DJI Mavic, Air and Mini Drones
Friendly, Helpful & Knowledgeable Community
Join Us Now

Take pictures and footage, Commercial Permission required?

If I was to say take my old pictures and make prints or whaterever and market them in anyway that I have taken
over the years is what I was referring to. ...
And from what I gather I could and would be legal.
The problem is that many assume that the FAA/CAA etc have rules on photos and what you can do with them, but they don't.
In the extremely unlikely event of the FAA becoming involved in something like this, they would not be asking: Did you sell a photo?
Their questions would be along the lines of: Did you engage in flying for a client?
 
The problem is that many assume that the FAA/CAA etc have rules on photos and what you can do with them, but they don't.
In the extremely unlikely event of the FAA becoming involved in something like this, they would not be asking: Did you sell a photo?
Their questions would be along the lines of: Did you engage in flying for a client?
Got that part and is something myself don’t do. I fly for myself. And maybe latter do something with what I have taken.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GadgetGuy
It really isn't grey at all. It's black and white. In the U.S., anything shot while flying recreationally can later be sold without limitation for any amount of money. As long as the intent of the flight at launch was recreational, whatever video and photos that came from the flight can freely be sold later. Create your website and sell away, without a second thought. Even @BigAl07 fully agrees with me on this one, from his prior posts on this very subject.
IANNAL, and while I am fairly sure @BigAl07 is correct on this, I also have to say that I agree with @dirkclod that unless and until the FAA or a court rules on this, it’s a grey area. Personally, I’m perfectly comfortable with the fact that several images I took before I got my Part 107 certificate are on commercial sites, because they asked me for permission to use them after the fact and I had no expectation that they’d ever be used commercially (I was also not paid for them, but that’s not relevant). But if I were advising a client, I’d have to warn them the FAA might argue otherwise. But I’d also tell them that would be pretty unlikely (but they might!).
 
Just wondering, if anyone can lead me in the right direction. With the footage from my drone, if I wanted to put them onto a site like shutterstock to sell? How much would I have to make for it to be classed as commercial? Even if it's a once off or every year I put something up? I recently heard this from a youtuber who works with drones, that it doesn't get classed as commercial or require permission from the CAA or have a NQE unless I make a substantial amount of money from it..and I don't really know if it's still true or not?
I've been on the CAA website relating to drones, but there is no information on this... well no clear information on this...
I'm just a hobbyist, very new to flying, long background in the aviation industry until I got fed up with the **** politics.
I can't be *** to make a business out of it as I have several companies I already own.
So what I'm saying is, I'm not looking to flood sites like shutterstock with pictures every other day to see if I can make money, but if one of my pictures did start making some money, how much would I have to make before I hit the threshold? It would be pointless of me to do my NQE and pay for permission if I'm not going to use my drone for commercial business use. My line of work doesn't require me to use my drone, in fact, it would most likely be shot down if I did use it.. lol

Alamy.com is a better company to work with than Shutterstock.
 
As someone who's been there and done it, I think the suggestions that someone needs commercial drone licence just to submit images to a stock agency are beyond ridiculous.

Agree 100%, but the alternative would be to expect laws to keep pace with technology, which isn't something that they have a very good track record at - laws are generally reactive at the best of times, so when the goalposts are continually moving they have no chance. I'm hopeful that the EU's upcoming legislation will at least close the gap for a while but, even so, I fully expect them to be woefully inadequate once people start coming up with even more creative things to do with UAVs than the delivery services and similar being discussed at present.

That said, it *is* still possible to make a reasonable sum from stock and similar online portfolios - but it takes a *lot* more effort (e.g. marketing) than it used to. You need to treat it more as an online portfolio and refer as many clients - or potential clients - as possible towards it, not so much using it for direct sales, but as a foot in the door to get photographic commissions and other work (leading workshops, producing articles/books, etc.). Those are uniquivocably commercial from the outset though, and in most legal jurisdictions there's no way you can legally take that approach with a drone without a commercial license of some kind.
 
Thanks guys for all the info on this and sorry to the OP as I kinda took this off course but this has got me understanding
where I was confused on this.
Which that really isn’t that hard to do.
BigA has tryed to explain this to me before I was just to dense to understand.
 
The FAA are not photo police.
They have no rules about photography and no interest in whatever what you might do with any photos after you take them.
Agreed. But never underestimate their determination to overreach. That was my only point.
 
Agreed. But never underestimate their determination to overreach. That was my only point.
Determination to overreach?
I don't think we are talking about the same FAA.
I've still not heard of them prosecuting anyone for engaging in commercial drone photography without a Part 107 certification, despite there being no shortage of people doing it.
 
Ok, A lot more responses than I expected, but I really appreciate everyone putting in an input into this because I do find this interesting and would like to know more about it.

First things first, I'm in the UK, therefore CAA rules. But it is very interesting to hear about the FAA side of it as well. I've been watching a lot of Ken Heron videos on youtube and that's very interesting as well as the FAA and CAA try to be similar, but there are many differences in policies and complete horse #### policies. (I should know, I use to write them)

I do like what @zocalo said, and I agree, I was going to wait until the drone registration from the CAA comes into play and then see what happens afterwards into next year? I did not know about the EA new policy which might come in, I may have heard something similar about it, but unsure as it was thrown out in a particular case and I've just had the SSC UAV Team contact me telling me, and I quote

"I am not entirely sure what shutterstock is? We do allow people to put footage online however if any money is exchanged this would be classed as a commercial operation and you would need to apply for a PFCO"

I haven't responded to them because it was a short and stupid and no margin for compromise between Commercial and Hobbyist.. There is nothing in between?? You either spend hundreds or thousands of pounds and hope to get some work, depending if you have the right drone and equipment, or you just fly with limits?.. I do want to ask if they would have a separate category in the future, but personally it feels to me they are trying to put off a lot of people from buying a drone, or thinking about getting into the industry in the first place??. The way I'm reading into it, It looks like it's only for elitist and large corporations, a private club where if you can afford to splash out on equipment you're in.. Anyway Rant over lol

I did wonder about the monitoring of aerial photography as well Dirkclod.. How would they monitor you? The FAA and the CAA are not going to police you, even the police in this country won't even bother.. Just some sad sap in the office trolling through the internet and email you a warning?...

Also I do understand that just selling single or a couple of photos on the web isn't going to make me any money unless I include it with other things like other photographic, editing business, but to be honest, the more I look into it, the more I see how little it is used and a complete waste of money unless I am into the a range of skills where I can utilise the footage and be into the business plan 100%. Again, pointless using it in my business because someone will shoot down my drone.. (one of my customers would see it as a potential target lol, not kidding) But there is that fine line where if you have the intent to gain prior to flight, but what happens if I takes lots of pictures and later down the line I decide to sell them because someone months later says, hey I like your photo, can I use it? (loophole - if you are already considering the possibility of putting the images online for gain *prior* to the flight - which the OP clearly is - then legally you require a PfCO. ) How would they monitor this?

Doing something little on the side is absolutely pointless, with taking the NQE course (which isn't even a license compared to the FAA 107) then paying the CAA £280 a year for permission, and then insurance, maintenance, additional equipment, it is much like running a car... except the Remote Pilot "permission" is even more as you will need to drive to your location, so you're spending more overall. @Mavaic, our UK version isn't even a license, it's a permission slip!... If it was an actual license, I would look at getting it, but it's not..

Just so you know, I'm not going to post and try to sell pictures, just like I won't fly my drone in restrict areas, fly in places I shouldn't. I've worked in the Aviation Industry long enough that I won't cross that line until I'm sure I'm allowed to do it.

Overall, everything everyone has said has been helpful and interesting to read. I really do think flight workshops should be introduced, getting people to understand by doing. While they are flying you can tell them straight away the do's and don'ts, people listen more and take it in more when they are shown how to do it, rather than, hey read this massive text book and understand it!?....
The NQE in the UK sounds like I'm doing my PPL (Private Pilot License) all over again... Except I have to fly myself and without any assistance, then have to demonstrate my ability to an assessor (in all honesty, I haven't looked too much into the flight part of the NQE)

Anyway, there was a lot I haven't covered in the other messages I skimmed over, I will look at it in the morning. Please excuse my writing being all over the place, it's 1:18am in the morning and I'm trying to answer everyone's messages at the same time :D
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: dirkclod
The FAA are not photo police.
They have no rules about photography and no interest in whatever what you might do with any photos after you take them.

Actually, they do care and watch:

References:



and: FAA Fine Against Drone Photographer Dismissed

and others...
 
Actually, they do care and watch:
An incident from 2011 ?
And not a typical one as was discussed in this thread.
This was before there was a Part 107 or even the ridiculous 333 that came before it.
Back then their rules prohibited commercial use of any UAS.
and others...
Like ..?
The FAA is not checking every photo used to find drone imagery and then checking further to find out whether the photographer was licensed and whatever other information might be relevant.
They have many better things to do and not enough resources.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GadgetGuy
An incident from 2011 ?
And not a typical one as was discussed in this thread.


Like ..?
The FAA is not checking every photo used to find drone imagery and then checking further to find out whether the photographer was licensed and whatever other information might be relevant.
They have many better things to do and not enough resources.

i quoted two...2011 and 2016
 
i quoted two...2011 and 2016
And the second one was another odd one from way back in the past and again not a case where they found photos and tracked down the photographer.
It just doesn't happen.
 
Actually, they do care and watch:

References:



and: FAA Fine Against Drone Photographer Dismissed

and others...
I'm unsure about the FAA rules, but the news was back in 2016. In the UK, the rules have change substantially, especially since the bloody Gatwick incident, although hundreds of people apparently saw it, as well as thought the police helicopter was a drone.. but no one actually saw where it went.......? mmmmmm
 
And the second one was another odd one from way back in the past and again not a case where they found photos and tracked down the photographer.
It just doesn't happen.

OK, well those aren’t from “way back”, I go way back! ;)
 
That article @AMann about the lion and drone use. Why did the guy get the fine in the first place if he received no money for it?
Did they see the demonstration as a money making scheme that he made money from?
 
  • Like
Reactions: AMann
That article @AMann about the lion and drone use. Why did the guy get the fine in the first place if he received no money for it?
Did they see the demonstration as a money making scheme that he made money from?
More details: Minnesota Man Faces $55K in Fines After Flying Drone
He appealed, and the 5 separate violations alleged at $11,000 each were undoubtedly dismissed, although I can't find anything about what happened after his letter of appeal.
It doesn't appear that any of the alleged violations had anything to do with how the photo taken was used after the event. They all appear to be related to alleged violations during the flight itself, including distance from the nearest airport, flying over people, and proximity to a news helicopter also recording the event, all of which were disputed by the drone pilot.
 
Last edited:
Lycus Tech Mavic Air 3 Case

DJI Drone Deals

New Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
130,989
Messages
1,558,680
Members
159,981
Latest member
bbj5143