Do I need a licience to Mavic film a wedding for money?

[PT_Mavic]

Am I breaking any laws by offering to SAFELY[observing all FAA Regs.and of course, a heaping amount of common sense] to film parts of a wedding ceremony for a fee??
Hypothetically that is??

Yes, but also hypothetically, wouldn't it be something if you were the lucky guest who found the hidden gold coin in his piece of wedding cake?

 

[FatherXmas]

Your use of airport is a little broad. If we are talking Class G airspace, not having a 107 is actually more limiting. As a 107 holder, you can fly in class G without notification. As a hobby pilot, you have to notify all Class G airports if ops are within 5 miles.

Edit: At least that is they way I interpret it and have seen others interpret it.

That's my understanding as well. Most smaller airports have Class G from the surface to 700 feet surprisingly close to the airport. The little airport closest to me is that way up to only a mile or so away - way closer than the 5 miles recreational pilots have to stay.

 

[Robert Mitchell]

I have no need for or intention of doing commercial work, since I'm just a hobbyist. But I am interested in taking the part 107 exam so I'll have a better understanding of controlled airspace.

The thing that stops me is this: Under part 107, you can't fly within 5 nautical miles of an airport. As a hobbyist, your limit is 5 statute miles. 107 puts a lot more territory out of bounds.

Not true. With part 107 you can fly as close as you want to ANY class G airport, which the majority of smaller ones are. It is just surface E, or other controlled airspace where you need to get authorization, and that is getting easier all the time.

But, the best part is: if your mission is recreational, you can choose to fly that way, any time you want, and forget the 107 requirements for that flight. It is the intent of the flight which determines whether it is p107.

Best of both worlds!

 

[2nckayakers]

I have no need for or intention of doing commercial work, since I'm just a hobbyist. But I am interested in taking the part 107 exam so I'll have a better understanding of controlled airspace.

The thing that stops me is this: Under part 107, you can't fly within 5 nautical miles of an airport. As a hobbyist, your limit is 5 statute miles. 107 puts a lot more territory out of bounds.

The thing you have to remember here is that even if you get your 107, that doesn't mean you have to fly under 107 unless you are doing the flight for money. If you are just flying for fun you can still fly under 101 rules you just have to mentally declare which part you are flying under before you takeoff. If you aren't flying commercial it is a grey area as no one knows but you what you were thinking at takeoff unless someone else is present and you made a verbal declaration.

 

[mstevens]

Am I breaking any laws by offering to SAFELY[observing all FAA Regs.and of course, a heaping amount of common sense] to film parts of a wedding ceremony for a fee??
Hypothetically that is??

No, you are absolutely not breaking ANY laws by filming a wedding with your drone for money, as long as you only do it hypothetically.

 

[BerndM]

What if you don't actually "Charge" for your services but only accept generous "Donations"
Legally I would think that might be a loophole???? i don't know

 

[Five-O]

What if you don't actually "Charge" for your services but only accept generous "Donations"
Legally I would think that might be a loophole???? i don't know

You may be onto something.

 

[WDEnterprises]

What if you don't actually "Charge" for your services but only accept generous "Donations"
Legally I would think that might be a loophole???? i don't know

My understanding is that pictures and/or video taken during a purely recreational flight can be later sold or monetized without issues.

And many laws relating to drones are highly subject to interpretation and gray space right now.

What you have to ask yourself, "Is this money from this wedding worth the potential lawsuits, jail time, and/or federal charges I'm opening myself up to by doing this 'under the table' or not?"

And only you know the answer to that.

Just remember: if they decide to sue you for any reason, you're gonna have a really hard time proving that a video you "didn't shoot for money" that you "didn't receive money for" is worth you not paying back every penny they gave you and THEN some.

 

[Plawa]

Ignoring the whole legal aspect of it do people really want a drone buzzing overhead during the actual ceremony? I totally get some staged shots later on but not when all the aunties are crying their hearts out... Although they may drown out the noise from the drone

 

[Robbyg]

There are a million ways around this thing. You can be given a donation. You can be paid under the table. Lots of ways to circumvent the system if you want.

Just know that if that drone crashes into someone and lacerates their face or injures them in anyway you will have an even more serious problem than just the normal lawsuit if you do not have your 107 license. I would not even attempt something like this unless it was for a direct family members wedding with my own extended family present and it was done for free.

Once it involves money and regular people just make sure to get the License and then get insurance to cover you against any legal issues.

Rob

 

[Qoncussion]

My understanding is that pictures and/or video taken during a purely recreational flight can be later sold or monetized without issues.

Incorrect. If at any point you sell the footage, or give it to someone who sells it, or your footage is given away but later used in a video that at some point makes any money for somebody, such as - your clips are used in an independent film for which the theater is charging admission - the FAA deems the original flight to be commercial and subject to Part 107.

 

[beachcombing]

Incorrect. If at any point you sell the footage, or give it to someone who sells it, or your footage is given away but later used in a video that at some point makes any money for somebody, such as - your clips are used in an independent film for which the theater is charging admission - the FAA deems the original flight to be commercial and subject to Part 107.

Not 100 percent correct.

FAA Says Media Can Use Drone Photos From Citizen Journalists, Not Professionals

"According to the FAA's memo, the news media cannot use drones to gather news images nor can professional photographers in the business of taking and selling photos use drones without FAA permission. However, hobby photographers using drones could: If the individual's [sic] takes the pictures or videos or gathers other information as part of a hobby or recreational activity, then a later decision to sell some or all of those pictures, videos or other information" would not change the character of the operation and "no FAA authorization for that operation would be required."

 

[mw174620]

Not 100 percent correct.

FAA Says Media Can Use Drone Photos From Citizen Journalists, Not Professionals

"According to the FAA's memo, the news media cannot use drones to gather news images nor can professional photographers in the business of taking and selling photos use drones without FAA permission. However, hobby photographers using drones could: If the individual's [sic] takes the pictures or videos or gathers other information as part of a hobby or recreational activity, then a later decision to sell some or all of those pictures, videos or other information" would not change the character of the operation and "no FAA authorization for that operation would be required."

I believe Part 107 was enacted in 2016? If so, this article would be from a year prior to the official regulation being released. Part 107 is clear on this, if you make money or take donations, (yes it has been asked and addressed, charity work and donations is still considered a commercial act) then you need a Part 107.

 

[allnamestaken]

Am I breaking any laws by offering to SAFELY[observing all FAA Regs.and of course, a heaping amount of common sense] to film parts of a wedding ceremony for a fee??
Hypothetically that is??

Yes. If you film it commercially for money. Even if you only charge a penny. It is however illegal to fly over a crowd.

 

[mw174620]

Not 100 percent correct.

FAA Says Media Can Use Drone Photos From Citizen Journalists, Not Professionals

"According to the FAA's memo, the news media cannot use drones to gather news images nor can professional photographers in the business of taking and selling photos use drones without FAA permission. However, hobby photographers using drones could: If the individual's [sic] takes the pictures or videos or gathers other information as part of a hobby or recreational activity, then a later decision to sell some or all of those pictures, videos or other information" would not change the character of the operation and "no FAA authorization for that operation would be required."

This raises a really good question though regarding the current regulation. The memo states at the end, that later intentions to sell captured footage, does not change the initial intention of the flight. That seems to be contrary to what the FAA has been saying since Part 107's release.

 

[mw174620]

No. Only if you film it commercially for money. Even if you only charge a penny. It is however illegal to fly over a crowd.

Non-participating subjects, not a crowd.

 

[Mavic22704]

Hey guys what about doing photos for someone for free? A buddy at work wants me to take aerial photos of his new home. Is that legal?

 

[mw174620]

Hey guys what about doing photos for someone for free? A buddy at work wants me to take aerial photos of his new home. Is that legal?

Does he want them for commercial use? If no, then this would not be considered a commercial act. If it just simply, "Hey you have a drone, can you come take some aerial photos of my house for me to have?" Then I would see that as not requiring a 107 license.

Now if your friend was wanting you to do that, so he could use the pictures in a real estate ad, I believe that would be considered a commercial activity, even if you weren't being paid. I know plenty of people will say that it is not, because of no exchange of money, however the FAA has stated it is not about the exchange of money but about the intent of the mission/captured footage.

 

[Mavic22704]

Does he want them for commercial use? If no, then this would not be considered a commercial act. If it just simply, "Hey you have a drone, can you come take some aerial photos of my house for me to have?" Then I would see that as not requiring a 107 license.

Now if your friend was wanting you to do that, so he could use the pictures in a real estate ad, I believe that would be considered a commercial activity, even if you weren't being paid. I know plenty of people will say that it is not, because of no exchange of money, however the FAA has stated it is not about the exchange of money but about the intent of the mission/captured footage.

Thanks for the answer. Then I wonder what if later he decided to use them for real estate without asking me what would happen? He is a electrician so what if we made a trade out for some work? I guess the questions go on forever.

 

[mw174620]

Thanks for the answer. Then I wonder what if later he decided to use them for real estate without asking me what would happen? He is a electrician so what if we made a trade out for some work? I guess the questions go on forever.

In general, if you get something in exchange for your use of the drone, it would be considered use under Part 107. You are right, it goes on forever, and I don't claim to be 100% sure. Even FAA reps say it comes down to individual court cases.