No - but yes. If you want “A” then the way politics works is you argue for having “fully automated A with extra sprinkles and and 20 different colours”. You sell the idea to the wider community. Then you may end up with “A”. If you argue for “A”, you can end up with “B” or nothing. Look at the gun lobby - yes, you have it in constitution, but even in countries where it’s not, they argue for semi auto military, then end up with a compromise. With drones, we should never present as satisfied with the minimum, or we’ll get less. We should argue for overflight of any public and private land, that local councils never have control of airspace, that photography is allowed anywhere etc. and not back down. Same as unions will go for what may seem an unreasonable pay rise, then push right up to a strike, knowing the money simply isn’t available, to actually target better working conditions, that companies then offer in greater amounts instead of less so (which they would do if asked for that in the first place).
I must say that with drones, people seem very divided about brutally pushing for rights: four wheel drives, guns, smoking, drugs etc all seem much more concerted in their approach. Maybe drone owners come from wider walks of life - but I must say that in other posts about our pastimes, the range was heavily into same as above! Another effect may be that drone companies have feet in commercial camps, competing demands and don’t stand to lose out if they lose some of the hobby sector: they don’t get involved in promoting the hobby against commercial interests.
