While far-fetched, we might communicate with the beings running the simulation. This would be science - based on measurements. To date we have no evidence to explain "why was the universe created?", but "It just was" is a defeatist answer that could keep us from looking deeper.
So they completely ignored the fact that the art is public domain. Argh.
The cost of space rated hardware is the cost to understand the load case, not the cost of the item.
This could be a good thing.
Why issue a takedown for a torrent with no seeds?
The US four factors test for fair use is largely met:
Purpose: The authors of this video have added significant commentary that was not present in OP's original work.
Nature: They are using OP's video not as a creative work, but as statements of facts to support their commentary.
Portion: They used a large percentage of OP's video, but not all. This might be an item in your favor, but since this video is low res, they used as little as they could to make their point.
Market: They are not likely to have reduced the commercial value of OP's video.
So this seems to me that this is 'fair use' of OP's video. The commentary they present is certainly utter rubbish, but the law allows people to use evidence from original works as evidence for their arguments, even rubbish arguments.
OP has already posted a comment that attests that this is an unauthorized use of his original video. That taints the authors and their message. I am not sure that any further action improves the situation.
1 Your support client calls you
2 You open VNC in listen mode
3 Your support client runs a custom version of UltraVNC SC that is set to connect only to you.
Easy. Fast. Cheap. And it works.
We miss you Space Bat http://www.space-bat.com/
Companies can and do meet the desires of their customers when there is competition and independent data for comparison. I agree that companies do abusive things when they believe that they will not be caught or can not be economically forced to change (monopoly), but the auto industry makes cars that are much safer today largely because many consumers buy safety.
I value human life, but I understand that people make choices about safety every day. While a government regulated minimum safety level may be good public policy, companies can and will provide the safety their customers demand if customers have choice and data.
You can certainly believe that every company will screw you each chance that they get, but that level of pessimism about the actions of others will not guide you to a better situation. Certainly the article here is saying that the TSA has said "oops" with people's lives many times. It is only a lack of terrorist intent that has kept these government failures from contributing to loss of lives.
Companies are certainly out to make a buck, but perhaps the problem here is a willingness to accept government incompetence because of a fear of corporate incompetence. Personally I would rather let corporations handle security screening because the economic pressure has the possibility of making security a selling point. Economic and consumer pressure has little to no effect on government security.