Take pictures and footage, Commercial Permission required?

[The Rolling Drones]

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.

I think many people realize if they film while they are flying and not following the FAA rules they may be creating evidence that could be used against themselves. It would be the actions of the flight rather than the actual usage of the image/footage the FAA might be concerned with, your images just prove where you were and what you were doing. But as you mentioned there does not seem to be much enforcement in this arena right now.

 

[Maviac]

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.

I don't even think I'm disagreeing with you. Yes, I've seen the FAA overreach in enforcement actions outside the UAS field (in my experience as a private pilot, not personally, but in a friend's case) so I'm probably biased. I did have one disagreeable interaction with the FAA personally for a client, where a federal judge overruled them. But my comment was more to the point that federal agencies are generally given free reign (and I HAVE had experiences with other agencies where they have grossly overreached).

 

[HoozierDroneDaddy]

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.

However, based on his statements, he does have the intention to sell at a future time.
Another issue which was stated by the FAA a couple of years ago was if there is repetitive sales. Was it a one time sale from a previously recreational flight, or is it happening more than once. Repeated sales is an indicator to the FAA that he may be claiming recreational flight, but performing commercially. He cannot just go out and claim it is for recreational purposes, when he knows he will be putting media up for sale at a later date.
Just my opinion from past group discussions and feedback from the FAA.

 

[Dago Drones]

On page 1 is some novice willing to fly a drone without a 107 for a realtor for a drone. Everyone thinking such needs to know how illegal that Is. Fine to the realtor is $11,100 and fine to the unlicensed UAV Pilot is $1,100 - AND importantly the FAA is now monitoring the real estate websites.

 

[Meta4]

On page 1 is some novice willing to fly a drone without a 107 for a realtor for a drone. Everyone thinking such needs to know how illegal that Is. Fine to the realtor is $11,100 and fine to the unlicensed UAV Pilot is $1,100 - AND importantly the FAA is now monitoring the real estate websites.

Although it's a common rumour there is no $11000 fine for the realtor and the FAA is not monitoring the real estate websites.
How could they?

 

[dougiefresh27]

I thought it was black and white. Intent would be very hard to prove.
Any money made makes it commercial.
As for loop holes
Why wouldn't I just take pics and videos then give them for free to my wife and she can sell them
I gave them for free and she does not fly
So I still believe that if you make even 1 penny it is commercial regardless of original intent or flying status at the time.

 

[JAW]

In a Q&A following an FAA webinar a question was asked about a recreational pilot who took some photos one of which was sold. His intent was just to do some photos around a lake for his personal collection but subsequently sold one to a local resident. The FAA's reply was it was not a commercial transaction since the pilot's intent was just to take photos for his own use.

 

[Meta4]

I thought it was black and white. Intent would be very hard to prove.

Yes, intent is hard to prove.

Any money made makes it commercial.
... So I still believe that if you make even 1 penny it is commercial regardless of original intent or flying status at the time.

The relevant thing is what it means.
And in this situation, it is the flying, not the photography.
Selling a photo is a commercial exercise.
But the FAA/CAA don't have any rules about photos or selling them.
They have rules about flying and if they were concerned it would be are concerned about whether you were engaging in commercial flying.
If you had flown and photographed for yourself, entirely within the regulations last week and were lucky enough to make a sale next week, that doesn't make a past legal flight become illegal now.

As for loop holes
Why wouldn't I just take pics and videos then give them for free to my wife and she can sell them
I gave them for free and she does not fly

1. Because you'd look silly trying to run a business like that.
2. Because it's not as if getting a Part 107 is difficult or expensive anyway

These hypothetical discussions that come up almost every week are pointless.
It's not easy to find someone that will want to pay you real money for a drone photo.
If you do, take the money and enjoy it.
Finding someone to buy another photo will be even harder.

 

[Lastrexking]

This thread is frustrating. I get the majority of the members are probably US based, but OP is in the UK. Yet, there are almost three pages of arguing or discussing US laws.

How does that help OP, or any other UK based member with the same question? It happens time and time again on here.

 

[Meta4]

This thread is frustrating. I get the majority of the members are probably US based, but OP is in the UK. Yet, there are almost three pages of arguing or discussing US laws.

How does that help OP, or any other UK based member with the same question? It happens time and time again on here.

On this topic .. the US rules are quite similar to those in Britain.

 

[The Rolling Drones]

So, at the risk of being hypothetically pointless........but hypothetically if a part 107 pilot shoots a personal project today that would involve flying at night or over people with the intention of doing it strictly for his/her own enjoyment, then next year/month someone offers them money to use said footage, would that be cool with the FAA?
What if that fun personal project came out really nice and you decided to use it to promote your UAV business?

 

[Lastrexking]

On this topic .. the US rules are quite similar to those in Britain.

They May well be, and OP is obviously intelligent enough to know the difference. However, there are lots of laws that are different, and lots of people that won’t know the difference - for whom it would be confusing. We as a community need to be better at moderating ourselves and keeping topics and replies relevant.

 

[KobeFlight1981]

This thread is frustrating. I get the majority of the members are probably US based, but OP is in the UK. Yet, there are almost three pages of arguing or discussing US laws.

How does that help OP, or any other UK based member with the same question? It happens time and time again on here.

I understand the frustration. Trust me, I use to work in technical publications for civilian and military aviation.
It is surprisingly how similar the FAA and the CAA are. But there are obvious differences. At the same time both side of the pond and the rest of the world are trying to regulate everything to be the same. But places like e.g. Thailand, where apart from major cities and airports, you can fly a drone off and around the mountains and just look at your screen (well jealous).

But what makes me laugh.. People get pissed off with remote pilots flying and taking footage.. and I mean I've seen and read many cases of people getting a little annoyed and confront the pilot about being spied on.. but then people with the old mobile phones with cameras.. smart phones and tablets taking pictures of everything,..and no one bats an eye or complains about people taking photos in plain site. You know what I mean?

Overall. what everyone is saying in my post here. Very informative. Even if it is information from all over the world. It is actually handy that if I ever visit these places with my drone, I will have some idea how to proceed instead of getting into trouble over a picture..

So for those looking for a little more info about the CAA and licensing and stuff like that.. Check out CAA CAP1789, which in June 2020, could be a game changer for us Remote Pilots as it finally categorises the pilots into sections where one of the sections says we could fly, take footage and sell them WITHOUT getting a NQE or permission. OF COURSE THIS COULD HAPPEN OR IT COULD BE SCRAPPED!!!?? Make up your own mind. Personally for me, I am not getting my PFCO anyway. I don't intend to make a business out of it in anyway, but I am generally interested as I hear some much controversy about the matter it's worth the investigation. I wouldn't have found out about this if thingy a bob on the first page didn't mention about it. See below

 

[KobeFlight1981]

So, at the risk of being hypothetically pointless........but hypothetically if a part 107 pilot shoots a personal project today that would involve flying at night or over people with the intention of doing it strictly for his/her own enjoyment, then next year/month someone offers them money to use said footage, would that be cool with the FAA?
What if that fun personal project came out really nice and you decided to use it to promote your UAV business?

If a part 107 remote pilot were to go out and shoot for enjoyment. But then sell the footage months later.... would it matter to the FAA as he is already part 107 qualified?

 

[Meta4]

If a part 107 remote pilot were to go out and shoot for enjoyment. But then sell the footage months later.... would it matter to the FAA as he is already part 107 qualified?

It's a good thing that the FAA doesn't care about such contrived hypothetical scenarios anywhere near as seriously as they are discussed here.
The FAA's core business is air safety and they don't have enough resources to concentrate on that properly.

Backwards use of photos

If one gets their approved 107 license they then can charge a fee for their photos. But what about charging a fee for their photos taken prior to when they received their 107?

mavicpilots.com

 

[The Rolling Drones]

If a part 107 remote pilot were to go out and shoot for enjoyment. But then sell the footage months later.... would it matter to the FAA as he is already part 107 qualified?

I honestly don’t know what the FAA would find objectionable, but being part 107 qualified doesn’t let you fly over people or at night without a waiver. If you were just average Joe with a new drone it seems you can get away with flying over people and at night, or at least that seems to be the common consensus here.

 

[Johnmcl7]

I've been wondering about where a flight done for charity comes into it, I've always assumed that would be a commercial operation and license.

A commercial operation is defined as:
‘flight by a small unmanned aircraft except a flight for public transport, or any operation of any other aircraft except an operation for public transport;

• which is available to the public;
  or
• which, when not made available to the public,
  in the case of a flight by a small unmanned aircraft, is performed under a contract between the SUA operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the remote pilot
  or
  in any other case, is performed under a contract between an operator and a customer, where the latter has no control over the operator,

in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration.’

The key elements in understanding this term are ‘…any flight by a small unmanned aircraft…in return for remuneration or other valuable consideration’.

I've been asked a few times to produce footage from the drone to help out a charity or similar, I've always declined as I've interpreted the rules to mean that would be a commercial operation and I'm not not CAA licensed. I've looked into the latter but it's not worth it when only doing it as a favour to help out others. Is my understanding correct?

 

[KobeFlight1981]

So I asked the SSC UAS Team in the CAA (UK) about the PFCO and footage and taking payment etc etc etc.. But then I threw in a few more questions about other stuff to see their reaction. Quite standard response and has opened up some more questions about it. All my notes are in BOLD and Italic.
Anyway, my email starts off as...
Hi, SSC UAS team

Thanks for getting back to me.

I keep hearing from time to time that there are/were exceptions to this, hence why I’m asking because there is no definite answer that I could find at the time. (FYI, this is my original post on here before I contacted the CAA about it to find out more)

So in any case, any payment regardless of how little the payment (for example: £0.50p for a stack of photos of Port Talbot) will still require a PFco ? I was expecting some sort of margin with this, but it doesn’t seem like there is any?

I have additional questions

Will the PFco ever become a proper license like a PPL? If so, when is the timeline for this? Considering that the course seems to be run over the exact methodology of doing your PPL

When will there be a separate category in the future where hobbyist drone pilots can take general photos and sell them at their own leisure, instead of everything in one category (PFCO) where you have to do the full ground school course and basically come away with a industry commercial permission slip. (I asked this question because of the CAP 1789 CAA regulations that came out last June/July time 2019)

How will the CAA monitor people who sells footage but does not have a PFCO? (Just curious to see what systems they had in place already)

What are the laws flying around the coastline as well as beyond the shore line into international waters? ( I was thinking of flying coastal to get some amazing shots in)

When will the CAA implement the drone registration? And once registered, what does it do? Do we get bar codes, a serial number to apply onto the drone so we are recognised as registered?, will we get monitored via our dji app? What will we get once we register our drone? (I wanted to know what we do get as we provide them with all our information.. what do we get from it?)

Many thanks



This is their response to my random questions (testing the waters to what they would say)



Thank you for your email.

Commercial is commercial it does not matter how much you are selling the footage for.

We have no plans for the permission ever to become a license like the PPL. (why not?.. why isn't it a license? what is the reason?)

We are not sure if hobbyist drone pilots will be able to take general photos and sell them at their own leisure with out a PFCO. (Very determined for them to get me to get a PFCO.. no grey area here what so ever)

The CAA take emails from various members of the public regarding people using drones illegally and selling footage when they do not have the required PFCO. This can then become a police matter. (Really?.. ok how many has had police called on them for flying drones. Hobbyist and PFCO's.. I am very curious on the numbers and facts )

Please use the drone assist app which will enable you to see where and where not is permitted to fly your UAS on the coast. - Safety Apps - Dronesafe International waters is beyond are remit. (No s##t sherlock)

It will be law to have your drone registered by the end of this November. Please send your registration enquiries to [email protected] as it is a separate team that deals with these enquiries.

Kind Regards,

SSC UAS Team Consumers and Safety Civil Aviation Authority Tel: 03300221908 Follow us on Twitter: @UK_CAA Please consider the environment. Think before printing this email. ET.

 

[KobeFlight1981]

I am starting to get a little off topic here, so apologies. All I want to do is just have fun with my drone without any hassle. Fly in a safe but fun manner, which out endangering anyone. Get some great pictures and footage, show people my images and videos and not worry about any ramifications. The other day, someone said they were getting freaked out because they thought my mavic pro was a swarm of hornets???....

 

[Meta4]

I keep hearing from time to time that there are/were exceptions to this, hence why I’m asking because there is no definite answer that I could find at the time.

You'll find half of what you hear on internet forums is wrong.
Just because someone tells you something doesn't mean it's correct.

So in any case, any payment regardless of how little the payment (for example: £0.50p for a stack of photos of Port Talbot) will still require a PFco ? I was expecting some sort of margin with this, but it doesn’t seem like there is any?

You are getting confused
The PFCO is not about selling a few photos and teh CAA have no regulations about your photos and what you can do with them.
The PFCO is a permit to fly for hire and be a commercial drone pilot, not a permit to sell photos.

How will the CAA monitor people who sells footage but does not have a PFCO?

The CAA can't monitor flyers selling imagery without a PFCO.
It's just not possible and if it was, it would be very low on their priorities.

What are the laws flying around the coastline as well as beyond the shore line into international waters? ( I was thinking of flying coastal to get some amazing shots in)

Do you know how far you would have to fly to get to international waters?
You aren't getting there unless it's on a boat.

And after all that ... your idea of selling drone photos is probably just a fantasy anyway.
The world is awash with photos of all types but lacking in people that will exchange cash for them.
I wouldn't get too excited about the prospect.
If you are lucky enough to have someone offer to buy any of your work, consider yourself very lucky.