How do I stand legally....

Porky · Apr 7, 2019

Torcan said:
would you mind terribly sharing the photo here for all of us to see?

Here’s the photo, only a thumbnail of it?

brett8883 · Apr 7, 2019

Porky said:
Here’s the photo, only a thumbnail of it?

Great shot! Since you giving it away for free I don’t see why we can have the full sized ?.

razoraerial · Apr 7, 2019

Porky said:
Here’s the photo, only a thumbnail of it?

Very nice shot. A mavic did that ? I am new to the mavic side, always a phantom before.

Torcan · Apr 7, 2019

Porky said:
Here’s the photo, only a thumbnail of it?

wow, great shot, gorgeous, thank you for sharing

Gr8ful · Apr 7, 2019

I'd just give it to them. I'm sure you'll be rewarded in one way or another. I put in 2 runways on the farm which were legal but I took pics of all the farms near me & gave them out. Didn't cost much so with so many people down on drones spread some good will for the drone community instead of trying to sqeeze a few bucks. It's a compliment the love it so much so put it in a frame & small taken & donated by (your name & phone #) if you want to sell custom pics. Win-Win IMHO.

Soledamcer · Apr 7, 2019

We can all see what the near future holds for commercial drone operations, as Amazon and Google take to the skies. Anyone who secures full regulation of the almost unused airspace between 0 and 400ft is guaranteed a big slice of a very expensive cake. By usurping every sector, and displaying extreme danger without absolute regulation, the future for that regulator becomes dazzlingly bright. The CAA, FAA, ACAA etc. can't genuinely claim that selling a photo after a recreational flight is unsafe for aviation, which should perhaps be their only concern. However rigid controls exercised now may secure massive rewards down the line. Just propheteering?

brett8883 · Apr 7, 2019

Soledamcer said:
We can all see what the near future holds for commercial drone operations, as Amazon and Google take to the skies. Anyone who secures full regulation of the almost unused airspace between 0 and 400ft is guaranteed a big slice of a very expensive cake. By usurping every sector, and displaying extreme danger without absolute regulation, the future for that regulator becomes dazzlingly bright. The CAA, FAA, ACAA etc. can't genuinely claim that selling a photo after a recreational flight is unsafe for aviation, which should perhaps be their only concern. However rigid controls exercised now may secure massive rewards down the line. Just propheteering?

I can only really speak for the FAA and at least my interpretation of the CAA’s rule that I looked up and posted above but you are right it has nothing to do with safety or flight and that’s why it’s outside of their mandate.

I agree with you in that if the safety of sky is their only concern then it shouldn’t matter if the flight has the intent of recreational or otherwise. There is no evidence I can see that a non-recreational flight is more dangerous than a recreational flight therefore requiring a license. That don’t make no sense!

I do believe what they are trying to do is incentivize pilots to endure the training and testing to recieve the license voluntarily without restricting the ability of recreational pilots to fly.

Upon receiving the license, a commercial pilot enjoys a competitive advantage and barrier to entry for competitors and the commercial industry as a whole receives a certain degree of legitimacy. Anyone who is willing to put in the time and effort to obtain a 107 license in the US for example must be commited to doing this and most people will assume they are at least competent pilots. I’m sure this isn’t ALWAYS the case but I bet it is more often than not. Therefore, when a business hires any 107 pilot to preform work for them they can expect a fairly high degree of confidence the pilot can produce the desired result. To take that same concept to an extreme for example, if I am hurt and need medical attention I can lookup the nearest licensed physician and have a reasonably high expectation that doctor is qualified and competent for the job without knowing anything about that person.

Imagine the other way around, if anybody on a whim could go out and buy a white lab coat and a stethoscope and call themselves a physician then I would need to do much more research and would be very wary of going to any dr for medical care not knowing if they are qualified. It might not be worth it and I might decide not to go at all.

This is an extreme example to get my point across but hopefully you get the idea. So while I do think it could be viewed as profiteering, it’s actually beneficial to both the UAV industry and it’s customers.

Madmax229 · Apr 7, 2019

JLambert said:
If you did not set out to take the picture to sell it, then the intent is not commercial therefore I can't see why you can't sell it after the fact. It would be different if you were asked to come to the location take and take a picture for the club house.

The insanity plea hardly ever works

Maviac · Apr 7, 2019

Porky said:
Here’s the photo, only a thumbnail of it?

Nice. I’d pay for that photo, too.

Bazzam · Apr 7, 2019

JLambert said:
If you did not set out to take the picture to sell it, then the intent is not commercial therefore I can't see why you can't sell it after the fact. It would be different if you were asked to come to the location take and take a picture for the club house.

To Sell: Commercial

Soledamcer · Apr 7, 2019

brett8883 said:
I can only really speak for the FAA and at least my interpretation of the CAA’s rule that I looked up and posted above but you are right it has nothing to do with safety or flight and that’s why it’s outside of their mandate.

I agree with you in that if the safety of sky is their only concern then it shouldn’t matter if the flight has the intent of recreational or otherwise. There is no evidence I can see that a non-recreational flight is more dangerous than a recreational flight therefore requiring a license. That don’t make no sense!

I do believe what they are trying to do is incentivize pilots to endure the training and testing to recieve the license voluntarily without restricting the ability of recreational pilots to fly.

Upon receiving the license, a commercial pilot enjoys a competitive advantage and barrier to entry for competitors and the commercial industry as a whole receives a certain degree of legitimacy. Anyone who is willing to put in the time and effort to obtain a 107 license in the US for example must be commited to doing this and most people will assume they are at least competent pilots. I’m sure this isn’t ALWAYS the case but I bet it is more often than not. Therefore, when a business hires any 107 pilot to preform work for them they can expect a fairly high degree of confidence the pilot can produce the desired result. To take that same concept to an extreme for example, if I am hurt and need medical attention I can lookup the nearest licensed physician and have a reasonably high expectation that doctor is qualified and competent for the job without knowing anything about that person.

Imagine the other way around, if anybody on a whim could go out and buy a white lab coat and a stethoscope and call themselves a physician then I would need to do much more research and would be very wary of going to any dr for medical care not knowing if they are qualified. It might not be worth it and I might decide not to go at all.

This is an extreme example to get my point across but hopefully you get the idea. So while I do think it could be viewed as profiteering, it’s actually beneficial to both the UAV industry and it’s customers.

That addresses the need for a license to fly a drone, even if it only affords you three things:. The right to operate commercially. 2. The right to fly slightly closer to, but not over buildings. 3. The right to fly slightly closer to but not over people. The F107 doesn't test your photographic ability, which could be rubbish! So there is no professional guarantee excluding an ability to avoid damage (Possibly). Then there's the other skills that aren't tested. Topography,thermal imaging, advanced mathematics.variiys IT skills, video editing etc. Really, the FAA only want and own the icing.

Doug Wolfe · Apr 7, 2019

With your lack of intent, I would sell it...

brett8883 · Apr 7, 2019

Soledamcer said:
That addresses the need for a license to fly a drone, even if it only affords you three things:. The right to operate commercially. 2. The right to fly slightly closer to, but not over buildings. 3. The right to fly slightly closer to but not over people. The F107 doesn't test your photographic ability, which could be rubbish! So there is no professional guarantee excluding an ability to avoid damage (Possibly). Then there's the other skills that aren't tested. Topography,thermal imaging, advanced mathematics.variiys IT skills, video editing etc. Really, the FAA only want and own the icing.

The 107 doesn’t allow you to fly closer to buildings or closer to people. Recreational pilots and 107 have no restrictions when it comes to buildings and neither can fly over people without a waiver. Though you do need a 107 to get a waiver.

I get your point and I never said it guaranteed those things, what I said was it grants the PRECEPTION of those things and raises the likely hood that when you hire a 107 pilot that person didn’t just go down to Best Buy and purchase his drone yesterday.

I bet you’ll be surprised that to be called a licensed Dr. you only have to pass medical school, which only examines your knowledge of the subject and not if you are actually able to preform surgery or diagnose illness. In fact a medical license only grants doctors the ability of to treat patients for the very first time! But what I am saying is if you are hurt and somebody says, “I am a doctor and I can help” you probably will assume this person is at least competent even if maybe you shouldn’t.

But I’ll put it this way. If you hurt and two people run over to you and say they can help. One says he is a doctor and the other says he isn’t a doctor but has many years experience recreationally treating his family, who are you going to let give you care?