That's my understanding as well. If it's used for commercial purposes, even if given away, then it's commercial and you have to have a 107.
Recreational flyer.Can I give a commercial entity a photo to use?
- Thread starter offtheback
- Start date
Yes - the corollary of my comment on pro bono work (non-recreational) is that if the intent of the flight was recreational, at the time of the flight, then subsequent use of the photos, even in furtherance of a business, is allowed. As mentioned by others - it's even legal to be compensated in that situation.
No - you are wrong about that - the criterion is purely the original intent of the flight. The FAA has clarified this multiple times and yet this kind of misinformation still gets asserted every time the subject comes up.
Yes - but it's the intent of the flight that has to be "in furtherance of a business" for that to apply.
This was one of the original clarifications by the FAA on the subject. It's been referenced many times. For those who still cannot be bothered to follow the link and read the memo - here is the relevant section:
"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 (sic) 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. No FAA authorization for that operation would be required.
However, if the individual is conducting the operation with the primary intention of obtaining pictures, videos, or other information to sell, then the operation is commercial in nature and not part of a hobby or recreational activity. As noted above, such operations currently would require an authorization from the FAA. Evidence that may indicate an individual's true intentions in conducting an operation may include the frequency with which pictures, videos, or other information collected using an unmanned aircraft is later resold. Operations that frequently result in pictures, videos, or other information that is sold to a third party may indicate that the operation is in fact commercial in nature notwithstanding the individual's claim of a hobby or recreational purpose. The FAA would have to consider each case on its own merits."
Last edited:
This letter sparked an "AH-HA" moment for this new flier. The FAA regulates flight, I understand, and tries to determine if the flight was done under the rules. OP was flying for recreation, not commercial, so the FAA is satisfied. They don't have authority to regulate subsequent commerce.
Thank you all for your responses.I feel it's ok to let her use the photos considering the intent when I flew and took them.The area is not grey to me any more but the rule is written in a way that allows lots of leeway when "intent"is the determining criterion.If I get arrested I assume you would all donate to my bail GOFUNDME page.
Thats really cool you are diligently looking i to this, If you snap a photo and give it to your friend you did not exchange the photo for ANY kind of consideration (money) and they turned around and sold it, you are only liable for the transaction you are party to, and that is handing over a free photo. From the way it sounds if it were the other way better, not enter one of these forums photo contest and get a gift for it or an instagram post or a youtube/insta that may give away endorsents tht would be legit illegal... eh but we all do it in some form or another. You gave it for free the buck stops there
Unfortunately the water was severely muddied when the FAA mistakenly allowed Part 107 to be incorrectly called "Commercial". Commercial Compensation is but one (of many) reasons an operator is not flying as a Hobbyist and not the ONLY reason.
It's a Remote Pilot In Command certificate to operate an sUAS as a Civil Operator. Civil is everything outside of Hobby/Recreational. All sUAS operators are Civil Operators unless they fly COMPLETELY within the bubble of protection offered by Part 101/336.
If you do ANYTHING that pierces your protective bubble you are back (by Default) operating under Part 107 regulations.
If the flight was indeed purely HOBBY and the picture was taken and later deemed to have value it can be given/sold with no repercussions from the FAA.
It's a Remote Pilot In Command certificate to operate an sUAS as a Civil Operator. Civil is everything outside of Hobby/Recreational. All sUAS operators are Civil Operators unless they fly COMPLETELY within the bubble of protection offered by Part 101/336.
If you do ANYTHING that pierces your protective bubble you are back (by Default) operating under Part 107 regulations.
If the flight was indeed purely HOBBY and the picture was taken and later deemed to have value it can be given/sold with no repercussions from the FAA.
Quite true, by definition!
But many hobby photos are shared just for the shear beauty of them with no intent of publishing them for money. Even some photos appearing on the forum! I am sure there are many non-107'ers that post a "Just bought my first drone and here's my video of . . .".
Now, I pose the question . . . "I freely gave a photo of an autumn forest to a friend, my friend ended up selling it at her garage sell for $1, is it now Part 107 or not? I suppose it to be NOT because, though the scene was captured on film and given freely without any thought of "in furtherance of . . ." even though the friend gained $1. The intent was personal as a gift of $0, and not seeking any monetary reward. Recreational?!?
Am I on the wrong track? Whether or not I am Part 107, can I never give any photo/video away freely. I believe this really could be touchy situation where the FAA would not really give a rat's patootie. The 107'er was not seeking any monetary gain and place a zero value on the single photo, although his/her friend received a value of $1 in exchange for the photo.
At what point does it go from RECREATIONAL to PART 107?
Seeking thoughts.
FTR - I have ZERO problems of people posting drone photos/videos on the forum/internet and seeking input as to improvements of their photographic skills. I am just looking for opinions only!
brett8883
Well-Known Member
I would recommend reading the posts in this thread because this has now been answered many times including by a moderator of this forum. We are now going in circles
Inspirephil
Inspirephil
Thank you for being so concise and clear about it. Much appreciated
Please at least read post #22. Photos are neither Part 101 nor Part 107, and therefore do not change. It's the flight that is one or the other, and that can't change after the event. And it is the flight that is regulated by the FAA, not the use of the photo. The photo is only relevant if it determines the status of the flight - in other words if you conducted the flight with the intention of taking photos for non-recreational use then the flight, itself, was not recreational.
After reading this complete thread the answer is obvious. It is only about intent of the flight.
The FAA can question your intent if you have a pattern of skirting the rule for gain.
The FAA can question your intent if you have a pattern of skirting the rule for gain.
Just give her the photo this is getting way out of hand. Your not giving away top secret stuff.
I'm sure that the FAA will immediately back down in the face of such an irrefutable defense.
BD0G
Well-Known Member
Absolutely! If you just proclaim that one can sell photo's taken with thier drone for profit everyone knows that "Trumps" (< see what I did there) any rules or regulations that the Federal Aviation Authority has imposed.
I think that you have to utter Abracadabra as well.
Abracadabra - Several folk etymologies are associated with the word:[2] from phrases in Hebrew that mean "I will create as I speak"
I think that you have to utter Abracadabra as well.
Abracadabra - Several folk etymologies are associated with the word:[2] from phrases in Hebrew that mean "I will create as I speak"
I had an interesting thought and question about this topic. Does the digital image file contain any information that can trace it back to the exact drone that took the picture? Sorry if this is obvious to some but I have not looked at EXIF data yet on my drone pix.
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
video editing advice re D- Log M and Normal Mode - Mini Pro 4
- Started by lookupbrightnow
- Replies: 0
Forum statistics
