Legal advice needed

[marcorasi1960]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

 

[PhantomFandom]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

I am not a lawyer and cannot offer you any binding legal advice. What I can offer you is a basic understanding on the drone laws you are asking about.

• In the USA, the difference between taking pictures for strictly recreational purposes and taking pictures for commercial endeavors hinges only upon the pilot's intent when he took those pictures.
  If when you took all of these pictures you were doing them solely for the enjoyment of flying and taking pictures, then you are fine without a commercial license. However if you had any intent on using those pictures for commercial purposes, then you would need a commercial (FAA Part 107) UAS license.
  This would also be the case currently if the pictures you posted on social media were in furtherance of any sort of business. Even for something like making a few dollars by posting them on a YouTube channel.
  Now the issue would come about after this potential book is published and someone questions your intent when you took the pictures. You could say you had no idea about this book when you took them and that could be absolutely true. However if someone really pushed and found even one shred of evidence that you potentially were looking to do something commercially with them and you knew that when you took them, then you could be in trouble.
• Licensing aside, you also need to be very sure that every single one of these pictures was taken while strictly following all FAA regulations regarding UAS. Never over any people (not even a single person), not over any moving vehicles, always within visual line of sight, and not in any controlled airspace.
• The airspace regulations really are not in any way fuzzy. What makes them seem that way are states, cities, and municipalities who believe that they can control airspace. Federal law specifically states that the ONE AND ONLY entity that controls airspace over the entire United States is the FAA. That means from the ground up and without any pre-emption by any other local authority.
  However some local authorities don't pay attention and believe they can make their own rules. They can not in fact do so. Unfortunately they run the police departments and if you get booked, you will need to fight them in court to prove they are not able to enforce such laws.
  The only thing they can legally restrict is the public lands they control in their jurisdiction. They can indeed prevent you from launching or landing a UAS from property they control. However, they cannot prevent you from flying over it.

What I would recommend in any case is to just go get your Part 107 license. It really isn't hard and it also isn't expensive. That way you can take all the pictures you want for any purpose and you're covered.

 

[old man mavic]

all the answers you need can be found in the FAA guidelines ,you could face prosecution if some of your pics were deemed to have been obtained in violation of drones flying in airspace ,that they should not be in

 

[Mavic Mac]

First and foremost I HAVE NO AFFILIATION WITH THIS FIRM but he posts a lot of info on drones and laws concerning drones. It may be worthwhile contacting them.


Drone Law and Drone Attorney Assistance

Rupprecht Law is located in Palm Beach County, Florida.

HERE is a link to his web

 

[BigAl07]

I think you DEFINITELY want to seek the consultation (paid) of an Aviation Attorney because this could get "messy" in a hurry.

While technically it sounds perfectly legal on the surface you need to have someone who has the correct credentials tell you that. As noted above one of the best in our industry is Rupprect Law. I've spoken with him in great detail back in the Section 333 days and he's an industry leader and also "one of us".

 

[Mavic Mac]

I think you DEFINITELY want to seek the consultation (paid) of an Aviation Attorney because this could get "messy" in a hurry.

While technically it sounds perfectly legal on the surface you need to have someone who has the correct credentials tell you that. As noted above one of the best in our industry is Rupprect Law. I've spoken with him in great detail back in the Section 333 days and he's an industry leader and also "one of us".

Glad to hear from someone who has personal knowledge of him. Like I had posted I have no affiliation but its good to know that you have worked with him in the past

 

[bcfd29]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

your publisher should be able to provide this legal counsel to you at their cost if they wish to enter into a contract for your work, the regulatory agencies (still under staffed and under funded) have more pressing issues (sorry, but I had to) than retroactively chasing you down for how and where you took some photos. nice that you care, but do not over analyze what would seem to be a positive and beneficial project. best of luck on your book project, I hope it gets published! these kinds of issues will emerge as uav/drone access to imagery is realized by others as the incredible resource that it is.

 

[BigAl07]

your publisher should be able to provide this legal counsel to you at their cost if they wish to enter into a contract for your work, the regulatory agencies (still under staffed and under funded) have more pressing issues (sorry, but I had to) than retroactively chasing you down for how and where you took some photos. nice that you care, but do not over analyze what would seem to be a positive and beneficial project. best of luck on your book project, I hope it gets published! these kinds of issues will emerge as uav/drone access to imagery is realized by others as the incredible resource that it is.

They probably wouldn't give it a 2nd thought until someone (probably a local rival looking to try and level the playing field) reports the images to the FSDO. At that point some degree of investigation will take place.

 

[marcorasi1960]

Thank you very much to all of your input. I will definitely contact Rupprecht Law, but your insightful and detailed replies have already given me a general idea of the exposure and the considerations. I also like the suggestion that I get a Part 107 license, as it sounds as though it would give me an additional degree of protection against trouble (any recommendation on an easy and efficient way to pursue it during the pandemic?). For example, I definitely had no commercial intent when taking my pics up to today, and it is obvious from the way I shared them, but I might want to add some new pictures to the future book... By the way, I found super-interesting the comments on the FAA being the one and only with jurisdiction over the airspace. It's still intimidating when a sheriff approaches you and tells you that your flight over an area controlled by the Army Corp of Engineers will lend you in jail if you do it again, which happened to me recently. Is there a place where I could get some idea about the type of 'trouble' one could get into with the FAA? Have people been arrested even for violations that caused no harm to others? Or is it mostly fines, or revocation of a right to fly? I do not want to push any boundary, because I believe in our responsibility to the public and to the drone community to be good citizens, even beyond what the law requires, but I often wonder how stiff of a penalty one could face if wrongly accused of foul play.

 

[theDRONEranger]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

- Drone Law and Drone Attorney Assistance

Drone Law and Drone Attorney Assistance Know before You Fly Campaign. Waivers Exemptions Operating Certificates Consultations & more… Discover our services Our Mission Helping Businesses Navigate Aviation Law to Save Time, Money, and Lives. Contact us Services Waivers Expert drone waiver...

jrupprechtlaw.com

 

[sar104]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

When I saw the thread title I was worried that you really were looking for definitive legal advice on an internet forum, rather than recommendations for a lawyer. But then it turned out that you got the recommendation and accurate advice too.

 

[PhantomFandom]

It's still intimidating when a sheriff approaches you and tells you that your flight over an area controlled by the Army Corp of Engineers will lend you in jail if you do it again, which happened to me recently.

Of course it is always intimidating when approached by law enforcement. It is intimidating even if you are totally on the right side of the law and the officer does not know the law. They still have all the power and all of the control over the situation. Generally it is just best to say "Yes sir, I will move on". Go home, look up the the regulations for where you were flying, and follow up with a letter asking for clarification.

You do need to educate yourself though on the airspace where you are flying (as per the FAA) so that you are in fact flying legally. Not knowing the specific area you were flying that day, perhaps it was indeed controlled airspace and you were not allowed to fly there. However, that determination would be based on (yes again) the FAA and not the sheriff or the Army Corps of Engineers.

 

[Mavic Mac]

Of course it is always intimidating when approached by law enforcement. It is intimidating even if you are totally on the right side of the law and the officer does not know the law. They still have all the power and all of the control over the situation. Generally it is just best to say "Yes sir, I will move on". Go home, look up the the regulations for where you were flying, and follow up with a letter asking for clarification.

You do need to educate yourself though on the airspace where you are flying (as per the FAA) so that you are in fact flying legally. Not knowing the specific area you were flying that day, perhaps it was indeed controlled airspace and you were not allowed to fly there. However, that determination would be based on (yes again) the FAA and not the sheriff or the Army Corps of Engineers.

From THIS web site

Operators will be held liable for damage to public property at TVA and Corps of Engineers lakes resulting from piloting a drone or any other activity associated with operating a UAS, and violations may result in removal from federal property and potential citations.

Yes, this will generate a discussion because a citation is not an arrest in the true sense of the word - but who really wants or needs the hassle ?

 

[SBurke1969]

I have been flying a Mavic 2 for a year, and I need legal advice on some matters related to my photographs. Can anyone recommend a lawyer who is knowledgeable about drones? I have been taking a lot of still photographs in a city in Louisiana, and posting them on social media. They have become very popular in the city that they portray. To the point that a local well-known and highly respected historian and university professor has proposed that we publish a book, with my photographs and his comments on what they illustrate. It sounds like a fun thing to do, but I have two concerns: (1) Since I am an amateur drone pilot and photographer, am I allowed to publish the photos I took, or do I need to get some type of commercial license to do that? (2) The rules on where a drone can be flown seem very fuzzy to me; the FAA rules are clear and I always follow them; but local rules are unclear or inexistent, and sometimes someone tells me I cannot fly over a certain park or building, and I can never figure out what the laws and regulations really are. By publishing my photos in a book, am I exposing myself to legal trouble? I would very much appreciate any perspective that anyone could offer, in particular information that would lead me to a legal expert that could tell me if my concerns are founded or if I am worrying too much and there is no real exposure. I would be happy to pay the appropriate fees for such expert legal advice.

I am an attorney. I am licensed to practice law in Oregon, Washington, and U.S Courts. I do not practice law in Louisiana, nor do I have a clue what implications your state law may have on the answer to this question. What I can say, without reservation, is that you must have a commercial license (Section 107) to publish your book. You cannot receive any form of compensation for any drone footage, whether still, moving, or otherwise, without having a commercial drone license. Compensation is not limited to money. It is compensation by any means available. You cannot take drone photos in exchange for a lunch, or a beer, or dinner. There are no exceptions on this point. The regs are not ambiguous, and this point seems very clear to me.

As far as where you can fly, that can get complicated. While some cities have ordinances concerning where you can or can't fly a drone, this issue is primarily controlled under Federal law. There are a lot of state agencies and some cities that have enacted laws concerning drone limitations that are technically unenforceable and illegal due to preemption by Federal law. Some are enforceable. Having said that, a city will refuse to agree with what I said and will continue to prosecute you under its law until an appellate court judges issues an order decreeing the law was illegal/unconstitutional/ultra vires. You would need an attorney to get that order, and it will cost more than your drone. That much is certain. Unfortunately, there are too many idiot drone pilots who are screwing all of this up for the rest of us. Everyone should look at flying a drone like driving a car, or flying an aircraft with people in it. It really isn't a toy. Just remember that without waivers, which are hard to get, you cannot fly over people (literally over the person) or traffic (literally over a moving car) and you can never fly over large gatherings such as sport events and stadiums. There are a lot of places you can fly without breaking a law. The most important thing to keep in mind is to avoid impacting other people, and be respectful of their privacy and right to enjoy their surroundings.

I'd get the license and publish that book. It sounds cool. I haven't been to New Orleans since about 1995, and I still miss the food.

 

[sar104]

I am an attorney. I am licensed to practice law in Oregon, Washington, and U.S Courts. I do not practice law in Louisiana, nor do I have a clue what implications your state law may have on the answer to this question. What I can say, without reservation, is that you must have a commercial license (Section 107) to publish your book. You cannot receive any form of compensation for any drone footage, whether still, moving, or otherwise, without having a commercial drone license. Compensation is not limited to money. It is compensation by any means available. You cannot take drone photos in exchange for a lunch, or a beer, or dinner. There are no exceptions on this point. The regs are not ambiguous, and this point seems very clear to me.

As far as where you can fly, that can get complicated. While some cities have ordinances concerning where you can or can't fly a drone, this issue is primarily controlled under Federal law. There are a lot of state agencies and some cities that have enacted laws concerning drone limitations that are technically unenforceable and illegal due to preemption by Federal law. Some are enforceable. Having said that, a city will refuse to agree with what I said and will continue to prosecute you under its law until an appellate court judges issues an order decreeing the law was illegal/unconstitutional/ultra vires. You would need an attorney to get that order, and it will cost more than your drone. That much is certain. Unfortunately, there are too many idiot drone pilots who are screwing all of this up for the rest of us. Everyone should look at flying a drone like driving a car, or flying an aircraft with people in it. It really isn't a toy. Just remember that without waivers, which are hard to get, you cannot fly over people (literally over the person) or traffic (literally over a moving car) and you can never fly over large gatherings such as sport events and stadiums. There are a lot of places you can fly without breaking a law. The most important thing to keep in mind is to avoid impacting other people, and be respectful of their privacy and right to enjoy their surroundings.

I'd get the license and publish that book. It sounds cool. I haven't been to New Orleans since about 1995, and I still miss the food.

It's great that you are willing to offer legal advice as an attorney, but you are not quite correct on one significant point and completely wrong on another one. Your premise that Part 107 and the limited exemption are about compensation is the source of both issues.

1. Partly wrong: Part 107 and its various clarifications from the FAA make it quite clear that compensation, other than directly for the flight itself, is only a potential indicator of the purpose of a flight, and that the intent at the time of the flight is what counts. Part 107 doesn't regulate sale of materials acquired during a flight. Part 107 itself doesn't even mention compensation or commercial use, and the limited exemption for recreational use states just that - the flight must be for recreational purposes. In other words you don't break the law by selling photos - you break the law by flying non-recreationally without a Part 107 license. You can even (technically) subsequently sell photos or video taken on a recreational flight provided that the flight was purely for recreational purposes at the time (i.e. you did not plan to use the material non-recreationally) because it doesn't change the recreational nature of that flight.
2. Wrong: Subsequently getting a Part 107 license doesn't help at all. If the flight was genuinely recreational, then the material can be used without any post hoc impact on the validity of the flight under the recreational exemption. If it was not recreational (perhaps with the intent to acquire material for a future book project) and thus illegal without a Part 107 license, then subsequently acquiring a Part 107 license doesn't suddenly make it legal.

 

[BigAl07]

I am an attorney. I am licensed to practice law in Oregon, Washington, and U.S Courts. I do not practice law in Louisiana, nor do I have a clue what implications your state law may have on the answer to this question. What I can say, without reservation, is that you must have a commercial license (Section 107) to publish your book. You cannot receive any form of compensation for any drone footage, whether still, moving, or otherwise, without having a commercial drone license. Compensation is not limited to money. It is compensation by any means available. You cannot take drone photos in exchange for a lunch, or a beer, or dinner. There are no exceptions on this point. The regs are not ambiguous, and this point seems very clear to me.

As far as where you can fly, that can get complicated. While some cities have ordinances concerning where you can or can't fly a drone, this issue is primarily controlled under Federal law. There are a lot of state agencies and some cities that have enacted laws concerning drone limitations that are technically unenforceable and illegal due to preemption by Federal law. Some are enforceable. Having said that, a city will refuse to agree with what I said and will continue to prosecute you under its law until an appellate court judges issues an order decreeing the law was illegal/unconstitutional/ultra vires. You would need an attorney to get that order, and it will cost more than your drone. That much is certain. Unfortunately, there are too many idiot drone pilots who are screwing all of this up for the rest of us. Everyone should look at flying a drone like driving a car, or flying an aircraft with people in it. It really isn't a toy. Just remember that without waivers, which are hard to get, you cannot fly over people (literally over the person) or traffic (literally over a moving car) and you can never fly over large gatherings such as sport events and stadiums. There are a lot of places you can fly without breaking a law. The most important thing to keep in mind is to avoid impacting other people, and be respectful of their privacy and right to enjoy their surroundings.

I'd get the license and publish that book. It sounds cool. I haven't been to New Orleans since about 1995, and I still miss the food.

While I respect your experience and knowledge I have to state that you're wrong sir. DATA collected as a hobbyist, so long as the flight was flown completely within the regulations of a hobbyist, can be later sold or used for promotions. The FAA is ONLY concerned with the flight and the INTENT at the time of the flight and not what happens with the DATA later on. I'm not speaking on heresay etc... I'm an FAA Safety Team Representative (manned aviation) and an FAA Safety Team Drone Pro (Charlotte NC Region). I'm one of the people who might contact you if there is an incident or report in my region. I'm also the one who will be doing "additional training/education" if there is an incident/report and this is deemed a requirement.

As an example... I go flying my drone, 100% recreationally and capture something that's WOW/AWESOME that later becomes valuable. Someone can purchase that data from you or you can use it for promotion etc with no repercussions from the FAA. While if this happens occasionally you still have a case but if you sell images from your HOBBY flights often you have pierced that protection hobby/recreational bubble.

It's been stated and documented many times that the INTENT of the flight that acquired the DATA is the only determining factor in LEGAL or NOT.

 

[PhantomFandom]

I am an attorney. I am licensed to practice law in Oregon, Washington, and U.S Courts. I do not practice law in Louisiana, nor do I have a clue what implications your state law may have on the answer to this question. What I can say, without reservation, is that you must have a commercial license (Section 107) to publish your book. You cannot receive any form of compensation for any drone footage, whether still, moving, or otherwise, without having a commercial drone license. Compensation is not limited to money. It is compensation by any means available. You cannot take drone photos in exchange for a lunch, or a beer, or dinner. There are no exceptions on this point. The regs are not ambiguous, and this point seems very clear to me.

As far as where you can fly, that can get complicated. While some cities have ordinances concerning where you can or can't fly a drone, this issue is primarily controlled under Federal law. There are a lot of state agencies and some cities that have enacted laws concerning drone limitations that are technically unenforceable and illegal due to preemption by Federal law. Some are enforceable. Having said that, a city will refuse to agree with what I said and will continue to prosecute you under its law until an appellate court judges issues an order decreeing the law was illegal/unconstitutional/ultra vires. You would need an attorney to get that order, and it will cost more than your drone. That much is certain. Unfortunately, there are too many idiot drone pilots who are screwing all of this up for the rest of us. Everyone should look at flying a drone like driving a car, or flying an aircraft with people in it. It really isn't a toy. Just remember that without waivers, which are hard to get, you cannot fly over people (literally over the person) or traffic (literally over a moving car) and you can never fly over large gatherings such as sport events and stadiums. There are a lot of places you can fly without breaking a law. The most important thing to keep in mind is to avoid impacting other people, and be respectful of their privacy and right to enjoy their surroundings.

I'd get the license and publish that book. It sounds cool. I haven't been to New Orleans since about 1995, and I still miss the food.

Greetings. @sar104 and @BigAl07 already beat me to it and noted that your interpretation of the FAA Part 107 regulation (and associate recreational carve-out) is incorrect.

As to the state and local ordinances, yes it is an arduous and expensive proposition to fight these stupid, illegal, and unenforceable ordinances but how else will the system ever change? It really is difficult to overcome the inequity of fighting the government but someone needs to do it. Some have taken up the fight in various states and WON, but then the battle has to be undertaken by someone else in another state or municipality. It never ends. One specific such case that really bothers me is New York City, which prohibits all UAS flights anywhere in the city limits (other than 5 specific approved sites). It's ridiculous. However who has the time, willingness, fortitude and MONEY to fight that behemoth entity?

 

[PhantomFandom]

Operators will be held liable for damage to public property at TVA and Corps of Engineers lakes resulting from piloting a drone or any other activity associated with operating a UAS, and violations may result in removal from federal property and potential citations.

OK that is fine and does not say that UAS flights over the facility are prohibited. One would expect that if you damage a facility, be it by UAS or any other method that you would be held accountable and responsible for that damage. If I am flying from my own backyard and my UAS crashes into a neighbor's roof then I would also be held responsible. If my lawnmower kicks up a rock and breaks a neighbor's window, I would likewise be responsible.

So the issue here is that:

1. It really did not need to be written specifically for UAS. It is just a basic liability issue.
2. It was most likely worded specifically in that way so that it did not actually prohibit overflight and yet seems ominous enough for drone pilots to think twice before even attempting to do so.

What a responsible drone pilot should do is to first think about whether or not they really need to fly there. Second, if they do fly there, make sure they know the law and that they have UAS liability insurance.

 

[oilpond]

In australia the police watch youtubes and book to catch and fine drone pilots.

 

[jsflyrv]

While I respect your experience and knowledge I have to state that you're wrong sir. DATA collected as a hobbyist, so long as the flight was flown completely within the regulations of a hobbyist, can be later sold or used for promotions. The FAA is ONLY concerned with the flight and the INTENT at the time of the flight and not what happens with the DATA later on. I'm not speaking on heresay etc... I'm an FAA Safety Team Representative (manned aviation) and an FAA Safety Team Drone Pro (Charlotte NC Region). I'm one of the people who might contact you if there is an incident or report in my region. I'm also the one who will be doing "additional training/education" if there is an incident/report and this is deemed a requirement.

As an example... I go flying my drone, 100% recreationally and capture something that's WOW/AWESOME that later becomes valuable. Someone can purchase that data from you or you can use it for promotion etc with no repercussions from the FAA. While if this happens occasionally you still have a case but if you sell images from your HOBBY flights often you have pierced that protection hobby/recreational bubble.

It's been stated and documented many times that the INTENT of the flight that acquired the DATA is the only determining factor in LEGAL or NOT.

I believe the OP was asking about taking photos to have published in a book. In this case he is intentionally flying and taking photos to be published in a book as a commercial venture, if the person publishing is doing it for any type of monetary gain. At this point it no longer falls under a hobbyist regulations and falls under commercial operation which would require Part 107.