Thanks, Vic but unless you are a lawyer and have trial experience in this subject, I will stick with the published FAA guidance. Even if the FAA guidance is outdated, it is a reasonable defense rather then saying “I read this on the internet from a non-FAA site.”
I am not a lawyer. As a matter of fact, I have an art degree.
But when it comes to FAA regulations, I am an expert. To the point where many in the FAA, from those in D.C. to my local Class B tower, reach out to me for questions or to help other drone owners understand the rules. I'm part of the FAA Safety Team (FAAST) as a Drone Pro.
I work with local and state official when they are drafting UAS ordinances and regulations. And as far as trail experience, I was an expert witness for Dr. Singer in Singer v. Newton (
MA) when he sued the city of Newton,
MA for over arching drone laws. Newton lost.
I know my stuff.
And that article you seem to want to ignore was proofed by two of my FAA contacts (including the FAA's "Drone Guy") before I published it.
And in another of your posts, you are incorrect.
You state "As other‘s said it is really the intent. If you are out filming a whale migration for enjoyment and see the Lochness Monster, yes you have the right to share, but not gain any monies from it."
While the first sentence is correct, the second is 100% wrong. Intent is always the determining factor in the decision to fly under 107 rules or 44809. However, it is perfectly legal to sell imagery taken during a 44809 flight.
In the FAA's resource library you'll find a memo titled "Media Use of UAS" (
https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/agc/practice_areas/regulations/interpretations/Data/interps/2015/Williams-AFS-80 - (2015) Legal Interpretation.pdf). While the language is outdated and it deals specifically with media, it has also been used buy the FAA to allow imagery from hobby flights to be sold after that flight. The FAA is very clear on this.
You mentioned a few times that you research and review FAA guidance. While that is also a good idea, you should keep yourself open to learning from those with more knowledge than you. And as far as "published FAA guidance", everything I've stated above is published. As is my article. Although technically not an FAA article, as mentioned, is was FAA vetted.
I also write for the FAA's blog.
Make sure you understand who you're disagreeing with.