Privacy & Pedos

[Malcx]

Thanks gnirtS - yeah looking at it from the perspective of intent is a good approach and it does all make a bit more sense that way.

 

[DJIce]

Wow lots of replies. It makes a lot more sense now thank you.
I guess a lot of it is down to common sense and being in "control" of people around you just means letting them know not to do anything stupid or asking permissions. Congested areas or built up areas mean I can't fly around the neighbourhood unless it's over a field nearby which is fine. With regards to using it in a park, my understanding is now that as long as there aren't any people nearby who are unnaware or uninformed of the drone flight I should be fine to take a few shots. Obviously not flying it around the whole park or near children lol (to the point of this thread haha). Nice one

 

[DJIce]

As a point to note: The drone code is "fairly" clear but I really wish they added a single sentence saying "50m of people and structures that are not within your control". That would save a lot of ambiguity imo.

 

[Congoblue]

It does say that or something like it in the wordy version, on that graphic version I think they were trying to use as little text as possible. Anyway well done for trying to stick to the guidelines. If only everyone would do that we wouldn't need to be making them all into laws.

 

[gnirtS]

Yeah the drone code is a summary document although that 1 sentence might help....but then people would ask to define "under your control" and so on.
The ACTUAL law is the Air Navigation Order 2016/2018. Drone code is just an idiots guide to people who buy the thing in a supermarket and definitely wouldn't bother reading the legalese of the ANO.

 

[Brihoppy]

Just agreeing with you. In the UK the law does not give you any expectation of privacy outside of your property.

You mean apart from Article 8 of the ECHR?!

 

[BossBob]

Article 8 only covers family life at home and at business premises linked to the family. Which means that private individuals are not supposed to invade that privacy in your home or business and the state has to have a warrant . Outside of that you are fair game. Look around at how many cameras there are in cars, buses, lorries, on street lamps, traffic lights and signs, in shops, filling stations and supermarkets. Houses have both overt and covert cctv. Everyone has a camera on their smartphone or tablet and conversations are recorded by Siri, Alexa or even your smart tv. It only takes you to be identified on one image put on to Facebook for all images on Facebook containing an identifiable image of you to be tagged as containing you, even if you are not a Facebook member. How can that be right? Privacy outside the home. No such thing! At least I never worry about consumer drone images. They are way too unstealthy to invade my privacy without me being aware of it,

 

[Brihoppy]

Article 8 only covers family life at home and at business premises linked to the family. Which means that private individuals are not supposed to invade that privacy in your home or business and the state has to have a warrant . Outside of that you are fair game. Look around at how many cameras there are in cars, buses, lorries, on street lamps, traffic lights and signs, in shops, filling stations and supermarkets. Houses have both overt and covert cctv. Everyone has a camera on their smartphone or tablet and conversations are recorded by Siri, Alexa or even your smart tv. It only takes you to be identified on one image put on to Facebook for all images on Facebook containing an identifiable image of you to be tagged as containing you, even if you are not a Facebook member. How can that be right? Privacy outside the home. No such thing! At least I never worry about consumer drone images. They are way too unstealthy to invade my privacy without me being aware of it,

It also touches on mass surveillance; but I wasn't being entirely serious hence the judicious use of winky smilies!!

 

[Tazbone]

I've had my Mavic Pro for a mere 4 days now.
I have read read read and watched so much information on how to fly and how not to fly... my head hurts...I haven't gone airborne yet either!
After reading threads on here in relation to the UK law I'm even more confused about where I can fly.
Come November 2019 another law comes into affect and yeah I can't wait for more confusing information or details about where I can or can't fly my drone.
I live in the city and green space are basically parks n gardens which obviously there will be folk around so I guess they're no go areas.
I'm thinking of driving into the countryside of North Wales Snowdonia to get airborne.
Do I have to drive to such places to fly my drone in peace and not having to look over my shoulder for plod or people wanting to shout laws and rules about flying.?
Being an amateur photographer I purchased the drone to shoot stills and videos of mountainous views,loughs and lakes etc so if possible could any of you guys know of an easy insurance company I can approach too.

 

[ac0j]

Article 8 only covers family life at home and at business premises linked to the family. Which means that private individuals are not supposed to invade that privacy in your home or business and the state has to have a warrant . Outside of that you are fair game. Look around at how many cameras there are in cars, buses, lorries, on street lamps, traffic lights and signs, in shops, filling stations and supermarkets. Houses have both overt and covert cctv. Everyone has a camera on their smartphone or tablet and conversations are recorded by Siri, Alexa or even your smart tv. It only takes you to be identified on one image put on to Facebook for all images on Facebook containing an identifiable image of you to be tagged as containing you, even if you are not a Facebook member. How can that be right? Privacy outside the home. No such thing! At least I never worry about consumer drone images. They are way too unstealthy to invade my privacy without me being aware of it,

Never leave the cave without a disguise?
Never go to places where people are?
or are you just saying you are as documented as the rest of us, but you just KNOW about it?

 

[AeroJ]

After reading threads on here in relation to the UK law I'm even more confused about where I can fly.

The worst thing about the UK for flying (for me at least) is that all land is owned by someone, and it will usually be impossible or at least very difficult to gain permission from those landowners in advance, or to even know who they are in some cases, and also that the airspace up to at least 500 ft above residential property IS considered part of that property unlike in the States. Lots of the best places for filming are off-limits to us if they are managed by National Trust or English Heritage, both of whom have unnecessarily hostile anti-drone policies. You'll also find yourself unwelcome at Nature Reserves and certain bits of coastline, so it remains a constant challenge to find somewhere safe and legal (yet still visually interesting enough to film) to fly. I spend far longer searching for and planning for flight locations than I do actually flying, but after a while that becomes part of the mission and isn't necessarily unenjoyable in itself.

The good thing about the UK countryside for flying is that it is cross-networked with public bridleways and footpaths from which we can legally launch (within reason), even if those footpaths cross otherwise private land. Also, if you put a little effort in you can often secure yourself a 'home ground' park or something, close to where you live, where you can gain permission to fly from the local council. I wrote to my town council, organised a demonstration flight for their officials to watch, and as a result gained permission to fly in ALL the local parks, ALL the council sports grounds and the vast majority of our local heath and lake, as long as I stay away from match days, or the main drag by the lake where most of the people are - most reasonable I thought... Occasionally I write to them and get extensions to that permission allowing me to overfly the lake when it snows for example, and I have never yet been refused something I applied for, and I don't even have a PfCO ! (Part 107 equivalent). I write to them once a year now to 'thank them for their continued permission', and more importantly, to remind them that there have been no 'incidents' as a result of my flyings, and therefore they should just let that continue...

And then there's all that farmland. Some people think that overflying open fields is the equivalent of flying in the farmer's back garden, but I am not one of them. Flying in a farmer's back garden would be like flying in a farmer's back garden ! Flying over his acres and acres of empty fields, (miles away from his farmhouse) is (in my book at least) a much lesser misdemeanour, and in some cases well worth the risk, and maybe even moderately defensible later. In my experience, you don't get into too much trouble doing this - in the very rare cases where the farmer spots you they will either come and find you, and be nice, and interested, or they may ask you to move on, which you can always do as pleasantly as possible. It is often easier to apologise than it is to ask in advance. But when evaluating the risk, we do have to remember they have guns ! Just occasionally they won't try and find you, but will open fire instead, which sends a fairly clear message that you should probably move on sooner rather than later - on the plus side, most of them miss initially, giving you time to get safely down !!

Of course if there is any farmland local to you that you would like to fly a lot, then it makes sense to look up the farmer online and to contact him and try and gain his permission. I've got a guy near me who lets me fly in any of his fields that don't have livestock in them for £50 a year, which was just a figure I plucked out of the ether and he agreed to !

 

[Congoblue]

Although you are right about National Trust "banning" drones on their property, for the large areas of landscape they own you are highly unlikely to encounter any opposition as long as you launch somewhere away from people (which you should be doing anyway). Their ban is not legally enforceable but personally I would rather avoid arguments.

If you try to fly over their stately homes, as with English Heritage, you are more likely to encounter problems.

If you keep to the drone code (50m away from people, 150m away from "built up areas" or large crowds) and use common sense you should not have any problems flying in the UK. If you choose times when nobody is around anyway (early morning is good) then you will be fine, you shouldn't need to drive to Snowdonia to fly.

 

[AeroJ]

Although you are right about National Trust "banning" drones on their property, for the large areas of landscape they own you are highly unlikely to encounter any opposition as long as you launch somewhere away from people (which you should be doing anyway). Their ban is not legally enforceable but personally I would rather avoid arguments.

Yes, I should have mentioned that. I too fly the odd NT site where it is large heaths or common ground, and like you haven't met any opposition yet... EH on the other hand - they got very cross with me when I made a Porchester castle video, even though the building was closed and empty at the time, and there were no more than a few dog walkers around...

 

[Congoblue]

I visit the Lake District quite a lot and NT own large areas of that, but most of it is uninhabited mountains and no problem flying there. Just the low flying RAF to watch out for.

What grounds did EH have for hassling you? Did you take off from their property - I think they could legitimately complain about that. They can't stop you overflying though.

 

[AeroJ]

What grounds did EH have for hassling you? Did you take off from their property - I think they could legitimately complain about that. They can't stop you overflying though.

I did take off from their property in that case, but strangely they didn't even mention that ! They thought their castle wasn't a building under my control, and I thought it was (and still do think it was !). I had checked there was nobody in it, done a full site survey to establish that and tried to find the site manager to ask, who wasn't there. If it's moving, or there are people in, no, I am not in control of that, but if it's empty and stationary, then I consider that I am, so felt able to (and did) get closer than 50 m to the structure. I was keen to point out that I didn't crash into it.

They also called it as an illegal flight based on my proximity to a nearby 'built-up' area, which I subsequently proved I was a legal distance away from. I also argued that at the time there was no definition of what constituted 'built-up', so I contested that too - it was only a few houses. They also wanted to bring to my attention the huge penalties and cost liabilities involved if I had crashed into their protected building. I argued that if it could survive 17 centuries of British weather I didn't appreciate what damage my little 2 lb plastic UAV could do, and they eventually let it go on the condition that I promised them i would never overfly their sites again. I haven't done so since, but to this day it continues to annoy me that I can't !

 

[old man mavic]

I've had my Mavic Pro for a mere 4 days now.
I have read read read and watched so much information on how to fly and how not to fly... my head hurts...I haven't gone airborne yet either!
After reading threads on here in relation to the UK law I'm even more confused about where I can fly.
Come November 2019 another law comes into affect and yeah I can't wait for more confusing information or details about where I can or can't fly my drone.
I live in the city and green space are basically parks n gardens which obviously there will be folk around so I guess they're no go areas.
I'm thinking of driving into the countryside of North Wales Snowdonia to get airborne.
Do I have to drive to such places to fly my drone in peace and not having to look over my shoulder for plod or people wanting to shout laws and rules about flying.?
Being an amateur photographer I purchased the drone to shoot stills and videos of mountainous views,loughs and lakes etc so if possible could any of you guys know of an easy insurance company I can approach too.

before you go to to snowdonia look up there website it gives all the info you need to fly in that area its in welch but you can select another language good luck with your flying

 

[dannybgoode]

Although you are right about National Trust "banning" drones on their property, for the large areas of landscape they own you are highly unlikely to encounter any opposition as long as you launch somewhere away from people (which you should be doing anyway). Their ban is not legally enforceable but personally I would rather avoid arguments.

If you try to fly over their stately homes, as with English Heritage, you are more likely to encounter problems.

If you keep to the drone code (50m away from people, 150m away from "built up areas" or large crowds) and use common sense you should not have any problems flying in the UK. If you choose times when nobody is around anyway (early morning is good) then you will be fine, you shouldn't need to drive to Snowdonia to fly.

The NT ban is entirely enforceable but only via a costly civil court action and / or an injunction.

The drone code and more broadly the Civil Aviation Act only pertain to what is criminal behaviour and does not trump civil law in any way.

This is no different to the RTA which doesn’t state anywhere that you can’t drive over private land but the civil torts of trespass and nuisance do apply. It is really important to understand how civil and criminal law interact otherwise you could end up in a messy argument by looking to argue an irrelevant point of law.

Similarly it is why the police cannot more travellers on from private land without an injunction as they are not committing a criminal offence.

The NT’s ban carries exactly the same legal weight as someone stocking up a ‘Private Land - No Entry’ sign round the border of their land. A landowner is absolutely allowed to prohibit access (unless a recognised right of way) to the land and that includes the air above it up to some slightly indeterminate height but as @AeroJ says, at least 500’.

It also has exactly the same inherent difficulties of enforcement. It is not a criminal offence the the police can’t arrest you. The NT does have form in taking civil action though which proves expensive for both parties.

Note I do fly over NT land just as I the the Peak District (which also prohibit drones). If asked to move on I nod, smile and pack up. This way you are very unlikely to have an unwanted legal letter through your door.

Note I have a degree equivalent qualification on civil law and have also researched this with the help of lawyer friends, the police and the Peak National Park.

 

[Congoblue]

A landowner is absolutely allowed to prohibit access (unless a recognised right of way) to the land and that includes the air above it up to some slightly indeterminate height but as @AeroJ says, at least 500’.

Interesting. Didn't know that applied to airspace.

 

[dannybgoode]

Interesting. Didn't know that applied to airspace.

Yep - I’ll dig the relevant bit of the Civil Aviation Act when I’m not meant to be working .

It’s horribly phrased in such a way that it’d only be settled by a costly legal battle but essentially a landowner, under the CAA, has the right to reasonably enjoy their land free of aircraft under a slightly indeterminate height.

Of course the legal argument would be over whether by flying over open countryside you were causing a nuisance and depriving the NT of their right to enjoy the land.

The big problem with testing it in court is that it would be highly likely you’d run out of money before they did.

Hence why it’s always best to nod, smile and move on

 

[BossBob]

Never leave the cave without a disguise?
Never go to places where people are?
or are you just saying you are as documented as the rest of us, but you just KNOW about it?

Yes, I just know about it, just trying to say that a drone at 50m with a wide angle camera accompanied by the sound of a swarm of bees has way less impact on privacy than anything mentioned above. All of that is done stealthily. As for going to less populated areas, I’ll go whenever possible. The comment on article 8 and mass surveillance is blatantly ignored by the likes of Facebook and Twitter, local authorities, law, and retail outlets will always claim its done in the name of security or crime prevention. If you want invasion of privacy, have a look above a supermarkets self checkouts. Often a camera, right above and slightly behind you as you enter your pin code for credit cards. How can that be right?