Just asking for a friend of mine , so I'm gonna put this out there , it seems to him if you don't show your face , or the vehicle that you drove to the location to fly in , then the FAA (or whoever regulates the air where you are) are going to have a hard time prosecuting you .They cant prove you were behind the sticks . Delete your flight logs regularly. You could then post all your BVLOS videos on a you tube account that doesn't have your name attached to it such as Skysailor or XTDrones or something vague like that , if you were so inclined , (which I'm not as I would never dream of flying beyond 300m). Is he wrong ?
You Tube legality question
- Thread starter Mazdaman323lx
- Start date
I would not be surprised if, if they really wanted to get you they have ways and means of tracing the poster and could then progress from there.
Where posting of such a video is done to antagonise the 'law' I am to some what surprised that laws have not yet been created to allow authorities to go after the host.
Where posting of such a video is done to antagonise the 'law' I am to some what surprised that laws have not yet been created to allow authorities to go after the host.
You must have watched the video discussing the case against PhillyDroneLife where Ryan was a guest (Ryan assisted a member of this forum in defeating the Genesee County Park Commission’s ban on flying drones in our parks). While that may work to help avoid prosecution, I don’t think that was what was being promoted nor is it what the vast majority of our membership condones. The continued abuse of the present regulations just lead to more strict regulations. Case in point are the new EU rules coming into effect in 2021 ( and I believe France is already there as of yesterday). The US is only a ways behind with their RID. So let’s break as many rules as we can just to gain a popularity on our YouBoob channel and make more advertising dollars for a company that wants to see the skies RID of recreational pilots and small business 107 pilots.
Brockrock
Well-Known Member
To be successfully prosecuted for violations of FAA Regulations, it would certainly have to be proven that a specific person or persons violated specific regulations and did so with intent and/or in a reckless manner.
What is not being mentioned very much in these discussions is the huge cost of possibly having to defend yourself if a case is brought against you, regardless of whether there is or is not enough evidence to ultimately convict you. These are not cases where attorneys on billboards will gladly take the case with no upfront costs to you - such as wrongful injury... This will cost upfront, and every hour of your defense will add up. Food for thought.
What is not being mentioned very much in these discussions is the huge cost of possibly having to defend yourself if a case is brought against you, regardless of whether there is or is not enough evidence to ultimately convict you. These are not cases where attorneys on billboards will gladly take the case with no upfront costs to you - such as wrongful injury... This will cost upfront, and every hour of your defense will add up. Food for thought.
The feds can compel youtube to give up your identity.
Just like this forum. In the case of the fireworks guy they froze his posts as it was considered evidence.
Having said that, really no worries if they do send you a letter, just be nice and promise not to do it again and you will be fine. Just don't be Punxsutawney Phil.
Actually they don't have to prove a thing to fine you, justy like the IRS.
It's up to you to prove otherwise to get out of the fine.
They would have to prove your crimes to jail you.
Not that I approve of or advise this.
Just like this forum. In the case of the fireworks guy they froze his posts as it was considered evidence.
Having said that, really no worries if they do send you a letter, just be nice and promise not to do it again and you will be fine. Just don't be Punxsutawney Phil.
Actually they don't have to prove a thing to fine you, justy like the IRS.
It's up to you to prove otherwise to get out of the fine.
They would have to prove your crimes to jail you.
Not that I approve of or advise this.
PhantomFandom
Well-Known Member
Um why would you even ask this question for "a friend"? Anyone who is looking to explicitly break the laws should be left on their own to figure it out IMHO.
Yes in terms of proving guilt in a court of law, it can be difficult to prove the actual perpetrator without seeing them on the sticks. However, it someone is so blatantly trying to break regulations, and actively trying to do so in a way to evade being caught then it not only shows knowledge of the regulations but also intent to break those regulations. So when they do catch him, I think the judge and jury would be much less inclined to let it slide with a slap on the wrist. This of course is assuming something happened which would require a criminal prosecution...which is possible. If it is just to avoid a fine then the RPIC needs to prove they were not the one on the sticks.
If the authorities want to make a case badly enough, there are other forensic methods to prove who was the RPIC, even if that evidence is circumstantial.
In other words, why do it at all. Just abide by the rules and make the UAS community better and safer for all of us.
I am not condoning anyone breaking the rules. I am simply enquiring into the legality of you tube or similar disclosing a person's identity , and this is not for myself but to prove a ongoing argument with a person I know who thinks he is above the law and protected by same. I don't think he is as safe as he claims. He claims that by using a VPN and a anonymous account he is protected. I would like a counter argument to this is all, regardless of right or wrong on anyone's part.
I have digital zoom of X2 or applied. The resulting video will look a closer to the ship than it actually is.
This would appear to be breaking the rules would it not to anyone viewing the video including the relevant authorities?
Off now to look up Punxsutawney Phil.
As I'm here I have a question for own flying ,Say I'm flying near a, ship coming up the harbour . I am keeping the required 120 meters distant , under 400 feet and can see the drone.
I have digital zoom of X2 or applied. The resulting video will look a closer to the ship than it actually is.
This would appear to be breaking the rules would it not to anyone viewing the video including the relevant authorities?
Off now to look up Punxsutawney Phil.
It depends on who the VPN is as to whether they have to disclose who a client is. VPN’s operate under the rules of the country they conduct business in. As far as having a totally anonymous YouTube account, I find that highly unlikely and Google will gobble to the authorities when deemed necessary by the DOJ.
I reckon you'd want to be flying outside the window of the oval office in the rose garden before that happens . Cant see them going to that trouble for some joe average flying his drone BVLOS in the middle of nowhere
If you post it, and they want you (bad enough), they will find you.....
Period.
Period.
Punxsutawney Phil is the groundhog used for groundhog day. It's my pet name for the Philly guy.
If they could track down bin laden I think they can find you.
Lets face it the Philly Guy was reckless not to mention has a few loose screws Wowzers.
There are a few very naive assumptions here. First, the government can subpoena YouTube's records and figure out who posted a video. They don't need to see a face. Second, they can prove by inference and circumstantial evidence who was flying. For administrative actions, "preponderance of the evidence" is the standard, not "reasonable doubt" (which is the case in criminal prosecutions) - preponderance means more likely than not. Pretty easy to prove ("Oh, you owned the drone? Who was flying it? You won't tell me? Ok, we'll assume it was you.")
But third, it is really unlikely the FAA will do anything about it.
Not to be a smart *** but I am getting all of the video footage I want without needing to resort to flying farther than visual sight of my drone. Even so, I often lose sight of my drone when I try to check my screen and then look up at the drone. Where is it???? It is impossible to see against a dark background, as you all know. All I can say is thank goodness for RTH.
hiflyer201
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2018
- Messages
- 2,678
- Reactions
- 2,118
If ye haven't noticed many of the videos featured on the video showcase section of this site are clearly breaking rules of one sort or another , be it flying beyond VLOS , Urban areas or flying through mist/fog with no objections .
Easy to get great footage flying around downtown Miami early Sunday Mornings bud. Whats the legality of that by the way?
Well, in the US, as a "recreational" flier, as long as you do not fly over directly over people, not flying from a Nat./State Park, not flying in an NFZ, staying very far and away from emergency crews and events, keeping LOS, under 400 feet, and not doing anything stupid, fly where you can. Even at night, (with the appropriate lighting).
Got 107? More restricted.....and then it gets a bit "iffy", as in being careful to "segregate" your recreational flying, and flying for "The furtherance of a business"....(that's the 107 part)
I don't think you're being a smart a** at all. I think we have probably all lost sight of our aircraft briefly.
I bet they have his attention now...... let it go with this last chance warning and next time....... fry his BeeHind
Similar threads
DJI Drone Deals
1. Mini 2
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
2. Mini 3 Pro
3. Mini 4 Pro
4. Air 2s
5. Air 3
6. Avata 2
7. Mavic 3 Pro
8. Mavic 3 Classic
New Threads
-
-
-
-
-
After TikTok ban passage, the prospect of a DJI ban is looking more likely- Started by rickmurray1989
- Replies: 9
Forum statistics
