We all know the basic rules of lawful operation of Solo. Not within 5 miles of an airport, remain in LOS, no higher than 400 ft. Don't fly over stadiums or people, etc...
As of July 1st we now have a, out flying in public, law in place that basically states an operator cannot record any private property or person on that property that has an expectation to privacy.The expectation to privacy is defined as the expectation one would have while on the ground, and not within view of others on the ground around that property.
For what it's worth I thought I'd share this with fellow Solo pilots here to pass along to the multi-rotor community of how quickly laws are being written and passed to limit 'drone' usage as this industry continues to grow. It's important that we keep ourselves, and each other, up to date on these laws as they come up in each state as we move forward to avoid any criminal or civil violation charges down the road. More of such laws are on the table and it's just a matter of time before each state passes them and adds more teeth to them, and so on.
.
The final draft of this law as passed basically states:
1. A 'drone' (as defined in the body of the law), being operated in an area by a pilot who is recording the flight, flies over any private property and records said property and persons within that property, is in violation of this law if those persons had an expectation to privacy, and the violation results in financial damages.
-Basically, the 'violated' person can civilly sue the pilot.
-There are no criminal charges attached, unless unauthorized surveillance of a particular person or property is being done by and investigative entity, government, law enforcement, or otherwise.
-Pilot would be responsible for court costs, attorney fees, and financial damages.
I've read the actual law, and as it sits right now the plaintiff has the burden of proof of how he/it actually suffered financial damage. I imagine if you had photo shoot, for example, taking place in your backyard studio and the 'drone's' presence somehow interfered with shoot, maybe you can cause problems for the pilot and cost him a little money if the court favors your 'loss'.
Anyway, check out the articles with video below. One homeowner videoed an Aspire hoving in their backyard videoing them! Most all of us know better, but the media loves to make a few incidents look like a widespread epidemic. So be constantly mindful of your surroundings while flying, there are many that are really paranoid about all these cameras flying around above them. Ultimately, I can see (non 333) 'drones' being banned to designated RC flying parks, taking sweet gimballed videos of trees and bushes.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/ne...s-drone-pictures-on-private-property/33038174
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/06/30/new-drone-laws-flying-into-florida/29546665/
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2015/0766
As of July 1st we now have a, out flying in public, law in place that basically states an operator cannot record any private property or person on that property that has an expectation to privacy.The expectation to privacy is defined as the expectation one would have while on the ground, and not within view of others on the ground around that property.
For what it's worth I thought I'd share this with fellow Solo pilots here to pass along to the multi-rotor community of how quickly laws are being written and passed to limit 'drone' usage as this industry continues to grow. It's important that we keep ourselves, and each other, up to date on these laws as they come up in each state as we move forward to avoid any criminal or civil violation charges down the road. More of such laws are on the table and it's just a matter of time before each state passes them and adds more teeth to them, and so on.
.
The final draft of this law as passed basically states:
1. A 'drone' (as defined in the body of the law), being operated in an area by a pilot who is recording the flight, flies over any private property and records said property and persons within that property, is in violation of this law if those persons had an expectation to privacy, and the violation results in financial damages.
-Basically, the 'violated' person can civilly sue the pilot.
-There are no criminal charges attached, unless unauthorized surveillance of a particular person or property is being done by and investigative entity, government, law enforcement, or otherwise.
-Pilot would be responsible for court costs, attorney fees, and financial damages.
I've read the actual law, and as it sits right now the plaintiff has the burden of proof of how he/it actually suffered financial damage. I imagine if you had photo shoot, for example, taking place in your backyard studio and the 'drone's' presence somehow interfered with shoot, maybe you can cause problems for the pilot and cost him a little money if the court favors your 'loss'.
Anyway, check out the articles with video below. One homeowner videoed an Aspire hoving in their backyard videoing them! Most all of us know better, but the media loves to make a few incidents look like a widespread epidemic. So be constantly mindful of your surroundings while flying, there are many that are really paranoid about all these cameras flying around above them. Ultimately, I can see (non 333) 'drones' being banned to designated RC flying parks, taking sweet gimballed videos of trees and bushes.
http://www.clickorlando.com/news/ne...s-drone-pictures-on-private-property/33038174
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/06/30/new-drone-laws-flying-into-florida/29546665/
https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2015/0766
Last edited:
