Can I let my Family Member use my drone pics in their real estate sale?

[DynoTech]

Hey guys and gals,
A few years ago I was visiting a family member in Ontario (Canada) and took some pics of their house with my Drone. They are getting ready to sell and asked if they could use my pics in their listing.

I know here in the US at least you must be Part 107 certified to use your pics “for the furtherance of a business”. I’m a little unsure of this particular situation. I’d be giving my Aunt the pics for free and I don’t have any sort of business I’m pushing. I’d like to do things legal and not break any rules here so curious on your thoughts?

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

From what I've read on this forum, you'd be able to give those to your family member free of charge, and not be infringing on commercial use rules.
At the time of the flight and photography, you did this for personal pleasure, and not intending for them to be used in the sale of the home.
Being a few years also makes this part quite more obvious in nature.

I guess though that forums are not exactly expected to get you totally dependable legal advice, but it seems the above from many other posts here that this would be your situation.

 

[Hauptmann]

Not legally, in the US.

 

[Thomas B]

Not legally, in the US.

House is in Ontario.

 

[sar104]

Not legally, in the US.

Actually perfectly legally, in the US. The intent of the flight at the time appears to have been recreational, so it did not fall under Part 107. That's all that matters. The law in Canada may be different though.

 

[MAvic_South_Oz]

House is in Ontario.

Exactly, FAA would have no interest in this sale in Canada.
Anything any drone pilot does outside US airspace would be out of their interest / jurisdiction.

The law in Canada may be different though.

This would need checking out.
But then it's complicated even if it was not permissible to provide the pics under Transport Canada rules.
Are Transport Canada going to extradite a US citizen due to a real estate ad with a few drone photos ?

 

[sar104]

This would need checking out.
But then it's complicated even if it was not permissible to provide the pics under Transport Canada rules.
Are Transport Canada going to extradite a US citizen due to a real estate ad with a few drone photos ?

Agreed - I'm sure they wouldn't pursue the pilot.

 

[xspwhite]

Yes I would think there would have to be a pattern of him continuously contracting himself out as a drone pilot and collecting money for his work. As far as his pictures, he can do as he wishes with them,; give them a way, sell them, or what ever, since he is the artist who took them..

 

[old man mavic]

i know where you are coming from better safe than sorry are there any markings on the pics ,if not and the fact you are not going on line then who is to say who took them but to be sure get your relatives to check with their solicitor

 

[Gareeee]

You were in compliance with Transport Canada's drone regulations when you took those photos. There is no "commercial" license requirement in Canada. That said, if you were to come to Canada now, you wouldn't be allowed to fly (legally) without a Special Flight Operation Certificate" (SFOC) as you are not a Canadian citizen.

 

[lilewis]

It seems to me this question always gets answers on both sides of the spectrum, and also in the middle. I'm convinced the regulations are unclear and we have to just use good judgement and hope for the best.

Personally, I can't envision the FAA or anyone else taking action on every photo/video that is sold or comes to their attention unless someone made a complaint. I would hope they they have more important things to resolve.

 

[sar104]

It seems to me this question always gets answers on both sides of the spectrum, and also in the middle. I'm convinced the regulations are unclear and we have to just use good judgement and hope for the best.

Personally, I can't envision the FAA or anyone else taking action on every photo/video that is sold or comes to their attention unless someone made a complaint. I would hope they they have more important things to resolve.

The regulations, at least in the US, are completely clear. The range of answers that you see on that issue just reflects the prevalence of uninformed opinion. However, as you point out, there is considerable uncertainty in the extent and consistency of enforcement.

 

[theDRONEranger]

Not legally, in the US.

Why not?
WITHIN THE US: When the original photos were taken, there was no commercialization intent during the flight at all! Therefore, this would be legal within the US.

 

[DynoTech]

Thanks for all the replies everyone. My pics would help with the sale quite a bit I believe since they have about 80 acres of land behind the house. I may reach out to Transport Canada just to see their stance on it.

 

[Cymruflyer]

Don't bother, just remember that those photos were taken with your tethered balloon and camera mount, remember!!! Nothing illegal about a tethered balloon aerial photo. I'm sure T.C. would prefer not to hear from you.

 

[dirkclod]

Don't bother, just remember that those photos were taken with your tethered balloon and camera mount, remember!!! Nothing illegal about a tethered balloon aerial photo. I'm sure T.C. would prefer not to hear from you.

Replying to a over a year old post bro .

 

[Cymruflyer]

Ohh I should have checked the date, thanks.

 

[DynoTech]

For the record I didn’t. Lol.

 

[OurAngryBadger]

Actually perfectly legally, in the US. The intent of the flight at the time appears to have been recreational, so it did not fall under Part 107. That's all that matters. The law in Canada may be different though.

Even if not, I doubt any prosecution would hold up in court. It's not the drone user profiting off the photos, it's the people selling the home. You can't get in trouble for something someone else does. It would obviously be a different story if the drone user sold the photos to the homeowners, and he didn't have a 107 license. But in this case, he did it for free and did not intend to seek any commercial gain for himself.