UFO Conjecture(s)

Thursday, October 29, 2015

The Ramey photo and copyright issues

A  debate, at Kevin Randle's blog, has ensued about the Ramey memo and the photo's copyright owner, the newspaper --  the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

It seems that the persons working to decipher the memo itself, a small portion of the photo, are protected by Fair Use, as they may be designated researchers or analytics, using the photo to learn/teach something about it.

Moreover, that they are only looking at a small portion of the original photograph, the "hesitancy" to show what the group hoping to decipher the damn thing is working on or has found seems to be a red herring.

That is, there seems to be a similar procedure and attitude that got the alien slides people in trouble: the bond of secrecy, holding back information to ostensibly come to a full denouement before sharing the find with members of the UFO community.

There is a whiff of stink about this.

For some of the views about Copyright law and Fair Use, here's a link to material that all of you can understand:

http://www.socialmediaexaminer.com/copyright-fair-use-and-how-it-works-for-online-images/

RR

15 Comments:

  • On Kevin's site, he makes reference that the group attempting to enhance the wording on the "Ramey Memo" was working on the project up until the April 2015 time frame. After having difficulties coming to any logical conclusion, this group and Kevin decided to open it up to others which also included Lance Moody. (No other RSG member was contacted as far as I know) Kevin stated that this group worked quietly using the Roswell Slides Group as a model.

    Is Kevin saying that the RSG model was used prior to or after April 2015? The initial deblurring attempts by the RSG of the Palmer Mummy placard occurred shortly after May 15, 2015 and thus the solution and techniques given to anyone wishing to duplicate the process. We only kept our then on-going deblurring attempts between ourselves until we were collectively comfortable with our results.

    So I'm assuming that Kevin meant that the RSG model was used well after the late May 2015 time frame. It's a tad bit confusing as read on Kevin's site.

    Note: I was a member of the RSG, but was not involved with the deblurring efforts.

    By Blogger Tim Hebert, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Tim -

    Sorry for the confusion. Prior to the journey to Texas in April, we had discussed how to go about publicizing the research regardless of what we found. If it actually could be shown to say "victims of the wreck," then we had to explain exactly how we had validated that line. After May 5 and the deblurring of the placard, we thought this was the way to do things which was sort of what we thought but now we had a template for the release of the data. For the sake of convenience, I just said we had modeled it after the Roswell Slides Research Group which wasn't completely accurate but did explain it in a nice, quick way. We had always planned to release everything we learned regardless of the outcome. We had hoped things would have progressed a little faster than they have and now hope to stimulate others into searching the memo. I just haven't figured out how to get the data into all the hands who might be able to use it because the whole package of raw data is about 32 gigabytes.

    By Blogger KRandle, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Rich -

    Really? A whiff of a stink?

    We have shared the data with many others and have offered to share it with more right here on this blog. There is no secrecy here, just a caution that comes from the holder of the negative about copyright, something that I didn't raise with them but they raised with us. We asked for clarification and their lawyers are looking into it so all the free legal advice is not helping matters.

    I have published one of the better images on my blog and would delight in sharing more of them with others, especially those who might be able to clarify the text. If you have an idea of who should see the raw data and how I might get something like 32 gigabytes of data to them, I'm all ears. It's not secrecy so much as it is trying to do this right... Suggestions would be helpful.

    By Blogger KRandle, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Kevin:

    I've had to work around copyright for a lot of years, as part of my news media duties and sites about media.

    The idea that you can't use a section of a photo, with or without Fair Use, is silly.

    That made me bring up the idea of an odorous whiff.

    The approach you fellows are using has a similarity to the alien slides approach. I don't think there is deviousness in your endeavors but others have contacted me, concerned about that similarity.

    You are addressing it, but there are caveats in place that should not be ignored: a small clique working in secrecy, or seeming secrecy makes for concern, rightfully or not.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Perhaps Kevin and crew should have hired a public relations person to assist them plan more effectively how to communicate their efforts.

    Even if no secrecy was intended, the mere perception of it is a killer. And there appears to be some secrecy at play.

    It could have been easily mitigated by a more organized approach declaring openly to all interested parties the following:

    1) We are forming a team to look at the memo one more time.

    2) The team includes the following people and here is our explanation of why.

    3) We have include a skeptic on the team to provide perspective.

    4) Our objectives are X.

    5) Our process is Y.

    6) Our timeframe is Z.

    7) We will provide periodic updates according to the following schedule.

    8) We have no plans to make any money.

    9) If we can't get agreement or good results, we will open it up to other experts.

    10) We have already selected an independent review panel to examine our work and to critique our final conclusions.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Brian's comment, with a procedure for pursuing the Ramey memo goes to what I see as the way the thing should have been formulated and handled.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Thursday, October 29, 2015  

  • Brian -

    Why? All that information is contained in the journal article, more than a single "skeptic" has seen the scans and there was no reason to mention any of this until the research was completed given the complicated negotiations between UTA and us, and the scheduling problems and other logistical concerns. We always planned to open all this up to others for their examination and we have plans for peer review. The only real complaint here seems to be that we didn't make all sorts of announcements prior to this which seems to annoy some. But why complicate the process when there was nothing to report in the beginning?... we saw how the leaks in the Roswell Slides caused all sorts of unnecessary grief. We avoided that until now.

    Besides, in the academic arena, there is often research conducted without great announcement. The first that is heard is upon publication in a referred journal. In journalism, a reporter often says nothing about his story until complete and the publishes it. We made mention now because our results had done little to clarify the memo and we hoped that providing a wider audience would result in some sort of resolution... instead we're criticized for no telling you (and many others) what we were doing and providing updates on the work.

    But then, no matter what was done, you'd find fault. I would hope that you and others would have some positive suggestions on how to proceed now that we have the scans. No one seems to be making those suggests. Instead they're concerned about a reception of secrecy where none really existed...

    By Blogger KRandle, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Kevin:

    I got an e-mail saying the Ramey family has that memo in its possession?

    Is that possible?

    (The sender is unknown to me.)

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Rich.

    Do you mean the Ramey family have the actual memo?

    Find that hard to believe as surely it would have been released or shown by now or mayby not.

    By Blogger Al12, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • AI12:

    I have no idea.

    I got a cryptic note, via Craig's List (yes, Craig's list) from a person I do not know, telling me that the Ramey family had the memo in their possession.

    That e-mail notification came into to my Spam folder at G-mail which I was not about to open. But after several notifications, I opened it in my smart phone, just in case it contained a virus or malware.

    That's all it said.

    I didn't reply.

    I don't know if there's a Ramey family extant, but surely Kevin and his pals could check it out, just in case.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Rich.

    Ok, that would be dynamite if they did.

    But like you say couldve been nothing or a trick.

    By Blogger Al12, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • All -

    The Ramey family does not have a copy of the memo. I talked with Ramey's wife a number of years ago and she had nothing like that...

    If the memo was a classified document from the military message center, then it would have remained on the base and in a suitable storage container (read safe for secret and below and vault for top secret). When it's usefulness had expired, it would have been routinely destroyed and not for some nefarious attempt to keep the secret.

    If the memo was the "talking points" of a press release, or a press release itself, events would have overtaken it (and no, Ramey cancelled his scheduled radio interview and all that has been found by Mark Rodegheir is the Headline Edition that David Rudiak has on his website) it probably ended up in a wastebasket.

    If the memo was brought into the office by Johnson (and I hesitate to say this, but I'm beginning to think that is the most likely source) it was either carried out by him or again thrown away.

    Given all this, I see no way for any member of the Ramey family having a copy of it now. Just another in a long line of lies spread by those who have nothing else to do.

    By Blogger KRandle, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Kevin -

    "All that information is contained in the journal article, more than a single "skeptic" has seen the scans and there was no reason to mention any of this until the research was completed given the complicated negotiations between UTA and us, and the scheduling problems and other logistical concerns."

    >>The journal article is not public yet. From what I can tell only one skeptic was involved initially, then later you invited a broader audience. No one knows who they are really. Avoid the headache and declare it all first.

    "We always planned to open all this up to others for their examination and we have plans for peer review."

    >>Avoid problems next time and make that known upfront, especially if following a recent botched attempt like those behind Mexico City.

    "The only real complaint here seems to be that we didn't make all sorts of announcements prior to this which seems to annoy some."

    >>I'm not annoyed, just pointing out that not announcing it upfront is problematic as can be seen.

    "But why complicate the process when there was nothing to report in the beginning?... we saw how the leaks in the Roswell Slides caused all sorts of unnecessary grief. We avoided that until now."

    >>Choose an evaluation team that won't "leak" information. Making their names public upfront holds them all accountable if leaks are made.

    "Besides, in the academic arena, there is often research conducted without great announcement."

    >>Yes, but this is ufology not academics and the audience is not fellow academic researchers but followers of a certain unproven belief.

    "In journalism, a reporter often says nothing about his story until complete and the publishes it."

    >>Well this isn't journalism. Journalism is competitive and that's why often times breaking stories are researched secretly then published rapidly to beat the competition.

    "I would hope that you and others would have some positive suggestions on how to proceed now that we have the scans."

    >>Let's be honest, you wouldn't have included me or some others in this process from the get go. That doesn't bother me, but let's not pretend any advice I might give would be valued.

    By Blogger Brian Bell, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Thank you Kevin.

    The e-mail seemed iffy to me, and G-mail automatically put it in my Spam folder which told me something, but I had to ask.

    RR

    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

  • Kevin: "...and no, Ramey cancelled his scheduled radio interview..."

    I understood the national broadcast was cancelled, but there appears to have been a local Ft Worth broadcast, so there were two radio broadcasts reported.

    Or am I confused about it?

    Regards,

    Don

    By Blogger Don, at Friday, October 30, 2015  

Post a Comment

<< Home