Legality of shots that possibly weren't legal

[jfkparenteau]

So a year or so ago I was invited by a Fireman's association to tour a California burn area. It was long since put out, so this was a tour for them to review the aftermath. I was helping out a friend who was shooting some of it as footage for their internal usage. I wasn't paid. In the process, I flew my Mavic Air over a burn area within full view of the local police and fire team (who thought it was cool).

I realize now I probably broke a bunch of rules. It was my first outing with the drone and I was just excited. But now I worry about showing the footage even on my demo reel or social media. What is my exposure here?

Thanks for your thoughts.

John

 

[Thomas B]

In general flights for others are illegal unless you’re part 107. If not, you can post the video, but not transfer to others.

 

[Phantomrain.org]

For me the General rule is simple : I will film any fire / Police / event taking place and will stop when there is Air Support or if someone asks me to stop recording.


As a safe guard , i keep myself out of the frame when recording when I post the videos.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly your Mavic in the Rain. and Land on the water.

 

[sar104]

The legality entirely depends on whether you can claim that you were flying recreationally. The "helping out a friend" bit clearly suggests that it was not, but without more context it's not clear. If you can reasonably say that it was recreational then simply sharing the videos is not inconsistent with that.

That said, I don't think that you have much to worry about at this point.

 

[Formosa Straight]

Not sure but isn't this a question of it being a recreational or commercial flight? Helping out a buddy I would think is kind of irrelevant. I can help my buddy out by taking a vid of his boat, I'm still flying recreationally as I have not made any financial gain from the filming and making money from the flight and footage was never the intention of the flight, therefore nto commercial. If you were helping a buddy and had no intention of any commerical gain from the footage then I believe you have nothing to worry about.

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

Not sure but isn't this a question of it being a recreational or commercial flight? Helping out a buddy I would think is kind of irrelevant. I can help my buddy out by taking a vid of his boat, I'm still flying recreationally as I have not made any financial gain from the filming and making money from the flight and footage was never the intention of the flight, therefore nto commercial. If you were helping a buddy and had no intention of any commerical gain from the footage then I believe you have nothing to worry about.

Commercial gain has nothing to do with it. It is purely the intention of the flight. If you're "doing a favor for a buddy" that is not a purely recreational flight and therefore falls under Part 107. The recreational rules are an exclusion and anything not strictly by those rules is by default, a Part 107 flight.

 

[Phantomrain.org]

Commercial gain has nothing to do with it. It is purely the intention of the flight. If you're "doing a favor for a buddy" that is not a purely recreational flight and therefore falls under Part 107. The recreational rules are an exclusion and anything not strictly by those rules is by default, a Part 107 flight.

This is what I call the Revolving door : As its just not that simple.

If your neighbor asks you to fly over his house and check to see if his gutters are filled , you do not need a 107

If your neighbor asks you come to his work place and check the gutters for him you do need a 107.

if your friend asks you to film his wedding , you do need a 107

if you friend asks you to drone his house when the party arrives you do not need a 107

But here the thing , and why i call it the revolving door , every time you call the FAA to clarify depending on what agent you are talking to , the answers can change,

In the end by the time your done , the FAA always says the same thing, you really should get your 107 so you dont have to worry about such things.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain.

 

[hiflyer201]

I think you are over thinking this. It's just drone footage. Bystander video is used constantly and no one seems to be asking questions. If you were interfering with tankers that would be a problem

 

[Vic Moss]

Let's look at this two ways.

First, was it a non-recreational flight? Yes, 100%. You should have had a 107 to do this.

Second, will the FAA care? Highly unlikely. No one inside the FAA is going around scouring the webs for drone use (despite what some lead you to believe). And if they find out, worse case scenario, you get a letter explaining the infraction and the rules. You say, "I'm sorry, I didn't realize that, and I won't do it again."

And the only way the FAA will find out is if someone sends in a complaint. That is highly unlikely for imagery that old.

End of story.

 

[Vic Moss]

This is what I call the Revolving door : As its just not that simple.

If your neighbor asks you to fly over his house and check to see if his gutters are filled , you do not need a 107

If your neighbor asks you come to his work place and check the gutters for him you do need a 107.

if your friend asks you to film his wedding , you do need a 107

if you friend asks you to drone his house when the party arrives you do not need a 107

But here the thing , and why i call it the revolving door , every time you call the FAA to clarify depending on what agent you are talking to , the answers can change,

In the end by the time your done , the FAA always says the same thing, you really should get your 107 so you dont have to worry about such things.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain.

There is some bad information here.

Anything that falls outside a purely recreational flight requires a 107. Scenarios 1 and 4 are most definitely flights that require a 107.

And the FAA doesn't really change the answer. There are certain people inside the FAA (FSDO is notorious for this) that don't have the correct information, so they can muddy the waters. This is exactly why people like myself and @BigAl07 do what we do. We get questions like this from FSDO all the time.

 

[BigAl07]

This is what I call the Revolving door : As its just not that simple.

If your neighbor asks you to fly over his house and check to see if his gutters are filled , you do not need a 107 Ummm.... you are providing a SERVICE to someone else. How is that not Part 107 and outside of ~44809? Is a Dr. who happens to be your neighbor and looking at your broken arm still a Dr. and required to have a License to give medical advice?

If your neighbor asks you come to his work place and check the gutters for him you do need a 107. True but how is it ANY different than checking his home gutters other than possibly the physical address? Same service just different location and BOTH require Part 107.

if your friend asks you to film his wedding , you do need a 107 Correct

if you friend asks you to drone his house when the party arrives you do not need a 107 you are providing a SERVICE to someone else. How is that not Part 107 and outside of ~44809?

But here the thing , and why i call it the revolving door , every time you call the FAA to clarify depending on what agent you are talking to , the answers can change, Believe it or not, the FAA is a group of HUMANS and just like many of us on here they make mistakes, misunderstand a rule/regulation, and sometimes just don't know what they are talkin about. That's no different than any other Organization/Dept/Group etc. They make mistakes and unfortunately do so often. That's why we spend so MUCH time on this forum (and many others) trying to cease the BAD information regardless where it comes from. Remember that many in the FAA are new to or not a fan of UAS so they aren't deeply involved in our regulations etc. It's a BIG Organization to say the least.

In the end by the time your done , the FAA always says the same thing, you really should get your 107 so you dont have to worry about such things.

Phantomrain.org
Gear to fly in the Rain.

Very well said @vic. I wish I had a DIME every time we had to try and field this question.... I'd be retired LOL!

Here is how I comment on this.... if the flight is purely Recreational it falls under ~44809 and no Part 107 is required. If any portion of the flight does not fit squarely inside the protective bubble of ~44809 then the entire flight falls under Part 107 (for this conversation we are NOT talking about Govt or Public Safety Flight).

Here's the catch.... you can NOT RECREATE for someone else. Even if you LOVE what you're doing if it's for someone else in any capacity it is NOT RECREATIONAL. The moment you do it FOR SOMEONE you are no longer Recreating!!

 

[GFields]

Greetings! Welcome to the forum. The answers listed above may not help you much as they are confusing and unclear. I suggest contacting the FAA yourself and be sure to write down the agent's name and ID and the response. Having a paper trail has its benefits.

 

[Vic Moss]

Here's the catch.... you can NOT RECREATE for someone else. Even if you LOVE what you're doing if it's for someone else in any capacity it is NOT RECREATIONAL. The moment you do it FOR SOMEONE you are no longer Recreating!!

That's a good way to put it. I usually just send them to one of our articles...

Hobby v. 107: Unscrambled - Drone Service Providers Alliance

Why does it seem so difficult for some people to understand the very marked difference between the FAA’s “hobby” rules and “commercial” rules when it comes to UAS (drone) flights in the National Airspace System (NAS)? Our rules could not be any more clear. It seems human nature wants to default...

dspalliance.org

 

[Vic Moss]

Greetings! Welcome to the forum. The answers listed above may not help you much as they are confusing and unclear. I suggest contacting the FAA yourself and be sure to write down the agent's name and ID and the response. Having a paper trail has its benefits.

Not necessary. You can take anything I or @BigAl07 say to the bank. We are both FAASTeam Drone Pros, and have more knowledge than 99% of those inside the FAA when it comes to UAS regulations. We are required to in order to work with the FAA. And if you try and talk to the wrong people at the FAA, you'll get bad information.

I even hold training events for FSDO employees and other FAAST volunteers. And I now Allen holds some trainings as well.

But just in case you'd like the official word from the FAA, the "Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft" (49 USC §44809) link is below. Read that for the answers. You're either flying under all active 8 sections of 44809, or you're flying under 14 CFR Part 107.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

 

[GFields]

Not necessary. You can take anything I or @BigAl07 say to the bank. We are both FAASTeam Drone Pros, and have more knowledge than 99% of those inside the FAA when it comes to UAS regulations. We are required to in order to work with the FAA. And if you try and talk to the wrong people at the FAA, you'll get bad information.

I even hold training events for FSDO employees and other FAAST volunteers. And I now Allen holds some trainings as well.

But just in case you'd like the official word from the FAA, the "Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft" (49 USC §44809) link is below. Read that for the answers. You're either flying under all active 8 sections of 44809, or you're flying under 14 CFR Part 107.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

I agree. I was referring to the other comments. And since the OP is new and may not know you or BA, to find out directly. I certainly meant no disrespect to either of you.

 

[BigAl07]

Not necessary. You can take anything I or @BigAl07 say to the bank. We are both FAASTeam Drone Pros, and have more knowledge than 99% of those inside the FAA when it comes to UAS regulations. We are required to in order to work with the FAA. And if you try and talk to the wrong people at the FAA, you'll get bad information.

I even hold training events for FSDO employees and other FAAST volunteers. And I now Allen holds some trainings as well.

But just in case you'd like the official word from the FAA, the "Exception for limited recreational operations of unmanned aircraft" (49 USC §44809) link is below. Read that for the answers. You're either flying under all active 8 sections of 44809, or you're flying under 14 CFR Part 107.

https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?req=granuleid:USC-prelim-title49-section44809&num=0&edition=prelim

We fall into the "Train the Trainers" group LOL!


For others reading this thread, keep in mind that the FAA is a LOT bigger than Drone/UAS operations and they recruited us to be part of this as their Subject Matter Experts specifically for UAS. I happen to be also involved in the Manned Aviation side but my area of focus is definitely UAS for the last few years.

 

[Zbip57]

I flew my Mavic Air over a burn area within full view of the local police and fire team (who thought it was cool).

I do understand the difference between a Private Pilot Licence flying just for their own fun, versus a Commercial Pilot Licence and being paid to haul passengers or freight. There's a clear difference when it's just your own self at risk versus the responsibilities you shoulder for the safe operation of a business catering to paying customers.

I can also understand that there are differences between recreational drone flying versus operating as a commercial flyer for business hire. But I really don't understand this obsession with splitting hairs when it comes to cases such as this one.

Why is there any difference whatsoever in the level of risk, danger to the public, or whatever, if this guy had simply decided to fly his Mavic Air over the burn area for his own fun versus doing the identical same flight in "helping out a friend"? What is the FAA trying to prevent here?

Okay, I get it that there are actual legalities within the current FAA laws which say this is recreational versus that requires a Part 107. But if the local police and fire team didn't object to his flying a drone on this occasion, why should the FAA care whether he does it on his own for fun as a recreational flight or does the exact same flight in helping out a friend? Why should that make any difference at all? What is the point here?

I realize I'm lucky to live in Canada where there no longer is any artificial distinction between recreational versus commercial flying of drones. Everybody is subject to the same consistent set of rules, regardless of intent.

It just seems so pointless and downright silly to argue or fret over the sometimes miniscule differences between recreational or commercial. I could take my drone to my neighbour's house and fly it there just for fun. Or, tomorrow my neighbour could invite me back to do the same flights while demonstrating my drone to his friends. Would I need a Part 107 because this is providing a commercial service to the neighbour? If we subsequently relax and he offers me a beer, is someone going to report me to the FAA because I received compensation for my flight?

Why should it make any difference at all if, at the same time, I used my drone to check the gutters on my neighbour's house? Oh no, you can't do that legally unless you first study to read and understand reams of regulations, NOTAMS, METAR, etc. Why?

 

[MavicAir2Marc]

It just seems so pointless and downright silly to argue or fret over the sometimes miniscule differences between recreational or commercial. I could take my drone to my neighbour's house and fly it there just for fun. Or, tomorrow my neighbour could invite me back to do the same flights while demonstrating my drone to his friends. Would I need a Part 107 because this is providing a commercial service to the neighbour? If we subsequently relax and he offers me a beer, is someone going to report me to the FAA because I received compensation for my flight?

Why should it make any difference at all if, at the same time, I used my drone to check the gutters on my neighbour's house? Oh no, you can't do that legally unless you first study to read and understand reams of regulations, NOTAMS, METAR, etc. Why?

See Vic's post #9. The OP asked the legality, the other answers are to make sure he understands the correct information on the rules as written. Unfortunately, if there are any gray areas in the ruling, some people will twist and turn them to their own interpretation. It's black & white, so will the FAA care? No, I'm sure they have better things to do with their time.

 

[Zbip57]

The OP asked the legality, [...]

Yes, I understand that there are legal FAA requirements. I just don't understand why they are required.

It's like setting different speed limits on the highway for whether you're just out having a fun drive versus driving to work. Why should the requirements be different depending on the purpose of the trip?

Why do I need to meet stricter regulatory requirements in order to peer into my neighbour's rain gutters versus just flying over his house for fun? Yes, legally it's required. But why? What useful purpose does that serve?

 

[sar104]

Yes, I understand that there are legal FAA requirements. I just don't understand why they are required.

It's like setting different speed limits on the highway for whether you're just out having a fun drive versus driving to work. Why should the requirements be different depending on the purpose of the trip?

Why do I need to meet stricter regulatory requirements in order to peer into my neighbour's rain gutters versus just flying over his house for fun? Yes, legally it's required. But why? What useful purpose does that serve?

You have the situation backwards. There are uniform FAA regulations regarding sUAS operation - those are 14 CFR Part 107 - but, under pressure from the model aircraft community, Congress decided to cut recreational pilots a break and relieve them of some of those regulations. So it's not that stricter rules were put in place for non-recreational use, it's that the basic rules were relaxed for recreational use.