Follow FAA Rules and Know Your Photography Rights

[Amarand]

There are a lot of folks asking questions about drones and photography/videography in the forums. sUAV are essentially flying cameras.

As long as you follow the FAA rules when flying, you're basically a photographer, and you have certain federally-protected legal rights:

http://www.krages.com/ThePhotographersRight.pdf

It's nice to know them, and share them with others.

Not only do you have legal rights as a photographer, but most states provide civil and criminal penalties against anyone who attempts to infringe on your rights.

Now, we obviously want to try and be as understanding as we can, defusing situations where possible, being "ambassadors of the flying community" but, frankly, we are pilots, flying cameras in the sky. Our primary focus should be on flying safely.

Know your rights. And don't be afraid of having your assistant hand a "concerned party" a print-out of the above PDF.

If you are legally flying in FAA-controlled air-space "I'm calling the police!" should absolutely get them a copy of the attached PDF, and possibly "Oh, could you call the police for us? I'm flying right now, and really shouldn't take my eyes off of my aircraft or controls. Thanks!"

Again: know your rights.

 

[BigAl07]

I'm not so sure I would follow "everything" in that handout. There is a lot of "half information" presented in there (for instance taking pictures in an airport is one thing but taking pictures in a SECURE area of the airport is NOT legal).

Also sometimes there's a big difference between "Can You" and "Should You". Sometimes we need to be a good human and do the right thing . . .

 

[Amarand]

I'm not so sure I would follow "everything" in that handout. There is a lot of "half information" presented in there (for instance taking pictures in an airport is one thing but taking pictures in a SECURE area of the airport is NOT legal).

Also sometimes there's a big difference between "Can You" and "Should You". Sometimes we need to be a good human and do the right thing . . .

I absolutely, intentionally added "Follow FAA Rules" to the beginning of the subject line, to avoid someone saying "but an airport...."

As a human, living in a country with laws/rules, I try to be a good person, but I mainly just try to know the laws and follow them.

As a photographer with decades of experience, I've been approached by people who were misinformed about the law. I've had people assault me, trying to take my camera, or insist that I delete photographs taken in public.

This handout is useful, but it obviously doesn't supercede FAA regulations about where you can, and cannot fly. I always advocate safety-first, and you are a pilot first and a photographer second, but you are absolutely a photographer, with legal rights, as well.

 

[Olav van Gerven]

I'm not so sure I would follow "everything" in that handout. There is a lot of "half information" presented in there (for instance taking pictures in an airport is one thing but taking pictures in a SECURE area of the airport is NOT legal).

Also sometimes there's a big difference between "Can You" and "Should You". Sometimes we need to be a good human and do the right thing . . .

In the US: As long as you are in a public accesable area, you have the right of free press (1st Amendment). Everything you can see you can film "the eyes cannot be tresspassed".

However, as in many cases, not all LEO do know the caselaw, they prevail "protocol" over "Law" and even if you are completly in your legal rights, you might face problems.

 

[Amarand]

I'm not so sure I would follow "everything" in that handout. There is a lot of "half information" presented in there (for instance taking pictures in an airport is one thing but taking pictures in a SECURE area of the airport is NOT legal).

I've worked on military airbases, and also commercial airports, since 1988. I know how secure areas work, and have had to wear the appropriate badges. I know what happens if you violate those rules. I am not advocating anyone violate the law, by flying in a secure area of an airport. I don't think this pamphlet implies it's okay for you to do that.

 

[Amarand]

In the US: As long as you are in a public accesable area, you have the right of free press (1st Amendment). Everything you can see you can film "the eyes cannot be tresspassed".

However, as in many cases, not all LEO do know the caselaw, they prevail "protocol" over "Law" and even if you are completly in your legal rights, you might face problems.

As soon as law enforcement is involved in any situation, it's good to have your I's dotted and your T's crossed.

Are you flying legally? Do you know the rules about the area you're flying in?

But don't assume, just because a police officer tells you to land your drone, that they have legal authority to do so.

I mean, by all means, land your drone when safe to do so, comply with all instructions, present identification when requested, explain the purpose of your flight, show your flight plan, do all the things we're trained to do, especially if it's someone in an official capacity (law enforcement, FAA). I'm not getting into a fight with any official, ever.

"Land your craft!" "Okay. Let me find a safe place to land." Done and done.

But if some random person approaches you, you have legal rights, and it's good to know them.

 

[Amarand]

Also, "The Photographer's Right" pamphlet shared is written by a lawyer. I am not a lawyer. But I feel comfortable sharing this sheet because it's updated semi-regularly, is easy to carry with you, and is written by an attorney specializing in photography law.

This pamphlet does not cover any aspect of the flying of our aircraft - but that's also fairly well covered by the FAA, and we discuss where/when/how we can fly regularly here in the forums.

Assuming you are flying in a place you are allowed to fly, during the allotted/authorized time period, you are allowed to take pictures in accordance with the law. Period. It's good to know your rights.

 

[AMann]

I was shooting a time lapse scene through a front window from a public sidewalk outside a swanky restaurant when the owner came out and immediately started yelling at me that I was harassing his customers and that he was calling the police. I deescalated the situation by just not being argumentative, but being nice about explaining how it was legal to do in public places and showing how my shots never showed people details because the moving people were blurred. I even offered him a shot that he has hung up there now, too.

I know that part of the reason why the guy got so upset was that he is from Europe and their rules about photography in public places are so much more restrictive than those in the US. European tourists are unused to our rules and protections that all photographers in the US have in public under the 1st amendment, and US tourists are just as baffled over the public privacy laws while visiting Europe.

Anyways, youtube is full of idiots getting into dumb arguments with people who think they cannot take photos or fly somewhere that they really can, and in most cases the arguments escalated because of the way both sides responded with each other. Instead of allowing this to happen, it really helps to deescalate a confrontation over photography or drone flying by understanding a person’s background and point of view about it first by listening to them before respectfully describing to the person and showing supporting documents why you can legally do those things in public.

 

[DroningOn]

I'm not getting into a fight with any official, ever

While I wholeheartedly agree with this statement but there is a huge difference between “getting into a fight“ and asserting/protecting one’s rights in the face of authority.

Isn’t that the point of why you created this thread?

There’s a big difference between a police officer, aka authority, ordering you to stop recording him with your smart phone and them demanding that you unlock it and hand it to them so they can delete the video. If I was ever put in that position, the first request would probably be followed but the second would NEVER BE. I think most, if not all, here would feel the same way

 

[Amarand]

While I wholeheartedly agree with this statement there is a huge difference between “getting into a fight“ and asserting/protecting one’s rights in the face of authority.

Isn’t that the point of why you created this thread?

There’s a big difference between a police officer ordering you to stop recording him with your smart phone and them demanding that you unlock it and hand it to them so they can delete the video. If I was ever put in that position, the first request may happen but the second would NEVER happen. I think most, if not all, here would feel the same way

I have a healthy respect for legal authority. It's a part of my job. It's what pays for me to be able to afford things like a high-end iPhone and DJI drones to fly around in my spare time.

I am only advocating, by sharing this PDF, that people should know their legal rights as a photographer, not just as an FAA-authorized pilot of an sAUV. There is a small amount of overlap between these two - but the FAA has stated, very recently and many times in the past, that the taking of pictures (and right to privacy) are already fairly well covered under other laws (federal, state and local). As long as you know the law, you're good.

So on the one hand, as a photographer, it's good to know your legal rights, and it's also good to be able to explain them (calmly and rationally) to anyone who questions you, whether they are a legal authority or a random person with zero authority.

My response will be tempered by the type of person approaching me (authority/not-authority), the way they are approaching me (interest/anger/confusion), and whether or not I have a witness available. Also, as a pilot legally flying my craft, I can safely IGNORE all non-authorities until I have safely landed my craft, as long as those non-authorities aren't stating safety related facts that I am unaware of. There's a world of difference between "You can't fly here!" and "OMG a shark is about to jump up and attack your aircraft. You're flying too low. Quick, fly higher!" Not the same thing, especially if you are allowed to legally "fly there."

I've volunteered at a library for almost a decade now, and it's in a neighborhood with questionable individuals. Sometimes these people get upset because they haven't had their fix in a few hours, sometimes they don't want to be told that what they are doing is vandalism, or that eating food by the computers is inconsiderate. I'm getting pretty good at asking people to do the right thing, deescalating situations when they get heated, and finding someone in authority (librarian/security guard) when things get outside of my scope as volunteer. I can't kick someone out, but I CAN get someone who can kick someone out.

I guess what I'm saying is: know your rights as a photographer, and don't let people push you around saying "you can't fly here!" when you can, or "you can't take pictures of me!" when you can. You have rights. Know them. Assert them. Don't let people push you around (because that's assault and battery).

 

[AMann]

Oh, and just a warning. Even though that pamphlet says it is legally permissible in the US to take photos of children in public places (yeah, I know...) if you really are thinking of doing it, just be very careful and do get permission first. You will not win any argument against this one! I saw what happened once when some poor guy was taking photos from across a street of school kids playing outside during their lunch recess when the teachers saw him. Their mom alarms instantly went up and he was surrounded by angry mob of teachers and he barely escaped from them. Just use common sense when photographing that subject, even in the United States! Get permission first always before doing it, because even law enforcement will not be on your side on that one.

 

[Amarand]

While I wholeheartedly agree with this statement but there is a huge difference between “getting into a fight“ and asserting/protecting one’s rights in the face of authority.

Isn’t that the point of why you created this thread?

There’s a big difference between a police officer, aka authority, ordering you to stop recording him with your smart phone and them demanding that you unlock it and hand it to them so they can delete the video. If I was ever put in that position, the first request would probably be followed but the second would NEVER BE. I think most, if not all, here would feel the same way

Also, with regards to police officers, if someone asks me to "stop recording" in a place where I am legally allowed to record, I'm probably less likely to "stop recording" because now it's becoming something I might want to use in court to show that someone was overstepping their authority. I'm going to comply with their legal requests (land the aircraft, produce identification, produce authority to fly [say, Part 17 certificate if a commercial flight]), but I am going to politely question any non-legal requests, because that's what people should do. Also, have a witness. Better yet, have a witness with a recording video camera (we all have them on our phones). Many police have body cameras now, and dashboard cameras. It's still a question of "do I know my rights?" They're just different rights.

Some of the rights you discuss are your ability to be somewhere as a human. Are you loitering? Is this public or private property? Do I have to legally comply with the authority's request for identification? Those have nothing to do with the FAA.

Other rights are your ability to fly in a certain location. The FAA governs every INCH of space between the surface of the earth and...whatever separates airspace from space-space. When I'm flying, if I'm following the FAA's guidelines, I'm covered. I'm good.

Then there are rights as a photographer/videographer. A lot of the same questions above: am I allowed to be here? Is what I'm photographing/video recording in a legally sensitive area? (In which case, why are you flying there?!) Many people are misinformed about the rights we have as photographers, but also, assume they have a much greater expectation of privacy. People have little or no legal expectation of privacy in public. And this is well documented in the law and legal precedents.

My primary motivation for posting this PDF is to help people understand their rights as a photographer, because our drones are flying cameras. The PDF does not cover the "flying" part of "flying camera," but it does cover the "camera" part. And in the eyes of the law, currently, there's not a lot of difference - camera wise - between a camera on the ground and a camera in the sky. As long as you are following FAA guidelines for the flying part.

 

[DroningOn]

I have a healthy respect for legal authority. It's a part of my job. It's what pays for me to be able to afford things like a high-end iPhone and DJI drones to fly around in my spare time.

I am only advocating, by sharing this PDF, that people should know their legal rights as a photographer, not just as an FAA-authorized pilot of an sAUV. There is a small amount of overlap between these two - but the FAA has stated, very recently and many times in the past, that the taking of pictures (and right to privacy) are already fairly well covered under other laws (federal, state and local). As long as you know the law, you're good.

So on the one hand, as a photographer, it's good to know your legal rights, and it's also good to be able to explain them (calmly and rationally) to anyone who questions you, whether they are a legal authority or a random person with zero authority.

My response will be tempered by the type of person approaching me (authority/not-authority), the way they are approaching me (interest/anger/confusion), and whether or not I have a witness available. Also, as a pilot legally flying my craft, I can safely IGNORE all non-authorities until I have safely landed my craft, as long as those non-authorities aren't stating safety related facts that I am unaware of. There's a world of difference between "You can't fly here!" and "OMG a shark is about to jump up and attack your aircraft. You're flying too low. Quick, fly higher!" Not the same thing, especially if you are allowed to legally "fly there."

I've volunteered at a library for almost a decade now, and it's in a neighborhood with questionable individuals. Sometimes these people get upset because they haven't had their fix in a few hours, sometimes they don't want to be told that what they are doing is vandalism, or that eating food by the computers is inconsiderate. I'm getting pretty good at asking people to do the right thing, deescalating situations when they get heated, and finding someone in authority (librarian/security guard) when things get outside of my scope as volunteer. I can't kick someone out, but I CAN get someone who can kick someone out.

I guess what I'm saying is: know your rights as a photographer, and don't let people push you around saying "you can't fly here!" when you can, or "you can't take pictures of me!" when you can. You have rights. Know them. Assert them. Don't let people push you around (because that's assault and battery).

I don’t disagree with anything you have said. If there is a difference in how I have dealt with these kind of incidents with the “public“ it’s that I just ignored them. Problem solved.

 

[Amarand]

Oh, and just a warning. Even though that pamphlet says it is legally permissible in the US to take photos of children in public places (yeah, I know...) if you really are thinking of doing it, just be very careful and do get permission first. You will not win any argument against this one! I saw what happened once when some poor guy was taking photos from across a street of school kids playing outside during their lunch recess when the teachers saw him. Their mom alarms instantly went up and he was surrounded by angry mob of teachers and he barely escaped from them. Just use common sense when photographing that subject, even in the United States! Get permission first always before doing it, because even law enforcement will not be on your side on that one.

That sounds like a school zone. Different rules/laws with regards to children in a school zone, obviously. Not technically "public space." Not arguing that it's a good idea to take pictures of kids playing at school. But I'm sure there are laws there, and you should know what they are.

Also, angry-mob mentality is the "right of the many" versus actual legal law. Just because you're surrounded by angry teachers and parents does not necessarily mean that they are in the right.

I don't shoot around schools, because children aren't something I photograph.

But if you're at a public festival? All bets are off. And you do NOT need to ask permission first.

 

[Amarand]

I don’t disagree with anything you have said. If there is a difference in how I have dealt with these kind of incidents with the “public“ it’s that I just ignored them. Problem solved.

There is a difference between how we deal with things, and what our legal rights are. It's important to know that, just because you want to be considerate, and ask permission before taking someone's photograph in public (even children), does not mean that you are necessarily legally obligated to do so.

Obviously private property (school is private property) is different. The laws may differ within a school zone. It's also possible that the parents and teachers circling the photographer may simply be a case of "you can't shoot here!" Which may, or may not, be legally true. Not a position I would want to personally be in, but it's good to know the law/rules, versus simple conjecture.

 

[Amarand]

Regarding school zone photography, what it comes down to is this: know the local laws before you shoot. If someone says "you can't shoot here" and you believe you can, ask them to cite the specific law (municipality, local, state, federal) that forbids you from photographing in that area. Sometimes it's a simple case of misinformation. Someone doesn't understand the law, and feels it SHOULD be a law, but it isn't. The law is the law. "You can't do that!" Okay, tell me what law prohibits me from doing that. If an authority says that, you have a legal right to know exactly what law you are breaking. If it's a random person, you have no legal requirement (in public space) to interact. And YOU have a legal right to call the police and stop the random person from harassing you. "Charge me, or let me go."

I'm not saying that you should argue with authorities, especially if you don't know the law. But you should know the law, and you should always stand up to unlawful tyranny.

If you're allowed to fly somewhere legally - fly there if you want to.
If you're legally allowed to take pictures or video - do it if you want to.
If you want to be somewhere - be there.

As long as you aren't violating any laws, why should you stop doing what you're doing?

 

[Amarand]

Oh, and just a warning. Even though that pamphlet says it is legally permissible in the US to take photos of children in public places (yeah, I know...) if you really are thinking of doing it, just be very careful and do get permission first. You will not win any argument against this one! I saw what happened once when some poor guy was taking photos from across a street of school kids playing outside during their lunch recess when the teachers saw him. Their mom alarms instantly went up and he was surrounded by angry mob of teachers and he barely escaped from them. Just use common sense when photographing that subject, even in the United States! Get permission first always before doing it, because even law enforcement will not be on your side on that one.

Also....

You saw what happened when he was taking pictures. Mob mentality kicked in. "You can't do that!"

Did you see what happened afterward? Did the police come and take him away? Were they legally authorized to do so? Which municipality? After he was taken away, was he legally arrested, or was it determined that it was an unlawful arrest? (They happen!) If he went to court, under what part of law was he cited? Civil or criminal? What law(s) did he break?

 

[AMann]

Also....

You saw what happened when he was taking pictures. Mob mentality kicked in. "You can't do that!"

Did you see what happened afterward? Did the police come and take him away? Were they legally authorized to do so? Which municipality? After he was taken away, was he legally arrested, or was it determined that it was an unlawful arrest? (They happen!) If he went to court, under what part of law was he cited? Civil or criminal? What law(s) did he break?

He just left the scene. My point was don’t think just because you have a right to do something that it doesn’t include responsibilities. The guy should have understood that parents and teachers are very protective of kids and he should have let them know what he was doing before proceeding.

Its the same for us with drones; even though you may have permission to shoot a real estate property, you should ask the owner to inform his neighbors, or do it yourself, before you fly.

 

[Amarand]

He just left the scene. My point was don’t think just because you have a right to do something that it doesn’t include responsibilities. The guy should have understood that parents and teachers are very protective of kids and he should have let them know what he was doing before proceeding.

Its the same for us with drones; even though you may have permission to shoot a real estate property, you should ask the owner to inform his neighbors, or do it yourself, before you fly.

Lots of "shoulds" there. Not a single one of those is a legal requirement, in most cases.

But there's a difference between a guy who lives in the neighborhood of the school, taking pictures across the street, versus a guy loitering in a school zone taking pictures of children. And the difference may be legal, or it may be perceptual. But not all perceptions are correct.

If I am operating under a Part 107, and I have all of my legal ducks in a row shooting a specific house, unless there's a legal requirement to ask/notify the neighbors, I'm not going to do it. It only goes on my checklist if it's required. Sorry. If you think I'm violating the law, please feel free to call the police, otherwise, I'm going to get back to piloting my drone.

 

[Amarand]

Lots of "shoulds" there. Not a single one of those is a legal requirement, in most cases.

But there's a difference between a guy who lives in the neighborhood of the school, taking pictures across the street, versus a guy loitering in a school zone taking pictures of children. And the difference may be legal, or it may be perceptual. But not all perceptions are correct.

If I am operating under a Part 107, and I have all of my legal ducks in a row shooting a specific house, unless there's a legal requirement to ask/notify the neighbors, I'm not going to do it. It only goes on my checklist if it's required. Sorry. If you think I'm violating the law, please feel free to call the police, otherwise, I'm going to get back to piloting my drone.

Also, having sat on TWO juries where we convicted someone based on physical actions (with no sound) recorded from quite a distance away using cell-phone video-only, I can tell you for a fact that I'm going to hover my drone and record every second of someone getting in my face, until the police arrive. Then I'll turn the video over to the police, and have the person arrested.