What is commercial work?

[Dahveed]

I have a quick question regarding what is commercial work.

- I took stills of my mother's house and the realtor used one of them in the MLS listing. I received no compensation for this work.

- A buddy wants some video and still images to promote a motorcycle rally he hosts. If I do this work and do not get paid, is this considered commercial? Is a license required?

My view is since I'm not getting any compensation for this work, it falls within the recreational use. Another drone user claims it is commercial work regardless of compensation because the end product is for a commercial use.

I'm a total recreational flyer. I have never received any compensation for any photo/video I've taken.

So is this commercial work and should I be licensed?

 

[msinger]

I took stills of my mother's house and the realtor used one of them in the MLS listing. I received no compensation for this work.

This is commercial work.

A buddy wants some video and still images to promote a motorcycle rally he hosts. If I do this work and do not get paid, is this considered commercial?

This is also commercial work -- unless your buddy just puts together rallies for fun (in his free time) outside of whatever he does for work.

If someone is making money or the photos/videos are being used to help someone make money, then you're doing commerical work.

 

[Dahveed]

This is also commercial work -- unless your buddy just puts together rallies for fun (in his free time) outside of whatever he does for work.

If someone is making money or the photos/videos are being used to help someone make money, then you're doing commerical work.

Not sure of the buddy's tax status (which would be the root of the question - for profit entity or just a casual group). He does do this in his spare time, but spare time activities can be commercial. He does charge for attending the rally. I think its a charity, but that would still be commercial in my mind.

Ok, so the end user's use of the images governs if its commercial or not. My compensation is regardless in the determination.

 

[pixl]

If someone is making money or the photos/videos are being used to help someone make money, then you're doing commerical work.

Exactly. People are always trying to escape that as a "technicality". Even videos posted on YouTube can be deemed commercial if YouTube puts ads on it. If someone is making money...even if it's not you, it can still be deemed commercial wrk.

 

[msinger]

Ok, so the end user's use of the images governs if its commercial or not.

That's correct.

 

[FlyGuy8675309]

Interesting. I always thought it was the intention at the time of the flight, not the end use of any video or photo products.

 

[sar104]

Interesting. I always thought it was the intention at the time of the flight, not the end use of any video or photo products.

It is the intent that matters but the question was poorly posed because the criterion in determining whether aerial photography is covered under Part 101 or whether it requires a Part 107 license is not whether it is commercial, but instead whether it is purely recreational flying.

Based on the FAA definition they could easily argue that if the intent is aerial photography of any kind then it is not a purely recreational flight. However, that is not the approach that they have taken in practice, and they have de facto allowed that recreational flight can include videography and photography provided that those are themselves for personal recreational enjoyment. That said, as soon as you start taking photos for a different purpose, whether compensated or not, they have made it clear that it becomes not recreational flight and falls under Part 107. It is especially obvious if the photography is at the request of a third party; anything commissioned is non-recreational.

 

[Xtreme Drone Pilot]

How about this scenario: someone shoots some footage with a drone just for fun. Soon after, they lose the drone and quit flying altogether. Some years later, someone asks for copy of the footage to further their business. Should that no-longer-pilot rush and get the 107? Ridiculous, isn't it?

Similarly, many people can fly drones for years and later decide to put the footage on YouTube and monetize. Do they need to get 107 retroactively?

It's a bit akin to this situation: you gave a lift to someone in you car years ago. You meet them again accidentally and they say, "hey, I remember you, you gave me a lift years ago! I want to treat you with a dinner or something." - "Wait. I must get my taxi driver license first so I can be paid."

 

[sar104]

How about this scenario: someone shoots some footage with a drone just for fun. Soon after, they lose the drone and quit flying altogether. Some years later, someone asks for copy of the footage to further their business. Should that no-longer-pilot rush and get the 107? Ridiculous, isn't it?

Similarly, many people can fly drones for years and later decide to put the footage on YouTube and monetize. Do they need to get 107 retroactively?

It's a bit akin to this situation: you gave a lift to someone in you car years ago. You meet them again accidentally and they say, "hey, I remember you, you gave me a lift years ago! I want to treat you with a dinner or something." - "Wait. I must get my taxi driver license first so I can be paid."

So you haven't even read this thread, let alone the rules and criteria for Part 101.

 

[pixl]

So you haven't even read this thread, let alone the rules and criteria for Part 101.

Yeah....I was just gonna say... smh...

 

[BigAl07]

A hobbyist can sell anything they take during the flight so long as the INTENT of the flight is for recreational ONLY! Not just that but it has to be for the recreation/enjoyment of the PIC only and not for someone else. As noted above a "pattern/trend" of this will quickly remove this "safe haven" but it is possible for a hobbyist to be able to sell their DATA acquired from the air.

The moment you do something "FOR" someone else you've removed yourself from the Hobby/Recreational realm and defaulted back to a CIVIL operation which is fully under Part 107 Rules & Regulations.

On the OPs scenario #1:
If you took the pictures just for fun while you happened to be flying around you're good. If you took them FOR your friend (regardless of his/her use of them later) you default to CIVIL operations.

Scenario #2: There is no way for you to fall under "Hobby/Recreation" when you start out with:

A buddy wants some video and still images

to further compound the case against yourself add this:

to promote a motorcycle rally he hosts

None of that could even be remotely twisted to be "Hobby/Recreational".

What will help this conversation is to drop the term "Commercial" and replace it with CIVIL. Commercial operations do also fall under CIVIL but the correct all encompassing term for this discussion is Civil Operations which require Part 107. Compensation itself is but one of many criteria to push an operator into Part 107 regs.

 

[BigAl07]

How about this scenario: someone shoots some footage with a drone just for fun. Soon after, they lose the drone and quit flying altogether. Some years later, someone asks for copy of the footage to further their business. Should that no-longer-pilot rush and get the 107? Ridiculous, isn't it?

Similarly, many people can fly drones for years and later decide to put the footage on YouTube and monetize. Do they need to get 107 retroactively?

It's a bit akin to this situation: you gave a lift to someone in you car years ago. You meet them again accidentally and they say, "hey, I remember you, you gave me a lift years ago! I want to treat you with a dinner or something." - "Wait. I must get my taxi driver license first so I can be paid."

I have to say I'm a bit shocked by your post above. You usually give pretty good advice/comments about UAS but this one really is one of those Ah HAH moments. You haven't researched Part 101 or Part 107 at all as of yet.

 

[princeofthehouse]

This opens to a interesting ethical/moral/philosophical debate like all these things there is the rules on paper and the rules in real life, and how they are applied..
is it all a absolute.. reality is the intent behind commercial licensing requirement is to target those who make a living from drone work or make a profit from it of any real note.
Those who abuse the system to make money.

the FAA or other organizations are not going to go out of their way to go after someone who gets slipped 50 bucks for taking some pictures of a friends or someone's house on a rare occasion.
Nor are you likely to be gone after if x years down the line when the house is being sold that same friend gives a copy to a realtor to use.
They wouldn't notice unless reported and even then "I had no reason to believe these shots were going to be used this way, I was just taking beautiful pictures and shared them with my friend" could be said if questioned.
Perhaps you go to a friend/family wedding/event and he asks you to bring your drone to do a group shot or whatever and later on slips you 50 as a thanks, no plan or agreement, just a good gesture of gratitude would it be wrong to accept that money?
Technically yes, but no one is going to come after you for that.

To cover your second example, you have been specifically asked to film a commercial event.. you admit it, the answer is that using it for that purpose is the spirit and intent of the rules regarding commercial use, even if you never receive a penny.
You are also making a very public display of doing it.

The intent and reality matters.

You start filming events you are asking for trouble.

To be clear I am not advocating any breaking of the guidelines or rules, merely pointing out to you the reality of how the rules are implemented in life.
Follow the guidelines and avoid commercial involvements regardless of personal gains.
Your friend should understand that I trust.

 

[jwnipper]

Lots of good info for a rookie pilot like me. So if I'm understanding this correctly, if my neighbor asks me to video his grandkids playing out back on their go kart, and I agree and wouldn't think of asking for money since he is my neighbor and I get to get some flight time in, I would legally need the license to do that? I thought the license only came into play if monetary gain was made by using the drone in any fashion. That may have been answered on this thread already, if so I do apologize. I've also seen where dronebase.com says you can do their pano missions and submit the photos, they just can't pay you if you don't have the license. Those pianos are definitely being used for commercial work, so how does that work?
Thanks in advance for not flaming me for being a rookie at this, I'm just wanting to learn. Got my test prep book in the mail today and I'm ready to start studying.

 

[sar104]

Lots of good info for a rookie pilot like me. So if I'm understanding this correctly, if my neighbor asks me to video his grandkids playing out back on their go kart, and I agree and wouldn't think of asking for money since he is my neighbor and I get to get some flight time in, I would legally need the license to do that? I thought the license only came into play if monetary gain was made by using the drone in any fashion. That may have been answered on this thread already, if so I do apologize. I've also seen where dronebase.com says you can do their pano missions and submit the photos, they just can't pay you if you don't have the license. Those pianos are definitely being used for commercial work, so how does that work?
Thanks in advance for not flaming me for being a rookie at this, I'm just wanting to learn. Got my test prep book in the mail today and I'm ready to start studying.

In the US, monetary gain is not the criterion. Part 101 doesn't mention compensation and it doesn't mention commercial work. What it does say is that to be exempt from Part 107 (i.e. to be exempt from requiring a Remote Pilot in Command certificate) the activity has to be purely recreational:

§101.41 Applicability.
This subpart prescribes rules governing the operation of a model aircraft (or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft) that meets all of the following conditions as set forth in section 336 of Public Law 112-95:

(a) The aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use;

(b) The aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization;

(c) The aircraft is limited to not more than 55 pounds unless otherwise certified through a design, construction, inspection, flight test, and operational safety program administered by a community-based organization;

(d) The aircraft is operated in a manner that does not interfere with and gives way to any manned aircraft; and

(e) When flown within 5 miles of an airport, the operator of the aircraft provides the airport operator and the airport air traffic control tower (when an air traffic facility is located at the airport) with prior notice of the operation.​