R.I.D. Spoofing and is it legal?

[Cafguy]

I am in no way condoning the use of these spoofers and yes there are laws that make any interference with a Gov service Illegal but so far the community has been testing these devices out ( in no way maliciously) and not one Govt. Entity has expressed concern or even interest in there development ( There are many videos and websites out there where you can legally acquire the coding and setup advice. This would not be true of any other device that "causes Havoc" to the Air traffic system or any device that could actually "fool" Law enforcement. I see no really good reason for the device as much as I see no good reason to offer a pilot finder to any unhinged person out there. If law enforcement wants to find me. Welcome ! I'm easy to find I will even wave BUT for Billy and his shotgun looking to exact retribution for the crime of flying a drone, I would prefer that it be a little harder for him to confront me!!

 

[Skydreamer]

I am in no way condoning the use of these spoofers and yes there are laws that make any interference with a Gov service Illegal but so far the community has been testing these devices out ( in no way maliciously) and not one Govt. Entity has expressed concern or even interest in there development ( There are many videos and websites out there where you can legally acquire the coding and setup advice. This would not be true of any other device that "causes Havoc" to the Air traffic system or any device that could actually "fool" Law enforcement. I see no really good reason for the device as much as I see no good reason to offer a pilot finder to any unhinged person out there. If law enforcement wants to find me. Welcome ! I'm easy to find I will even wave BUT for Billy and his shotgun looking to exact retribution for the crime of flying a drone, I would prefer that it be a little harder for him to confront me!!

yup,i am very concerned about Billy,in what kind a mood is he today,did he take his pills etc.

 

[Torque]

I had to laugh at the proliferation of fear mongering click bait YT videos regarding the "dangers" of RID over the past 10 days or so.
Back in 2013 I was approached when flying my Phantom 1 in rural Washington state. Drones were brand new, I was flying in Meth country, probably not a wise spot to try out brand new technology. Guy was stern, curious, and not friendly, but never was he threatening. Shortly after he left, gunshots were heard - no idea if they were related to my drone or originated from him, but I realized I was probably not in the smartest of spots to fly, and left. I've been flying a variety of drones since then, most often in public where I am not hidden. Only been approached by curious people since that experience in 2013.
Until this spring when I hovered near a house in the neighborhood on my Mavic 3's maiden flight - paused just long enough to try out the 28x zoom to see how clear Mt. Rainier would be at that magnification. Neighbor thought I was watching him and followed my drone home to threaten me. LOL, I didn't dare tell him I could zoom in on his nose wart if I wanted... But in retrospect, I understand how he thought my pause in front of his house at 250' AGL COULD be to spy on him.
So in a decade of flying drones, 2 negative experiences from the public, both times were somewhat understandable.
I think RID is the Y2K of our hobby, not much more.

 

[lookout]

I had to laugh at the proliferation of fear mongering click bait YT videos regarding the "dangers" of RID over the past 10 days or so.
Back in 2013 I was approached when flying my Phantom 1 in rural Washington state. Drones were brand new, I was flying in Meth country, probably not a wise spot to try out brand new technology. Guy was stern, curious, and not friendly, but never was he threatening. Shortly after he left, gunshots were heard - no idea if they were related to my drone or originated from him, but I realized I was probably not in the smartest of spots to fly, and left. I've been flying a variety of drones since then, most often in public where I am not hidden. Only been approached by curious people since that experience in 2013.
Until this spring when I hovered near a house in the neighborhood on my Mavic 3's maiden flight - paused just long enough to try out the 28x zoom to see how clear Mt. Rainier would be at that magnification. Neighbor thought I was watching him and followed my drone home to threaten me. LOL, I didn't dare tell him I could zoom in on his nose wart if I wanted... But in retrospect, I understand how he thought my pause in front of his house at 250' AGL COULD be to spy on him.
So in a decade of flying drones, 2 negative experiences from the public, both times were somewhat understandable.
I think RID is the Y2K of our hobby, not much more.

I'm going to guess it was

 

[BigAl07]

I can't imagine some "current" laws etc that would address this. It's creating FAKE DATA to thwart the entire reason for RID to begin with. I am confident that LE (local and federal) would be more than happy to address it IF it were to come to light.

 

[lookout]

I can't imagine some "current" laws etc that would address this. It's creating FAKE DATA to thwart the entire reason for RID to begin with. I am confident that LE (local and federal) would be more than happy to address it IF it were to come to light.

LEOs wanted this RID thing to begin with. But it seems FAA is completely comfortable with being collusive with LEOs. Yeah let's get them bad boys out of the air and replace them with the big bad boys.

 

[brett8883]

I can't imagine some "current" laws etc that would address this. It's creating FAKE DATA to thwart the entire reason for RID to begin with. I am confident that LE (local and federal) would be more than happy to address it IF it were to come to light.

I think at this point we need to define if we are talking about using this to throw off Karen down the street as mentioned by the OP or using this to in the furtherance of an actual crime.

I have no doubt LE could use existing laws on someone doing this to cover up a crime (not just breaking FAA rules) or using it to cause a significant safety hazard amounting to reckless endangerment, but if the question is if these apps are illegal in and of themselves that’s dubious at best. I would go so far as to say that it’s an open question if LE can even use RID unless there’s a warrant or clear and present danger. Neither LE nor FAA are anxious to have that tested in court I can assure you.

 

[mavic3usa]

I think at this point we need to define if we are talking about using this to throw off Karen down the street as mentioned by the OP or using this to in the furtherance of an actual crime.

I have no doubt LE could use existing laws on someone doing this to cover up a crime (not just breaking FAA rules) or using it to cause a significant safety hazard amounting to reckless endangerment, but if the question is if these apps are illegal in and of themselves that’s dubious at best. I would go so far as to say that it’s an open question if LE can even use RID unless there’s a warrant or clear and present danger. Neither LE nor FAA are anxious to have that tested in court I can assure you.

Don't forget, RID is supposed to act like a car's license plate. LEO is not going to need a warrant to read the RID signals given off by your drone just as they don't need a warrant to read your license plate when you are driving down the street. This won't be a Fourth Amendment violation when you balance the need with public safety. Open skies reminds me of open fields and drone pilots don't have the right to keep your current drone flight hidden from the prying eyes of government. Reading your details isn't the big of an intrusion.

I would love to see LEO need at least reasonable suspicion to open the app and detect the drones that are in the area but sadly they won't even need that and that's a pretty low standard. However, what I think will be tested is being able to review the history, capture and store the history, and/or use the data to in some sort of advanced law enforcement capacity with regards to tracking and he collection of data. Regardless, when it comes to drone, it won't be difficult to get a warranty anyway.

 

[lookout]

I think the problem here is we are being bamboozled.

The faa selling out part of the airspace they don't own, but rather regulate is a serious problem because that is the public domain they are trying to sell out from under us, in furtherance of a business. The RID becomes a ankle bracelet in order to operate in this new highway robbery airspace we will be operating in soon. Enforcement will come about by the officers of a municipal corporation who have stolen this free use of airspace using police state tactics. It's like difference between a government owned and a privately owned prison that if and when they pass that one bill making drone offenses criminal instead of just faa infractions.

 

[brett8883]

Don't forget, RID is supposed to act like a car's license plate. LEO is not going to need a warrant to read the RID signals given off by your drone just as they don't need a warrant to read your license plate when you are driving down the street. This won't be a Fourth Amendment violation when you balance the need with public safety. Open skies reminds me of open fields and drone pilots don't have the right to keep your current drone flight hidden from the prying eyes of government. Reading your details isn't the big of an intrusion.

I would love to see LEO need at least reasonable suspicion to open the app and detect the drones that are in the area but sadly they won't even need that and that's a pretty low standard. However, what I think will be tested is being able to review the history, capture and store the history, and/or use the data to in some sort of advanced law enforcement capacity with regards to tracking and he collection of data. Regardless, when it comes to drone, it won't be difficult to get a warranty anyway.

First of all, until this is argued in court and we get a ruling from a judge we won’t really know so this is all conjecture but to exempt LE from the needing a warrant (probable cause) the evidence of a crime must be in plain view.

I think there is an interesting legal argument that the act of opening up an app to check remote ID violates Plain View doctrine. The classic example of Plain View doctrine is in Arizona v. Hicks where LE suspected a CD player of being stolen, however, to find out if it was stolen they had to pick it up and turn it over to check the serial number. The court ruled that since officers had to pick up the CD player to get the serial number the evidence was not in plain view and the search was deemed illegal.

 

[mavic3usa]

First of all, until this is argued in court and we get a ruling from a judge we won’t really know so this is all conjecture but to exempt LE from the needing a warrant (probable cause) the evidence of a crime must be in plain view.

I think there is an interesting legal argument that the act of opening up an app to check remote ID violates Plain View doctrine. The classic example of Plain View doctrine is in Arizona v. Hicks where LE suspected a CD player of being stolen, however, to find out if it was stolen they had to pick it up and turn it over to check the serial number. The court ruled that since officers had to pick up the CD player to get the serial number the evidence was not in plain view and the search was deemed illegal.

"Open skies reminds me of open fields and drone pilots don't have the right to keep your current drone flight hidden from the prying eyes of government."

The drone pilot is broadcasting his details all over the navigable airspace, there isn't even an expectation of privacy involved here.

Open Fields Doctrine

www.law.cornell.edu

 

[brett8883]

The drone pilot is broadcasting his details all over the navigable airspace, there isn't even an expectation of privacy involved here.

Open Fields Doctrine

www.law.cornell.edu

This is still a high level open question especially if this applies to RID. Generally this doctrine is has to do with visual identification. In Race Day Quads vs FAA we see an epic show down between the DC Court of Appeals Justices and an FAA lawyer arguing exactly this point. Ultimately that wasn’t the question brought to the court (the question was if the remote ID rules itself was unconstitutional not how it is used) and the petition was denied but arguments from the Justices show that LE isn’t going to get a free lunch in regard to RID. If it was someone defending against an enforcement action this may not have gone the FAA’s way.

Forgive the talking heads in this video (couldn’t find the video without them) so please skip to 39 minutes if you’d like to hear the oral arguments on this issue.

Race Day Quads vs the FAA Remote ID live from court

Cutting it fine internet just back here, good luck Jonathan

www.youtube.com

 

[mavic3usa]

This is still a high level open question especially if this applies to RID. Generally this doctrine is has to do with visual identification. In Race Day Quads vs FAA we see an epic show down between the DC Court of Appeals Justices and an FAA lawyer arguing exactly this point. Ultimately that wasn’t the question brought to the court (the question was if the remote ID rules itself was unconstitutional not how it is used) and the petition was denied but arguments from the Justices show that LE isn’t going to get a free lunch in regard to RID. If it was someone defending against an enforcement action this may not have gone the FAA’s way.

I get your point and I'll watch the video when I get time this weekend.

 

[brett8883]

I get your point and I'll watch the video when I get time this weekend.

Sounds good. And to be clear I’m not saying you are wrong, or even likely to be wrong.

 

[Melvoid]

I was approached once and I wasn't even flying a drone. I had what looked like a controller in hand and they let me know that what I was doing was very illegal.

Now I'm curious about what you had that looked like a controller and what you were actually doing...

 

[DAFlys]

In My FPV Hobby we have come up with a solution for those cell phone drone finder apps. It is simply a board programmed in Arduino to mimic a bunch of drones flying all around you-- so Karen can't see the pilots exact location. NOW I know mimicking some data is illegal but what about RID a lot of us are thinking of making one of these boards.
Keep in mind your rid number is still visible but so are a bunch of others

Is there a link to the project. I’m interested in building one.

 

[jmaganaski]

Our hobby is sort of a problem with some people and I have been confronted before. These RID Finder Apps make finding the drone pilot much easier for those people who should be contacting the police, rather than finding and explaining their definitions of the law ( sometimes Very angrily) To the operator.
I have noticed that once my DJI Mavic goes in its case and my tiny Cinewhoop FPV drones come out the problem intensifies. Now it doesn't happen to me often but with some of my buddies its an almost constant bother.

It’s not just a hobby. It’s a livelihood.

 

[lookout]

 

[lookout]

 

[RussOnTheRoad]

I for one will be selling my Mavic 2 Zoom and not be flying a drone with RID. Right or wrong, it is my personal belief that there is too much ignorance and animosity in the American population in general, too many guns and people to ready to use them. All it takes is one to ruin your whole day, cripple you forever, or end your life and ruin the lives of your loved ones. To me, personally, it's simply not worth the risk. Humans are capable of ruining pretty much anything and everything...take earth, for example.