Ok, let me see if I understand. A sign that says "No drones" which really means "No landing, launching, or operating drones while *on* the property" but doesn't prohibit flying over the property, you believe it is sufficient to simply say "No...
You and I both know that but most citizens and quite a few business don't know that; even the police don't always know it. Exactly why it helps to have the statute posted under "No Dogs" so we can read it where it will likely show the exclusions.
Of course it's not a law as only a government agency can make a law. If a museum (a private museum) says "no flash photography" then that is their rule or their policy and it's not a law and the state cannot enforce that against the citizen...
I think you are kinda missing my point. Failure to cite or reference a code, ordinance, or statute or the incorrect one could diminish the case against you especially if the sign is vague or confusing. Omitting the citation so you "don't get it...
Have you been online lately? "Ownership" is not a thing.
Don't let these places fool you into believing they own what you can see from the public or they have some kind of magical rights to what you can do with what you see with your own eyes...