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

Legal advice needed

Status
Not open for further replies.
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.


Go back and read the OP again... the images were already taken previously as a hobbyist and LATER became valuable. The flights were completely HOBBY/RECREATIONAL and no rules/laws were broken. They LATER became valuable in that someone wants to now (NOT AT THE TIME OF THE FLIGHT) use them in a book.

Now IF the OP decides to take additional pictures with the intention of "possibly" using them in this book it's outside of Hobby/Recreational and as such has pierced the protective bubble and defaulting THOSE flights (not previous flights) to Part 107.
 
With a disclaimer saying all photos were taken with a camera on the end of a very very long pole.
 
And this thread proves why one should never seek legal advice in a forum such as this. As for an attorney proffering totally incorrect legal advice in an informal forum, I would only accept such advice if I were paying the attorney for it and, as a result, (s)he were legally and financially liable for the consequences of the incorrect advice they have given.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
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’m not taking sides on this issue since I am Part 107 certified and don’t have to worry about it. One of the reasons I am certified is I have seen confusing and conflicting direction from the FAA on this issue over the last few years.

What I worry about is...

1) How do you prove that the “intent” of your flight was recreational if there are no witnesses?

2) What prevents someone from using “recreational flight” as an excuse to obtain commercial media?

3) The legal fees needed to defend yourself if accused of flying commercially without the proper certification could be expensive.

I would definitely seek legal advice for the subject situation.
 
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
Just no. Get your facts straight first and don’t proffer legal advice in an informal forum. This kind of thing has potentially negative consequences on someone who follows your advice, and I have no doubt whatever that you would then deny legal liability for the incorrect advice you have given.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
With a disclaimer saying all photos were taken with a camera on the end of a very very long pole.

I’ve been experimenting with long poles and gimbal mounted cameras. It works.
 
I’m not taking sides on this issue since I am Part 107 certified and don’t have to worry about it. One of the reasons I am certified is I have seen confusing and conflicting direction from the FAA on this issue over the last few years.

What I worry about is...

1) How do you prove that the “intent” of your flight was recreational if there are no witnesses?

You don't need to prove that. The onus would be on the FAA to provide evidence that it was not, and they are not going to waste time chasing down individual cases where it is not demonstrably obvious.
2) What prevents someone from using “recreational flight” as an excuse to obtain commercial media?

Nothing, but sooner or later, especially if gets reported, the pattern is going to comprise the evidence that the FAA would need.
3) The legal fees needed to defend yourself if accused of flying commercially without the proper certification could be expensive.

It's only going to come to that if you really have been doing that.
I would definitely seek legal advice for the subject situation.

Agreed - this case could appear suspicious, hence all the recommendations above to do so.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BigAl07
I may have missed this, as I didn't read all the responses, but here is the most simple answer. Your intent at the time you took the photos was not commercial, it was for personal use. If you decide to sell them later, you will be fine. The FAA will never come after someone selling an aerial photography book. This is not legal advice, but I'm 100% certain you will never be questioned.

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.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sar104
In australia the police watch youtubes and book to catch and fine drone pilots.
What evidence do you have for this. It could only be AFP and I doubt that. Maybe CASA if they have a complaint lodged, but I doubt they are sitting trawling through YouTube looking for infringements.

BruceG
 
hough 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.

Agreed.
I am not sure how many others do this, but to avoid some of the hassle when I am flying in an area that may be "concerning" to bystanders/law enforcement/etc I print out the flight map, any relevant regulations, and flight restrictions (or lack of) for that area and have it with me.
9 out of 10 times if a local officer stops you and questions what you are doing, simply having some basic research you did ahead of time shows that you are not trying to flagrantly violate any laws and that you are knowledgable (probably more so than the officer) and being respectful of the laws. Has saved me a few times (in different countries) when the local officer is annoyed and tells me I can't fly but actually there is no regulation against it, I show them I did my research and am very polite and not confrontational. At worst we agree to stop further flights but usually they end up just talking about the tech and wanting to see the videos/pics!
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhantomFandom
I may have missed this, as I didn't read all the responses, but here is the most simple answer. Your intent at the time you took the photos was not commercial, it was for personal use.
Yes it has been mentioned many times in the thread.

This is not legal advice, but I'm 100% certain you will never be questioned.
You absolutely cannot be 100% certain of that. Publishing a book brings lots of attention. All it takes is one person complaining in order for the FAA to ask a few questions. They may be benign questions and easily satisfied, or it may turn into something bigger if there are any mitigating factors. You just can't be sure.
 
I may have missed this, as I didn't read all the responses, but here is the most simple answer. Your intent at the time you took the photos was not commercial, it was for personal use. If you decide to sell them later, you will be fine. The FAA will never come after someone selling an aerial photography book. This is not legal advice, but I'm 100% certain you will never be questioned.

The majority of your reply is spot on but that last statement
"I'm 100% certain you will never be questioned." doesn't hold water. It's possible that someone will see the book and question it. Especially if there is a sUAS operator in the area who is threatened by someone publishing sUAS work better than or more well publicized that theirs.

All it takes is one phone call or one anonymous webform submission for it to get on the FAA's radar. At that point someone will reach out and ask questions. I'm speaking from first hand experience from both sides of the equation. I've had someone report me for Commercial sUAS work without a license (I had it BTW) and I'm also an FAA Safety Team Representative who is tasked with "Information Gathering" in certain instances of possible sUAS violations.

Odds are nothing will ever be said but saying "100% certain" is not a fair/accurate statement to make especially considering this whole conversation is now on the WEB.
 
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.
Check out King Schools. (I’m not affiliated with them, but am using them to get my Private cert.)
If you go to their YouTube channel, they have 22% off promo code, which would make it about 100 USD.
Cheers.
 
This is a dicey area. While it is nearly impossible to prove intent when taking photographs as a hobbiest sans Part 107 certificate, you definitely should consult an attorney. What you do not want is, even if all your images were of recreational intent, is to have to defend those intentions with any prosecutorial authority. The only way I can think of to put your thumb on the scale of the system is to go get your Part 107, take some more pictures and blend your previous stash of photos because it is unlikely that, with commercial license in hand, anyone is going to want to see the metadata on any (of the earlier) photos and go after you for the earlier batch ex post facto.
 
If you make money from pictures you take with your drone, you need a FAA 107 License. 'period' Even at the time you took the photos you had no intention of selling them. You do not need a lawyer, you need a license.
 
If you make money from pictures you take with your drone, you need a FAA 107 License. 'period' Even at the time you took the photos you had no intention of selling them. You do not need a lawyer, you need a license.

No - that is an incorrect generalization, as explained multiple times already.
 
If you make money from pictures you take with your drone, you need a FAA 107 License. 'period' Even at the time you took the photos you had no intention of selling them. You do not need a lawyer, you need a license.

@skiptv that's the first totally incorrect comment I've seen you make.

It's 100% the INTENT at the time of the flight that matters to the FAA. This has been verified in writing and in several FAA Webinars since 2016.
 
Thanks again to all for the precious advice. I decided I will get a license to be on the safe side. I have one follow-up question. Through initial discussions with my coauthor (the university professor) and the publisher, I discovered that if the book makes any money, it will be very little. Photography books are expensive to make and don't sell that much. So, I'd be doing this more for the fun and 'prestige' of having my own book than to make money. So the thought occurred to me that I could let my coauthor get all the 'royalties'. If I set things up that way, and therefore if I did not make one dime from the endeavor, from a legal standpoint would I still be using my photographs for commercial purposes? I guess the answer is yes, because somebody is making some money from the pictures, even if it's not me. Does anyone know of any such situation? Thanks again
 
...... would I still be using my photographs for commercial purposes? I guess the answer is yes, because somebody is making some money from the pictures, even if it's not me.....

If it's not Hobby/Recreational 100% it needs Part 107 for the FLIGHTS! Keep in mind all of the DATA you've done up till now was HOBBY flights and then someone found value in your work LATER and wants to use it.

It doesn't matter WHO makes the $$, How they make the $$, or IF they make $$..... Money is only one aspect that could make a flight NOT Hobby/Recreational. EVen Charity/Volunteer efforts are outside of Hobby/Recreational protections against Part 107.

I've not seen any cases "tested" with your exact circumstances but from my limited perspective with working with the FAA you should be good to go for the stuff you've already created. Going forward it would be hard to argue you're doing only hobby as your work ends up published.
 
Thanks again to all for the precious advice. I decided I will get a license to be on the safe side. I have one follow-up question. Through initial discussions with my coauthor (the university professor) and the publisher, I discovered that if the book makes any money, it will be very little. Photography books are expensive to make and don't sell that much. So, I'd be doing this more for the fun and 'prestige' of having my own book than to make money. So the thought occurred to me that I could let my coauthor get all the 'royalties'. If I set things up that way, and therefore if I did not make one dime from the endeavor, from a legal standpoint would I still be using my photographs for commercial purposes? I guess the answer is yes, because somebody is making some money from the pictures, even if it's not me. Does anyone know of any such situation? Thanks again

The answer is yes, but you are still misunderstanding the law. The test is not whether you make money, or anyone else makes money. The test is whether the flight was recreational. If yes, then it doesn't matter if you subsequently make money - it was legal. If no, then it still doesn't matter whether or not you make money - it was illegal. And if it wasn't recreational then it doesn't matter if you subsequently get a Part 107 license - it was still illegal at the time of the flight.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,592
Messages
1,554,181
Members
159,596
Latest member
da4o98