Recreational flyer.Can I give a commercial entity a photo to use?

[offtheback]

My niece creates websites.Can I give her,without compensation,a drone photo to use for one of her client's websites?

 

[brett8883]

My niece creates websites.Can I give her,without compensation,a drone photo to use for one of her client's websites?

Did you already take the picture?

 

[EyeFlightDrone]

Yes.

 

[brett8883]

If you already took the picture you can even get paid for it. It matters the intent of the flight at the time the picture was taken.

If you are doing a pro bono professional photo shoot and you know it’s gonna be used for a comercial purpose but you just aren’t getting paid for it I don’t know that is clear at this point. I think it’s hard to say you are a recreational pilot which is really what matters.

Anybody got any insight on the latter situation?

 

[sar104]

If you already took the picture you can even get paid for it. It matters the intent of the flight at the time the picture was taken.

If you are doing a pro bono professional photo shoot and you know it’s gonna be used for a comercial purpose but you just aren’t getting paid for it I don’t know that is clear at this point. I think it’s hard to say you are a recreational pilot which is really what matters.

Anybody got any insight on the latter situation?

There is no ambiguity at all regarding the latter situation. The criterion has never been whether or not you are getting paid. If you are taking photos or video for any other purpose than your own recreational enjoyment then the flight is, by definition, not recreational. The FAA has made that perfectly clear, repeatedly.

 

[offtheback]

Did you already take the picture?

Yes the picture was taken for hobby purposes.Can she use it commercially if she doesn't pay me?

 

[brett8883]

Yes, you could even get paid doesn’t matter in this case.

 

[offtheback]

There is no ambiguity at all regarding the latter situation. The criterion has never been whether or not you are getting paid. If you are taking photos or video for any other purpose than your own recreational enjoyment then the flight is, by definition, not recreational. The FAA has made that perfectly clear, repeatedly.

The flight was recreational with no intent to sell or profit from it or for any intent for her to use it when I took them..She saw some photos and asked if she could use them.There will be no compensation

 

[brett8883]

The flight was recreational with no intent to sell or profit from it or for any intent for her to use it when I took them..She saw some photos and asked if she could use them.There will be no compensation

This is my bad I hijacked your Thread for a related question before we knew if it applied to you which it does not.

You are good to do whatever you want with your picture. You can give it to her for free or sell it to her/her client.

 

[offtheback]

This is my bad I hijacked your Thread for a related question before we knew if it applied to you which it does not.

You are good to do whatever you want with your picture. You can give it to her for free or sell it to her/her client.

Thanks-no worries!

 

[BluePuffin]

You are good to do whatever you want with your picture. You can give it to her for free or sell it to her/her client.

I’m afraid this is not true, you absolutely NEED a Part 107 commercial license to sell or give her the photo in order for her to sell it. It doesn’t matter if the original intent was not for commercial purposes. You were still flying recreationally and therefore you cannot use the photo commercially.

 

[BD0G]

The phrase used is "In Furtherance of a Business" . This gift of the photo or photo's would be used in that manner so a Part 107 would need to be obtained.

 

[brett8883]

I’m afraid this is not true, you absolutely NEED a Part 107 commercial license to sell or give her the photo in order for her to sell it. It doesn’t matter if the original intent was not for commercial purposes. You were still flying recreationally and therefore you cannot use the photo commercially.

From the “knowB4uFLY” campaign website which is sponsored by the FAA-

Q: I flew my drone for fun but ended up taking a photograph that I was able to sell later. Is this acceptable?
A: Yes, as long as the original intent of the flight was for fun.

 

[hiflyer201]

are you saying that if I email a drone shot to someone and they use it for say an ad of some kind...I would be commiting a crime?
I do have a part 107 but I doubt it that would allow me the right to question the source of someone else's photo? and since I gave the shot away to a friend..who would complain.
I'm hesitating to send this, Blue, because I do see your point.

I’m afraid this is not true, you absolutely NEED a Part 107 commercial license to sell or give her the photo in order for her to sell it. It doesn’t matter if the original intent was not for commercial purposes. You were still flying recreationally and therefore you cannot use the photo commercially.

 

[brett8883]

The phrase used is "In Furtherance of a Business" . This gift of the photo or photo's would be used in that manner so a Part 107 would need to be obtained.

Your flight had to be conducted in a manner that was intended for recreational enjoyment. What you do with your property after the flight is outside the jurisdiction or Authority of the Federal Aviation Administration and they say that as well per my post above with links to reference

 

[BluePuffin]

From the “knowB4uFLY” campaign website which is sponsored by the FAA-

Q: I flew my drone for fun but ended up taking a photograph that I was able to sell later. Is this acceptable?
A: Yes, as long as the original intent of the flight was for fun.

I do not believe this is an official FAA website, so I would be careful with the information you find on it. I feel like this topic is in a very controversial grey area. Ultimately the original intent means nothing, and if you puposely use a photo commercially you are breaking the rules. @hiflyer201 Where the grey are comes into play is if you send someone a photo and they use it without your knowledge. While you may not be completely accountable, you should attempt to make right the situation by informing the person using the photo upon discovery. I feel like the recreational rules are in somewhat of a mess right now, as they were recently repealed and are subject to be replaced in the future. It is probably best that you don’t allow your niece to use your photos on her websites. It is fine to share them with her, as long as they are not being used commercially.

 

[brett8883]

I do not believe this is an official FAA website, so I would be careful with the information you find on it. I feel like this topic is in a very controversial grey area. Ultimately the original intent means nothing, and if you puposely use a photo commercially you are breaking the rules. @hiflyer201 Where the grey are comes into play is if you send someone a photo and they use it without your knowledge. While you may not be completely accountable, you should attempt to make right the situation by informing the person using the photo upon discovery. I feel like the recreational rules are in somewhat of a mess right now, as they were recently repealed and are subject to be replaced in the future. It is probably best that you don’t allow your niece to use your photos on her websites. It is fine to share them with her, as long as they are not being used commercially.

I referenced an official resource that couldn’t be clearer and in plain English which should put this issue to rest but it’s ultimalty the OP’s decision.

Since the resource has been called into question here is a Press release on the FAA’s website that not only explains the partnership and directly links to the website I provided above. where did you think I found it?

I put a lot of research into my answers to posts and I never claim something without a irrefutable source.

 

[BluePuffin]

I referenced an official resource that couldn’t be clearer and in plain English which should put this issue to rest but it’s ultimalty the OP’s decision.

Since the resource has been called into question here is a Press release on the FAA’s website that not only explains the partnership and directly links to the website I provided above. where did you think I found it?

I put a lot of research into my answers to posts and I never claim something without a irrefutable source.

Ultimately it is up to the OP, like you said. I personally feel better, having my Part 107 license, that I am not doing anything wrong or operating in a grey area. The recreational rules do seem in some what of a sorry state currently, so both of our arguments may be true. I never knew the website you listed above was endorsed by the FAA, so I guess I know better for next time.

 

[brett8883]

Ultimately it is up to the OP, like you said. I personally feel better, having my Part 107 license, that I am not doing anything wrong or operating in a grey area. The recreational rules do seem in some what of a sorry state currently, so both of our arguments may be true. I never knew the website you listed above was endorsed by the FAA, so I guess I know better for next time.

It’s all good. And yea, there’s nothing wrong with getting a 107 in fact I likely will get one once the new rules come out.

I think one of sorriest things of all this is that UAS laws and rules have been written by people that don’t have a clue and are Administrated by a department that has absolutely no experience dealing with the public and doesn’t have a hope or prayer of enforcing any of the rules it mandates.

I live in Utah and I guess maybe it’s just in our blood that if you are gonna have rules and laws they should make plain sense to the dumbest person around and you shouldn’t need to be a paralegal just to know what you can and can’t do.

And again I blame the FAA for this but the fact the rules are so messed up that someone needs to ask if it’s against the law to give their niece a photo they took and for there to be some disagreement over the answer that’s INSANE! This is America not Soviet Russia!

Ok sorry, I'm done thanks for listening lol

 

[msinger]

I do not believe this is an official FAA website, so I would be careful with the information you find on it. I feel like this topic is in a very controversial grey area.

I cannot find this information on the FAA's website either. However, this letter from one of the FAA's attorney's states the following:

"Whether an individual taking pictures or videos or gathering other information using a model aircraft under the section 336 carve-out could later sell those pictures, videos, or other information would depend on the person's original intentions in conducting the operation. If the individual's takes the pictures or videos or gathers other information as part of a hobby or recreational activity, then a later decision to sell some or all of those pictures, videos, or other information would not change the character of the operation as part of a hobby or recreational activity that falls within the section 336 carve-out for model aircraft."