As it happens, I've studied fair use in detail. I wrote several news / opinion piece for slyck.com in 2004, when I fancied myself a pro-P2P activist. I would be very interested to hear what fair use provisions you believe protect re-publishing entire articles without permission.
On the other hand, I'd hate to force you to do all that "brain filtering" all by yourself. I worry that your cranial colander could clog!
I've owned, flown, crashed, repaired, and re-flown the Traxxis QR1 (toy), the original 3dr hexa-A, the 2014 3dr Y6B, and the Iris. My buddy flys a DJI phantom with me almost every friday.
With the prop guards, my buddy can 'bash around' with his phantom via manual control... he's literally bouncing off of trees and all is well because of those prop guards (jealous!). We flew together in the video linked a few lines below....and watching his video he literally bounced off five different trees and no crash. I hit ONE TREE and my IRIS bit it HARD. :)
On the other hand, my 3DR drones can fly GPS guided auto missions... which are as smart as the programmer (which being me is sometimes brilliant, and sometimes STUPID, i planned a mission into a tree recently). The capabilities here are 10x what you can do with a manually piloted mission.
To anyone thinking about buying an IRIS+ here's my advice FWIW.
1 - if you have no R/C experience, don't start with an IRIS nor a Phantom, buy a micro copter. For example, the blade nanos are pretty sweet.
2 - if you've flown R/C planes/copters or even r/c cars and just want an easy to fly copter, buy a DJI phantom (any generation). They are nice machines and are good 'bashers' but good luck getting support from DJI (although they have decent distribution so parts are available on eBay/Amazon/etc, more so than 3DR as of now)
3 - If you have some R/C experience and are more of a scientist/maker/hacker/DIYer, go 3DR. You have to read more docs, learn about configuration in mission planner, understand what things like GPS HDOP is, etc... which is fun learning, AND the capabilities are limited only by how deep you want to go. If you are a technical bad ass you can tit-for-tat with the developers in github and this forum (diydrones). If you like testing the next best thing, you can give feedback to the community testing the next beta release (3.2 right now). If you just want a well thought out design to learn what these amazing machines are capable of, go 3DR. If you want a really good gopro hero platform, go 3DR.
I'm not affiliated with 3DR in any way and am at the 'intermediate' skill level. Hit me up with any questions and I'll do my best to provide a no BS opinion... I'm not a troll (armen t) nor am I a complete fan boy.
@ Justin: excellentconsiderations, i agree 100%. One piece of advice i can giveis to avoidthe Tarot T-2D gimbalforGoPro,always gave me very bad results, micro oscillation at the groud and idecent management software, i don't know why 3DR adoptedthissolutionforIRIS+. There are productssuch assignificantly higherperformanceandstabilityasthese:
IngeneralAlexmosboard (8 and 32 bit) work much better.
X-CAM 3-axis Brushless Gimbal for GoPro A10-3H | X-CAM
X-CAM 3-axis Brushless Gimbal for GoPro A10-3H from manufacturer X-CAM, in category Gimbal/ Gimbal Controller etc..
Aaron Curtis > Marco RobustiniSeptember 10, 2014 at 11:56am
Brushless gimbals sure are tricky. I have wasted so much time trying to tune them, and I've had ones that work fine for a while and then start vibrating and seem untuneable.
Worth mentioning that the Phantom 2 Vision + gimbal does not work properly either. As far as I can tell everyone who has one (including me) experiences high frequency vibrations at certain tilt angles, which causes glitchy video because of the rolling-shutter effect, especially obvious when panning. Most users don't notice the problems in their videos because it's pretty subtle, but the videos are unusable for professional purposes. Here's an accurate video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySFbchfPYY
armen t > Justin HardinSeptember 10, 2014 at 12:08am
I have no doubt that re-posting without permission is common on diydrones, which is why I was wondering if there was a policy on it.
I'm also well aware of fair use, and I don't see how re-posting someone else's article on a different site could possibly qualify. From your link, "Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission."
Next time, actually take the time to think about the article and respond to it. For example, here's how I would do it in about 60 seconds:
Adam Estes over at Gizmodo wrote a gushing review of 3DR's latest update of the IRIS. The review is 8 parts enthusiasm, 1 part useful information, and 1 part misinformation. The only new feature appears to be longer flight times, and Adam does not explain how these are achieved. He seems confused about the nature of open source, and the follow me feature. You could read it, or you could just wait for the official 3DR press release which I hope will make more sense.
Sorry, i apologise there was a link, but these black underlined links are confusing to me.
The lack of attribution in words and the rest of the text got my attention. Normally people would say something like, i found this article about the new Iris+ on Gizmodo, heres the link. Cutting and pasting that much text is a bit much.
In the end my original statement about a paid for article appears to be true. Thats not journalism thats an advertisement.
Are you saying 3DR is paying Gizmodo? Seems unlikely. Do you have any evidence?
I think it's probably just a blogger whose style is to hype gadgets, because gadget hype is what Gizmodo people like to read. If they'd paid for the article I think they'd be pissed off with how much incorrect stuff it contains.
If theres a proper way of cut and paste, you should at the very least say so with a link on the very first line. No where in the text is a link or mention of the source.
Replies
As it happens, I've studied fair use in detail. I wrote several news / opinion piece for slyck.com in 2004, when I fancied myself a pro-P2P activist. I would be very interested to hear what fair use provisions you believe protect re-publishing entire articles without permission.
On the other hand, I'd hate to force you to do all that "brain filtering" all by yourself. I worry that your cranial colander could clog!
I just placed my order for the Iris+.
I've owned, flown, crashed, repaired, and re-flown the Traxxis QR1 (toy), the original 3dr hexa-A, the 2014 3dr Y6B, and the Iris. My buddy flys a DJI phantom with me almost every friday.
With the prop guards, my buddy can 'bash around' with his phantom via manual control... he's literally bouncing off of trees and all is well because of those prop guards (jealous!). We flew together in the video linked a few lines below....and watching his video he literally bounced off five different trees and no crash. I hit ONE TREE and my IRIS bit it HARD. :)
On the other hand, my 3DR drones can fly GPS guided auto missions... which are as smart as the programmer (which being me is sometimes brilliant, and sometimes STUPID, i planned a mission into a tree recently). The capabilities here are 10x what you can do with a manually piloted mission.
To anyone thinking about buying an IRIS+ here's my advice FWIW.
1 - if you have no R/C experience, don't start with an IRIS nor a Phantom, buy a micro copter. For example, the blade nanos are pretty sweet.
2 - if you've flown R/C planes/copters or even r/c cars and just want an easy to fly copter, buy a DJI phantom (any generation). They are nice machines and are good 'bashers' but good luck getting support from DJI (although they have decent distribution so parts are available on eBay/Amazon/etc, more so than 3DR as of now)
3 - If you have some R/C experience and are more of a scientist/maker/hacker/DIYer, go 3DR. You have to read more docs, learn about configuration in mission planner, understand what things like GPS HDOP is, etc... which is fun learning, AND the capabilities are limited only by how deep you want to go. If you are a technical bad ass you can tit-for-tat with the developers in github and this forum (diydrones). If you like testing the next best thing, you can give feedback to the community testing the next beta release (3.2 right now). If you just want a well thought out design to learn what these amazing machines are capable of, go 3DR. If you want a really good gopro hero platform, go 3DR.
I'm not affiliated with 3DR in any way and am at the 'intermediate' skill level. Hit me up with any questions and I'll do my best to provide a no BS opinion... I'm not a troll (armen t) nor am I a complete fan boy.
-Justin
@ Justin: excellent considerations, i agree 100%.
One piece of advice i can give is to avoid the Tarot T-2D gimbal for GoPro, always gave me very bad results, micro oscillation at the groud and idecent management software, i don't know why 3DR adopted this solution for IRIS+.
There are products such as significantly higher performance and stability as these:
http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/X-CAM_3-axis_Brushless_Gimbal_...
http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/FY-G3_Ultra_3-axis_Gimbal_for_...
http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/FeiYu_G3_2-Axis_Brushless_Gimb...
http://www.himodel.com/FPV_Telemetry/DYS_Gopro_3_3-Axis_Brushless_G...
In general Alexmos board (8 and 32 bit) work much better.
Brushless gimbals sure are tricky. I have wasted so much time trying to tune them, and I've had ones that work fine for a while and then start vibrating and seem untuneable.
Worth mentioning that the Phantom 2 Vision + gimbal does not work properly either. As far as I can tell everyone who has one (including me) experiences high frequency vibrations at certain tilt angles, which causes glitchy video because of the rolling-shutter effect, especially obvious when panning. Most users don't notice the problems in their videos because it's pretty subtle, but the videos are unusable for professional purposes. Here's an accurate video about it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iySFbchfPYY
you sound like a fan boi.
good luck with that
I have no doubt that re-posting without permission is common on diydrones, which is why I was wondering if there was a policy on it.
I'm also well aware of fair use, and I don't see how re-posting someone else's article on a different site could possibly qualify. From your link, "Acknowledging the source of the copyrighted material does not substitute for obtaining permission."
Next time, actually take the time to think about the article and respond to it. For example, here's how I would do it in about 60 seconds:
Sorry, i apologise there was a link, but these black underlined links are confusing to me.
The lack of attribution in words and the rest of the text got my attention. Normally people would say something like, i found this article about the new Iris+ on Gizmodo, heres the link. Cutting and pasting that much text is a bit much.
In the end my original statement about a paid for article appears to be true. Thats not journalism thats an advertisement.
Are you saying 3DR is paying Gizmodo? Seems unlikely. Do you have any evidence?
I think it's probably just a blogger whose style is to hype gadgets, because gadget hype is what Gizmodo people like to read. If they'd paid for the article I think they'd be pissed off with how much incorrect stuff it contains.
Did you obtain permission from the author?
Frank:
If theres a proper way of cut and paste, you should at the very least say so with a link on the very first line. No where in the text is a link or mention of the source.
-
1
-
2
-
3
-
4
of 4 Next