Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

Topics that do not fit anywhere else. Absolutely NO discussions of religion, race, or immigration!

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Keith B
Moderator
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 18493
Joined: Sat Aug 18, 2007 3:29 pm

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#16

Post by Keith B »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:Does the FAA have authority to require licensing for "pilots" of drones?

Chas.
They think they do. And one Judge will agree with them, then the next won't. They also keep trying different angles, by trying to regulate pilot, then by regulating the aircraft, but have never really beed successful.

I think the issue is they have a potential problem in the fact that there are a lot of them out there now due to being cheap, and a drone could cause a problem for a manned aircraft, so unless they show they have tried to regulate them if something happens they will be raked over the coals. They have the same issue with the green lasers becoming so cheap that everyone could get one. Now they have a 1000% increase in incidents because Bubba is sitting on his porch drinking beer and pointing the laser at planes as they come over.
Keith
Texas LTC Instructor, Missouri CCW Instructor, NRA Certified Pistol, Rifle, Shotgun Instructor and RSO, NRA Life Member

Psalm 82:3-4

cb1000rider
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 2505
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2013 3:27 pm

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#17

Post by cb1000rider »

Charles L. Cotton wrote: Does the FAA have authority to require licensing for "pilots" of drones?
Chas.
Not currently. The airspace issue seems to be taking the primary focus right now.

The FAA is seems to be inclined to divide them onto 3 classes:
1) Model Airplane: Line of sight, can't interfere with real aircraft, non-commercial. (there may be size and weight too, I know there is on the Academy of Model Aeronautics side)
2) UAS (unmanned aircraft systems): Beyond line of sight - First person view or autonomous, they have no "pilot" in the traditional sense. 3 modes of operation: Model (hobby), Public (Government), Civil (everything else)
3) Actual piloted aircraft (glider, lighter-than-air, fixed wing, rotary)


I wouldn't think that you could create a UAS license, as they the skill set required to keep them in the air them ranges from almost none to fairly significant.. Largely depending on the electronics on board the aircraft.

MechAg94
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1584
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#18

Post by MechAg94 »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Abraham wrote:If I'm weeding my flower/truck garden you shouldn't have the right to video it.

Isn't my back yard - my back yard?

Leave me out of your drone activities. I'm doing no harm.
I agree in concept, but the SCOTUS has opined that we have no expectation of privacy outside our home, or even inside if we leave our blinds open. I'm concerned with how the FAA even considered that it has the authority to regulate posting of videos, regardless how they were obtained.

Chas.
Wouldn't that depend on if the person with the camera is using footage of you or your property for profit? That is different issue than privacy though.
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 26796
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#19

Post by The Annoyed Man »

MechAg94 wrote:
Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Abraham wrote:If I'm weeding my flower/truck garden you shouldn't have the right to video it.

Isn't my back yard - my back yard?

Leave me out of your drone activities. I'm doing no harm.
I agree in concept, but the SCOTUS has opined that we have no expectation of privacy outside our home, or even inside if we leave our blinds open. I'm concerned with how the FAA even considered that it has the authority to regulate posting of videos, regardless how they were obtained.

Chas.
Wouldn't that depend on if the person with the camera is using footage of you or your property for profit? That is different issue than privacy though.
I can't give the legal citation to back this up, and it is strictly from memory........but I think that used to be the case, but no longer. The example that comes to my mind is some years ago, the owners of the Empire State Building sought to enforce their right to control publication and other use of photography which contained their building. Their position was that their building was iconic, and that they had intellectual property rights to control its usage in imagery...........which is patently stupid, since they could then claim ownership over any photograph of the NYC skyline, including images taken by/for the ownership of the World Trade Towers. I don't know if there was litigation involved, or any court rulings, but I think that they eventually gave up. The ACLU takes a position that photographers have rights: https://www.aclu.org/kyr-photo. According to them:
Your rights as a photographer:
  • When in public spaces where you are lawfully present you have the right to photograph anything that is in plain view. That includes pictures of federal buildings, transportation facilities, and police. Such photography is a form of public oversight over the government and is important in a free society.
  • When you are on private property, the property owner may set rules about the taking of photographs. If you disobey the property owner's rules, they can order you off their property (and have you arrested for trespassing if you do not comply).

    {——SNIP——}
  • Note that the right to photograph does not give you a right to break any other laws. For example, if you are trespassing to take photographs, you may still be charged with trespass.
The way I interpret that is that whether or not you may legally take pictures/video of someone's backyard from the air via use of a drone is dependent upon whether or not the FAA says you are trespassing onto someone's property when you are flying over it. But while the FAA may control airspace, they have no say over intellectual property at all......unless it is their own.

The law seems to use words like "reasonable" in a lot of situations, so maybe it boils down to whether or not you have a reasonable expectation of privacy from the air in the location at which you live. If you live in suburbia where people are packed cheek by jowl, it may be an unreasonable expectation. On the other hand, if I live on 1,000 acres and my house is located on the far side of the property from the road, and the only indication of a home in the distance is a mailbox at the end of my driveway, then I might have a reasonable expectation of privacy, and you would have to be going out of your way to violate that privacy. If you had to trespass onto my property to get close enough to launch the drone and invade my privacy, then I suspect you would have zero standing if I shot your drone down. It would be the same thing as if you had invaded my property to take still photos, and I caught you, confiscated the camera, stripped the film/data card out of it, and handed it all back to you after having erased the data card. You'd be lucky to be leaving the property without a police escort and some silver bracelets.

I don't know if it's illegal or not, but in that kind of situation, I might be inclined to shoot down the drone to protect my privacy. It would be up to the owner to prove that I had done it, and I have a shovel. He wouldn't be getting his drone back.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
User avatar

Topic author
VMI77
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 5
Posts: 6096
Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2010 5:49 pm
Location: Victoria, Texas

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#20

Post by VMI77 »

The Annoyed Man wrote:I don't know if it's illegal or not, but in that kind of situation, I might be inclined to shoot down the drone to protect my privacy. It would be up to the owner to prove that I had done it, and I have a shovel. He wouldn't be getting his drone back.
Could work, UNLESS it was uplinking the video feed.
"Journalism, n. A job for people who flunked out of STEM courses, enjoy making up stories, and have no detectable integrity or morals."

From the WeaponsMan blog, weaponsman.com
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 26796
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#21

Post by The Annoyed Man »

VMI77 wrote:
The Annoyed Man wrote:I don't know if it's illegal or not, but in that kind of situation, I might be inclined to shoot down the drone to protect my privacy. It would be up to the owner to prove that I had done it, and I have a shovel. He wouldn't be getting his drone back.
Could work, UNLESS it was uplinking the video feed.
It would depend on the device and how it was mounted to the drone. If it was a GoPro on a stationary mount for instance, and the camera was pointed the other way, the shooter would never be seen.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
User avatar

jimlongley
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 6134
Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2005 1:31 pm
Location: Allen, TX

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#22

Post by jimlongley »

The Annoyed Man wrote: . . .
  • When in public spaces where you are lawfully present you have the right to photograph anything that is in plain view. That includes pictures of federal buildings, transportation facilities, and police. Such photography is a form of public oversight over the government and is important in a free society.
Also except that some courts have already convicted people for photographing/videoing as a violation of "wiretap" laws, ie, that it was an unauthorized electronic recording, etc.

I know ACLU has been fighting this interpretation.

I can remember when police and fire, in performance of their duties, had no expectation of privacy, and it seems the pendulum has swung.

BTW, on the news the other night, the talking heads were showing a contributor's video and commenting on it, and when they reached the part of the script that mentioned that the contributor used a drone to take the video, you got a good feeling about the commentator's opinion as he had a bit of a problem saying it.
Real gun control, carrying 24/7/365
User avatar

RetNavy
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 515
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 9:21 am
Location: Paris, Tx

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#23

Post by RetNavy »

Wife posted on her facebook page a picture of the Cease and Desist letter a local freelance reporter/videographer received from the Corp of Enginners... couple weeks ago he flew his drone over the spillway at a local lake to show how the full the lake was... first time in years.... seems there is a code that prohibits taking video/pictures of COE dams.... his video was even show on a local Dallas station...

so if fly a drone... probably make sure it's not over federal land/property


https://scontent-atl.xx.fbcdn.net/hphot ... 3643_o.jpg
"Freedom itself was attacked this morning by a faceless coward. Freedom will be defended!"
-President George W. Bush, September 11, 2001
User avatar

baldeagle
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 5240
Joined: Tue May 25, 2010 8:26 pm
Location: Richardson, TX

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#24

Post by baldeagle »

Charles L. Cotton wrote:
Abraham wrote:If I'm weeding my flower/truck garden you shouldn't have the right to video it.

Isn't my back yard - my back yard?

Leave me out of your drone activities. I'm doing no harm.
I agree in concept, but the SCOTUS has opined that we have no expectation of privacy outside our home, or even inside if we leave our blinds open. I'm concerned with how the FAA even considered that it has the authority to regulate posting of videos, regardless how they were obtained.

Chas.
Obama told them they could.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 26796
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: Drone Controvery Thread --new angle, thanks to FAA

#25

Post by The Annoyed Man »

The obvious solution seems to be:

1. Get whatever license the FAA requires so that you are compliant with their regulations.
2. Start recording aerial videos of the FAA Director's private residence, particularly his back yard. Try to get zoomed in shots of street name, and address from the street signs and the front gate.
3. Monetize it by placing it on YouTube, inviting people to send all complaints to his home address.
4. Be sure to neutralize any potential liability to yourself by ending your videos with the following service announcement: "Please, do NOT drop incindiary devices onto this residence from your own drones!"

That should do it. :evil2:

Rinse and repeat for any other unelected bureaucrats who value their power more than your freedom.
“Hard times create strong men. Strong men create good times. Good times create weak men. And, weak men create hard times.”

― G. Michael Hopf, "Those Who Remain"

#TINVOWOOT
Post Reply

Return to “Off-Topic”