forum he simply said that he 
> was not responsible.  Well, someone was responsible, and someone 
> got paid for my photos, but it was not me.  It may be a difficult 
> and costly venture to gain the satisfaction you seek unless you are 
> clearly the maker of the underlying topographical map, as well as 
> the annotations, and can prove it is all yours.  Claiming copyright 
> infringement without that level of proof may cause you more grief 
> than you want.
>   
>  I was severely chastised here on this forum for stating something 
> I believed to be fact.  Both you and Dave might believe there is 
> copyright infringement, but that is not proof.  No one proved or 
> had to prove that my claim was untrue, but I was unable to show 
> proof of my claim or produce the classified documents that I had 
> seen.  And, that was just a side issue, not in the least the intent 
> of my disclosure.  One or more people took issue with my statement, 
> but never had the decency to ask me about it, or discuss the claim 
> with me.  I have seen properly scaled Russian made maps (usually 
> annotated completely in Russian), satellite photos (both US and 
> Soviet) and maps drawn from them, as well as maps almost like 
> cartoons in Baikonur brochures since before 1990, when the Proton 
> launch services were first marketed.  The maps do exist, and 
> Russians did make them available well before 2003.  If you made 
> those Russian maps, then perhaps I was even looking at some of your 
> early work back then.
>   
>  I can't speak for everyone, but I appreciate the great work you 
> have done, and your contributions both here and on your website.
>   
>  Good luck whatever you decide to do,
>  Ed
>  ----------------------------
>   
>  Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 16:46:30 +0000 (GMT)
> From: agzak at optonline.net
>  Subject: [FPSPACE] Another Boeing copyright infringement
>  
> I have a request for help in a legal case, which might have long-
> running implications for space journalism.
> 
> Boeing company and its subsidiary Sea Launch took a screenshot of 
> my interactive map of Baikonur from this page:
> 
> http://www.russianspaceweb.com/baikonur.html
> 
> and published it on its corporate web site here:
> 
> http://www.boeing.com/special/sea-launch/land-launch/index.html
> 
> with added labels, many of them completely wrong.
> 
> They rejected my request for a credit and corrections and instead 
> made a completely ludicrous claim that they got the map from the 
> Russian Space Agency's topographic division.
> 
> Now, I need a reputable source, (an industry representative, a 
> historian or a journalist) who could confirm following:
> 
> -Russians would never give a foreign company a scaled map of their 
> space facility, 
> 
> -Russians never published real (scaled) maps of Baikonur, but just 
> schematics,
> -All Russian military maps use completely different fonts, 
> topographic signs and colors,
> 
> -and the map of Baikonur on Sea Launch's web site is totally 
> consistent with voluminous cartography work, which I've done over 
> the years.
> 
> If anybody willing to help please contact me. Please feel free to 
> refer this matter to other online forums and communities. Thank you 
> in advance.
>   
> Anatoly Zak
> http://www.russianspaceweb.com
> 
> ----------------------------------------
>   
>  
> Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 20:28:08 -0400
> From: David Woods <drwoods1 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [FPSPACE] Another Boeing copyright infringement
> 
>  Anatoly,
> 
> I took both maps and overlaid your original over the Boeing copy 
> just to see how close it is.  Yours has more callouts but the river 
> and roads are exactly the same as well as the geographic features.. 
> In some cases the Site-IDs were moved slightly on their map, but 
> the font is the same.  I have it all in a 1.2 MB PSD file that I 
> can send you if you would like.
> 
> This is clearly copyright infringement because you have the proper 
> credit:  Copyright (c) 2003 Anatoly Zak / RussianSpaceWeb.com  
> There is no date on their site, but I do not think this Land Launch 
> web site was around in 2003 so yours precedes theirs.  I would ask 
> them to provide documentation that they, Boeing received it from 
> the "topographic division" without restrictions, and ask them to do 
> so within a reasonable amount of time, like 30 days.
> 
> For what its worth, I have seen you material used elsewhere but in 
> every case that I can remember you always received the proper credit.
> 
> Having been through this sort of thing myself on a number of 
> occasions, I can appreciate your annoyance with their failure to 
> cooperate.
> Dave
>