DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Few "General Classification" Questions

Jgruberman

Active Member
Joined
Sep 27, 2021
Messages
36
Reactions
8
Age
39
Location
Dallas
I have a few general questions to make sure that I operate my drone legally and responsibly, hoping someone can chime in or give me direction for how to obtain my answers. If any of these should be deferred to a state level then I understand that as well, I am in Texas if it makes a difference:

1. As I understand it, it is legal to fly over private residences(as all air belongs to the FAA) as long as I am not capturing images still or video without the homeowners consent. Is that correct? (An example of this would be if I am flying my drone from my home a park in the neighborhood, but there are several homes between the two points)

2. In addition to the question above, is it legal to capture pictures of the exterior of residences, given that there are no people in the capture, for whatever reason? I assume this is permissible since anyone could do that driving by with a cell phone or Google Maps does it regardless. For the purposes of this question though, what is considered private property? For example if I want to photograph a graffiti mural on the outside of the building, technically the building is private property but it's in a public area IE photographing from the outside. How does that work?

3. As I understand it, you may not take images of private property without the owner's consent. However, that confuses me a little since it somewhat conflicts with the previous point on anyone being able to take a picture what their cell phone of someone's house from the outside.

I really appreciate the help and clarification for these things. I'm not trying to do anything outside of the law, quite the contrary because I'm trying to ensure that I stay within all bounds of the law. I know the questions may seem a bit specific but I just want to paint some very specific scenarios so I can have a better understanding on where the law delineates. Thanks in advance for any help or guidance
 
  • Like
Reactions: DougMcC
Since you state you are from Dallas I am assuming you are flying in the USA. First of all there may be local laws about capturing images and posting in public forums of individuals. That is another matter and would encompass images captured with any other camera. Common courtesy is the way I treat recorded images of any form.

1. You can overfly property and it makes no difference if your camera is recording or not. Maintaining an altitude to be unobtrusive is a plus, but not a requirement. Overflight of people is forbidden.

2. If you could capture the image from a different perspective with a handheld camera then there should be no issue capturing the image. The same goes for if there are people in the image. If the image is offered for sale you may need a model release from anyone that is recognizable in the image. Same rules that photographers go by.

3. This again depends on where you are taking the images and would follow the same rules as for a handheld camera. If the image is captured from a public area (street, sidewalk, park, etc.) then there should be no problem. Hovering over the property and capturing the image may be considered to be trespass or invasion of privacy.
 
Since you state you are from Dallas I am assuming you are flying in the USA. First of all there may be local laws about capturing images and posting in public forums of individuals. That is another matter and would encompass images captured with any other camera. Common courtesy is the way I treat recorded images of any form.

1. You can overfly property and it makes no difference if your camera is recording or not. Maintaining an altitude to be unobtrusive is a plus, but not a requirement. Overflight of people is forbidden.

2. If you could capture the image from a different perspective with a handheld camera then there should be no issue capturing the image. The same goes for if there are people in the image. If the image is offered for sale you may need a model release from anyone that is recognizable in the image. Same rules that photographers go by.

3. This again depends on where you are taking the images and would follow the same rules as for a handheld camera. If the image is captured from a public area (street, sidewalk, park, etc.) then there should be no problem. Hovering over the property and capturing the image may be considered to be trespass or invasion of privacy.
Thank you for this clarification. Yes, you are correct - I am flying in the USA.

1. Is this not considered recording someone's property without their consent if I happen to fly over and the camera is angled slightly downwards and their property is in view? Or does the recording without consent only apply to people and not property?

1a. I take it that in the event that I am flying somewhere without people and someone happens to come into the frame then it's my responsibility to move the drone to ensure they are out of the frame(without them having consented to being in it first)

2. So then for example, in the event I were to fly over a property and say "Hey that's a gorgeous pool!" and no one is around, is it legal to take a picture of it?

3. Skipped as I have no follow up questions.

4. If I am at my sons soccer game at a public park, is it legal to record him playing? Or because there are other people at the park that haven't given their consent to recording, is it not permissible? (Following maybe answered in 1a)On that same note, if I'm recording myself or family and someone happens to find their way into the shot... how does that work? Do I then need to let them know I'm recording and get their verbal consent? Or should I be ceasing recording operation?

Are these rules/guidelines outlined somewhere that I can review and familiarize myself with them on the FAA site or somewhere similar? I don't mind researching and having the actual rules that would permit/disallow my actions would be handy to have.
 
1 and 1a) I am not sure what Texas has for privacy issues. A drone is no different than a cell phone or handheld camera as far as recording images. Overflight and recording people are two different things. People and other objects can be recorded without being overflown. Overflying people in the USA is considered being directly over a person.

2) Again local rules on privacy and photography. My personal ethos is that I would not publish such a photo, but for my own use not a problem. Either way I would not record it if people were present.

4) You can record your son’s soccer game as long as you are not flying over people or the field. The same when recording family or friends. It follows the same rules as a person with a cell phone or handheld camera as far as recording images. The main issue with a drone is flying in a safe manner and not over people.
 
Apparently Texas is one of the stricter places, I found this: GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 423. USE OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT
I think you are misreading 423.003. It only says that it is illegal if you are recording with the “intent” of “surveillance” of said person or property.

423.001 states all of the cases for recording that are legal to perform.

If what you wish to record is is something you would feel was right using your cell phone on a balcony, it should be fine as long as you are not flying over people or busy streets.
 
Okay and lastly, does the term "overflight" apply in a scenario where I am flying from Point A to Point B and someone just so happens to be standing between those two points? I mean, if I'm 200ft overhead for example, and I fly over someone for a split second while getting to my destination, how would I know someone is there, even for that split second?
 
I have a few general questions to make sure that I operate my drone legally and responsibly, hoping someone can chime in or give me direction for how to obtain my answers. If any of these should be deferred to a state level then I understand that as well, I am in Texas if it makes a difference:

1. As I understand it, it is legal to fly over private residences(as all air belongs to the FAA) as long as I am not capturing images still or video without the homeowners consent. Is that correct? (An example of this would be if I am flying my drone from my home a park in the neighborhood, but there are several homes between the two points)
You do not need the property owners' consent to take photos. There are two things on your side. First is the First Amendment. Anything visible from a public thoroughfare is fair game for photos and videos.

Second is The Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS). There are numerous SCOTUS rulings that affirm the above statement. The two most oft mentioned are Ciraolo v. CA and Riley v. FL.
2. In addition to the question above, is it legal to capture pictures of the exterior of residences, given that there are no people in the capture, for whatever reason? I assume this is permissible since anyone could do that driving by with a cell phone or Google Maps does it regardless. For the purposes of this question though, what is considered private property? For example if I want to photograph a graffiti mural on the outside of the building, technically the building is private property but it's in a public area IE photographing from the outside. How does that work?
Capture? Yes. However, you need to get a property release to see the image for anything other and editorial usage.
3. As I understand it, you may not take images of private property without the owner's consent. However, that confuses me a little since it somewhat conflicts with the previous point on anyone being able to take a picture what their cell phone of someone's house from the outside.
See above, you can take photos of ANYTHING visible from a public thoroughfare.
I really appreciate the help and clarification for these things. I'm not trying to do anything outside of the law, quite the contrary because I'm trying to ensure that I stay within all bounds of the law. I know the questions may seem a bit specific but I just want to paint some very specific scenarios so I can have a better understanding on where the law delineates. Thanks in advance for any help or guidance
The Texas law is in the process of being challenged by the National Press Photographers' Association. For now, it is in limbo, so it's probably better to be safe than sorry. However, to my knowledge that law has only been used once.
 
Capture? Yes. However, you need to get a property release to see the image for anything other and editorial usage.

Meaning I can take a picture but if I do anything with it other than simply look at it later for my own review, I need a release?

You do not need the property owners' consent to take photos. There are two things on your side. First is the First Amendment. Anything visible from a public thoroughfare is fair game for photos and videos.

Second is The Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS). There are numerous SCOTUS rulings that affirm the above statement. The two most oft mentioned are Ciraolo v. CA and Riley v. FL.

See above, you can take photos of ANYTHING visible from a public thoroughfare.

And in this case, a public thoroughfare is considered FAA airspace below 400ft?

Do both of these apply to the existing Texas laws or is this strictly from a US perspective?
 
Meaning I can take a picture but if I do anything with it other than simply look at it later for my own review, I need a release?
You can use it for editorial stories. And you can use it for self promotion (for the most part).
And in this case, a public thoroughfare is considered FAA airspace below 400ft?

Do both of these apply to the existing Texas laws or is this strictly from a US perspective?
Public thoroughfare doesn't have an altitude limit. And this is a U.S. law. At least until there is a successful challenge at the federal level.

This is not legal advice, but when I fly in Texas I never worry about that law.
 
You can use it for editorial stories. And you can use it for self promotion (for the most part).

And since it wasn't mentioned, just myself? In case I want to "compare pool ideas" from neighborhood pools, as strictly an example.

Public thoroughfare doesn't have an altitude limit. And this is a U.S. law. At least until there is a successful challenge at the federal level.

So when you say public thoroughfare, what does that mean?

This is not legal advice, but when I fly in Texas I never worry about that law.

Completely understand, won't hold you to anything of course. Which law are you referring to, in specific that you personally tend not to worry about when in Texas?
 
And since it wasn't mentioned, just myself? In case I want to "compare pool ideas" from neighborhood pools, as strictly an example.
That would be fine.

So when you say public thoroughfare, what does that mean?
A public thoroughfare is any area that the public is free to transit.
Completely understand, won't hold you to anything of course. Which law are you referring to, in specific that you personally tend not to worry about when in Texas?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Smooth Rhythm
A public thoroughfare is any area that the public is free to transit.

Which in this case is the sky? Sorry for sounding redundant but just want to be sure.

Not sure if it was intentional to leave off response to the part about which law you don't worry too much about in Texas. Honestly, majority of my time droning will probably be spent poking around the surrounding neighborhood (I already discovered a very attractive walking trail) and maybe recording some family sports/boating/time out.
 
Which in this case is the sky? Sorry for sounding redundant but just want to be sure.
The airspace is a public thoroughfare. Anyone can travel through it.
Not sure if it was intentional to leave off response to the part about which law you don't worry too much about in Texas. Honestly, majority of my time droning will probably be spent poking around the surrounding neighborhood (I already discovered a very attractive walking trail) and maybe recording some family sports/boating/time out.
The Texas UAS Privacy law.

Title 4, Subtitle B, Chapter 423: GOVERNMENT CODE CHAPTER 423. USE OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT
 
That would be fine.

A public thoroughfare is any area that the public is free to transit.

Actually - that is probably not fine in the letter of the law and places the drone use under part 107. e.g., it is illegal to use your drone to inspect your own gutters. Surveying of any sort is NOT recreational use.

In Ada County, Idaho. Any incidental flight over private property is fine, even recording the flight view, but intentionally inspecting private property (e.g., pools) for any reason is not allowed. The rule is a bit unreasonable, but, it is there.

In the Texas statute above, this may make photographs from drones problematic:
(14) from a height no more than eight feet above ground level in a public place, if the image was captured without using any electronic, mechanical, or other means to amplify the image beyond normal human perception;
And this, which is similar to Idaho - the operating words are "surveil property": Looking at numerous pools for comparison is surveilling them.
Sec. 423.003. OFFENSE: ILLEGAL USE OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT TO CAPTURE IMAGE. (a) A person commits an offense if the person uses an unmanned aircraft to capture an image of an individual or privately owned real property in this state with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property captured in the image.
Worth noting in the Texas statute that destroying the image as soon as it is realized it was taken is a defense against prosecution. So the longer definition of surveil over time wasn't the intent.

This entire topic of drone law is making my head ache - any one want to buy a couple of drones?
 
Actually - that is probably not fine in the letter of the law and places the drone use under part 107. e.g., it is illegal to use your drone to inspect your own gutters. Surveying of any sort is NOT recreational use.
107 and the FAA have nothing to do with privacy. So that's an invalid point.

In Ada County, Idaho. Any incidental flight over private property is fine, even recording the flight view, but intentionally inspecting private property (e.g., pools) for any reason is not allowed. The rule is a bit unreasonable, but, it is there.

In the Texas statute above, this may make photographs from drones problematic:

And this, which is similar to Idaho - the operating words are "surveil property": Looking at numerous pools for comparison is surveilling them.

Worth noting in the Texas statute that destroying the image as soon as it is realized it was taken is a defense against prosecution. So the longer definition of surveil over time wasn't the intent.

This entire topic of drone law is making my head ache - any one want to buy a couple of drones?
I deal with this all the time. I work with training with the FAA on all of this.

None of what you wrote is pertinent here. All of those quoted laws aren't preempted by the FAA.
 
I was responding to
2. So then for example, in the event I were to fly over a property and say "Hey that's a gorgeous pool!" and no one is around, is it legal to take a picture of it?

4. If I am at my sons soccer game at a public park, is it legal to record him playing?
And later asked:
And since it wasn't mentioned, just myself? In case I want to "compare pool ideas" from neighborhood pools, as strictly an example.


From the FAA:

What is a Recreational Flight?​

Many people assume that a recreational flight is one that is not operated for a business or any form of compensation. But, that's not always the case. Financial compensation, or the lack of it, is not what determines if the flight is recreational or commercial. The following information can be used to help you determine what rules you should be operating under. Remember, the default regulation for drones weighing under 55 pounds is Part 107. The exception for recreational flyers only applies to flights that are purely for fun or personal enjoyment. When in doubt, fly under Part 107.

  • Note: Non-recreational purposes include things like taking photos to help sell a property or service, roof inspections, or taking pictures of a high school football game for the school's website. Goodwill or other non-monetary value can also be considered indirect compensation. This would include things like volunteering to use your drone to survey coastlines on behalf of a non-profit organization. Recreational flight is simply flying for fun or personal enjoyment.
 
Last edited:
I was responding to

And later asked:



From the FAA:

What is a Recreational Flight?​

Many people assume that a recreational flight is one that is not operated for a business or any form of compensation. But, that's not always the case. Financial compensation, or the lack of it, is not what determines if the flight is recreational or commercial. The following information can be used to help you determine what rules you should be operating under. Remember, the default regulation for drones weighing under 55 pounds is Part 107. The exception for recreational flyers only applies to flights that are purely for fun or personal enjoyment. When in doubt, fly under Part 107.

  • Note: Non-recreational purposes include things like taking photos to help sell a property or service, roof inspections, or taking pictures of a high school football game for the school's website. Goodwill or other non-monetary value can also be considered indirect compensation. This would include things like volunteering to use your drone to survey coastlines on behalf of a non-profit organization. Recreational flight is simply flying for fun or personal enjoyment.

Personally, seeing something that looks nice and photographing it doesn't seem outside of the Recreational Use definition. Does it?
 
Personally, seeing something that looks nice and photographing it doesn't seem outside of the Recreational Use definition. Does it?
All I can recommend is to read and interpret the FAA guidelines and actual statutes yourself. But plan on spending an inordinate amount of time on it. Seems the paperwork reduction act doesn't apply to the FAA. Also, be wary that there is a lot of misinformation on the web regarding drones - one reason is the FAA hasn't finalized everything drone yet so facts are in constant change - another reason appears to be the depth one needs to dig to find all of the rules that might apply. Who's willing to spend a week trying to find the rule or rules that say you can or cannot fly a drone at night and under what conditions?

For example, general photography or filming your kids game for your own personal use is fair recreational use. Give any of the shots to the school newspaper and you are off the rails. The moment you post any of your fun times, especially to YouTube or another site that monetizes advertising, you are also now on precarious ground.


As an aside, have you passed your FAA Trust Test yet? Don't fly your drone until you do.
 
Yes I have completed this.
As an aside, have you passed your FAA Trust Test yet? Don't fly your drone until you do.

Yes this has been done. Also registered with the FAA as a Recreational Use drone. I've done all the legality stuff to my knowledge, this thread was moreso for me to make sure I have all my "CAN" and "CANNOTs" figured out
 
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,597
Messages
1,554,229
Members
159,603
Latest member
refrigasketscanada