ULA wants photographers to work for free getting pictures in the media. The way photographers were making this work was by selling photos after the fact. If ULA wants that to end (presumably so they can sell pictures themselves), then photographers should respond in kind: don't take pictures of ULA launches <i>at all</i>. Treat it like a union strike.
ULA thought one of these photos was epic enough to buy it and install it two stories high in their lobby - <a href="https://www.johnkrausphotos.com/Galleries/Launches/Delta-IV-WGS-9/i-CGNqT3t/A" rel="nofollow">https://www.johnkrausphotos.com/Galleries/Launches/Delta-IV-...</a>.<p>This is a very odd decision.
I am unclear on what’s happening here or what grounds ULA has to prevent photos from being taken. How can someone prevent someone from taking photos in a public space?<p>Edit: found the answer deep in the article. “ The launch site is not a public space but rather a ULA-operated facility on a US military base”
ULA just wants to monetize it and take in the bigger piece of the cake. I wouldn’t be surprised if they introduced a membership to take pics due to “social media pressure” in the future. I’m just glad these people aren’t in charge of the space itself, or they would charge you fees to capture the totality eclipse!
From quite deep in the article, an interesting note:<p><i>“It could be that the company's legal department got involved after there was a fatal heart attack during camera setup for the recent launch of Boeing's Starliner spacecraft on an Atlas V rocket.”</i>
The way things are going (no ULA rockets being even partially reusable) it makes perfect sense! Gonna milk those few remaining launches until it become unthinkable to launch anything with them due to cost. ;-)
> "I'm just shocked they don't want more coverage of these things and not less."<p>I'm having real trouble parsing this, can anyone break down the double-negative for me? Or does it simply not make sense?
The headline here and on TFA is incorrect, ULA is cracking down on _professional_ photographers who are not directly employed by the media.<p>Hobbyist photographers who don't sell their pictures and just want to take cool shots of spaceships are not affected by this.
Sucks, but this is pretty standard for any such event. For example you can't legally sell photos you take at a concert or sporting event or inside a company's offices. They might let you take photos for personal use and to share with friends, but that's about it.
>Photographers were welcome to set up remote shots at ULA launches if they worked for the media or wanted to post their work on social media. However, photographers could not sell this work independently, including as prints for fellow enthusiasts or for use in annual calendars.<p>I see no problem with this policy and frankly applaud it.<p>>said David Diebold, a photographer for Space Scout, on X. "Being forced to sign an agreement ..."<p>Nobody is forcing or being forced to sign anything.
> Dodd said he is confused about why ULA would care whether these hobbyists make a little money from their efforts.<p>To avoid the tragedy of the commons.