Beyond significant doubt, the unedited satellite photo belongs to NASA and is in the PD.
But, that's not what we've got here. my understanding is that the Space Science and Engineering Center at University of Wisconsin-Madison processes it so that third parties (in this case, the NWS) can wrap that image (like a "skin") onto Google's model of the planet to create images like this.
That is, the NWS has generated the image inside Google Earth, which Google's ToS clearly allow them to do (not commerical or promotional), but that permission does not release the resulting image under a free license or place it in the PD. --Rlandmann (talk) 04:51, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think the real question is not related to the Google ToS. The real question is whether it is actually out of PD. This is a rare instance where we have confirmation it was originally taken by NASA and in the PD. What did Google do? There was several discussions (when {{PD-NEXRAD}} was brought up and looked at on the copyright village pump discussion board several months ago), that PD images can be copyrighted. However, for it to be copyrighted, there has to be significant changes. If Google slapped their logo on it, it wouldn’t be significant changes, and would still be under the NASA copyright rules. This one isn’t super cut and dry in my opinion. I see your argument, but this also more or less seems like Google slapping a logo on a PD image. The copyright village pump dealt with that for PD-NEXRAD, where sometimes a logo was on a radar image. Those were determined to be PD at the village pump as it wasn’t significant changes. I have a feeling this gif is the exact same. WeatherWriter (talk) 06:35, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Google's contributions here likely fall into two categories: the 3D model that the PD image was wrapped around (and its rendering) and any map elements added by Google. The US doesn't recognise the "sweat of the brow" doctrine that exists in other copyright jurisdictions, so these are relevant only if copyright arises from one or both of those things, not just from Google doing the work.
On the 3D model element, I agree that a key consideration here is that if the result of the process is no different from viewing the raw satellite image, then the resulting image is also in the PD. If we could figure out how to access the raw Aqua imagery, that would settle that question.
As to the map elements, they are definitely copyrightable, if added by Google. When I turn on "Roads" in the "Layers" menu in the current Google Earth interface, I get a view very similar to the road network visible in this image (close enough to attribute the difference to UI changes over the intervening 4 years, and viewing on a different platform). This makes me very sure that the map elements belong to Google. --Rlandmann (talk) 09:07, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is the same understanding which left me to upload it and I did not notice the tiny copyright bit in the corner which referred to Google. Truly this NWS examination of images has resulted in incredible filth in terms of how complex things are. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬📋｠ 23:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Amazing! Thank you! We currently have two other files with similar issues; I'll ask you on your talk page if you can help with them too please :) --Rlandmann (talk) 22:18, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
As original uploader, I would happily have without-a-doubt free media in place of ambiguous mixture of free and non-free media. This image can and probably should be deleted, given more correspondence I've had with DMX (which has been sent to VRT per Rlandmann's request). We can replace any use of the problematic-copyright version with the free version above. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬📋｠ 21:56, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is the same understanding which left me to upload it and I did not notice the tiny copyright bit in the corner which referred to Google. Truly this NWS examination of images has resulted in incredible filth in terms of how complex things are. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬 📋｠ 23:02, 25 August 2024 (UTC)
Neutral Based on the consideration of Rlandmann and WeatherWriter’s arguments. ChessEric (talk) 05:55, 24 August 2024 (UTC)
