The Intellectual Property Paradigm In Satellite Private Spatial Data Commerce Case Study

Section 2. The Intellectual Property Paradigm in Satellite Private Spatial Data Commerce.

I. Intellectual property and satellite imagery and data commercial relations. A paradigm shift?

Conceiving satellite companies as “the authors of an image” or “the data creators” could be an important paradigm to debate about. Despite it is not the object of the present thesis to understand the moral authorship of an intangible asset, it is undeniable that there is an entity holding rights of an intangible that transfers such rights to another entity, according to the terms included in the agreement. Therefore, one must know where do these rights stem from. It is relevant, though, to discern whether “producing”, “capturing” or “interpreting” satellite
In this regard, Cimentarov refers to the exhaustion of rights doctrine as the “doctrine of first sale”62. Therefore, as Craig and de Bürca point out, the original holder of the copyright does not have the possibility to ban the circulation of the physical assets, if marketed with his consent63. One may presume that Cimentarov addresses this asseveration towards intangibles embedded into hardware devices such as CDs, CD-ROM, USB sticks, DVDs, Micro SD Cards or similar electronic hardware used to store digital goods. Since imagery and data are intangibles if traded online, therefore, a physical format regarding such intangible assets could only be envisioned if printed (imagery) or embedded into a piece of hardware. The structure of metadata could also be printed out according to some authors64. As far as distribution or supply of satellite imagery and data obtained from earth observation commercial online relations, transferring rights related to intangibles are performed using Internet and computers. One previously indicated that selling should not be the right verb to use in such transactions, due to the intangible nature of intangible assets. Hence, once the ownership of movable is transferred, the asset itself goes as a whole from the “transferor” to the “transferee”. However, “selling” an image online is not entirely correct from a legal perspective, due to the fact that the image still remains in the computer of the transferor. Consequently, only the rights of the image are transferred to the acquirer of such rights, that is to say, the image or its rights are supplied in exchange of an economic sum. Moreover, an online transaction “may be vested as a result” of a license, distribution, dissemination, deliverance, lend or any other type of agreement that national or international law may allow”. Thus, since autonomy of the parties