YouTube videos being commercial ???

[Skychs]

The FAA Says You Can't Post Drone Videos on YouTube

The FAA has taken the unprecedented step of saying that YouTube videos filmed by hobbyists are a "commercial" use of drones.

www.vice.com

A friend sent me this article saying I should not post my drone videos on YouTube. Since YouTube has advertising the FAA is considering the video's as a commercial post. Is there any truth to that?
thanks
chuck

 

[lightbg]

I consider commercial use involving some kind of personal compensation , of which my YouTube vids have given me zero. The FAA would have a hard time trying to prove my profiteering from a few amateur videos. One look at my bank balance and they might consider me a charity case and toss me a few quid.

Jake

 

[sar104]

The FAA Says You Can't Post Drone Videos on YouTube

The FAA has taken the unprecedented step of saying that YouTube videos filmed by hobbyists are a "commercial" use of drones.

www.vice.com

A friend sent me this article saying I should not post my drone videos on YouTube. Since YouTube has advertising the FAA is considering the video's as a commercial post. Is there any truth to that?
thanks
chuck

That's an old article, and the FAA has clarified things since then. Posting to monetized YT channels is considered commercial, and therefore non-recreational, but using regular personal channels is not considered incompatible with recreational flying.

 

[Skychs]

Thanks. That’s what I was thinking as well.

 

[Hummingbird.UAV]

Thanks. That’s what I was thinking as well.

You need 1000 subscribers and 4000 hours of view time/year before YouTube even considers putting ads on your vids. Any chance you are close or exceeding that. If not you have nothing to worry about.

 

[jasonlday]

I am going to disagree with the previous comments. The FAA has clearly stated that posting videos to youtube, facebook, etc have the potential for monetization however the exchange of money for services is not the determining factor for "commercial use". Recreational flying or flying for fun ends when you start advertising your flight. Under the current regulations the posting of videos on social media and video services constitutes commercial operations because you are now flying for more than just recreation.

 

[Northwood Mediaworks]

I am going to disagree with the previous comments. The FAA has clearly stated that posting videos to youtube, facebook, etc have the potential for monetization however the exchange of money for services is not the determining factor for "commercial use". Recreational flying or flying for fun ends when you start advertising your flight. Under the current regulations the posting of videos on social media and video services constitutes commercial operations because you are now flying for more than just recreation.

Can you copy and paste here the statement you are referring to?

 

[lilewis]

So you go out and fly for fun. Take some videos of interesting places, not knowing exactly what your going to end up with, but the playback and editing is a fun and creative thing to do for a hobby. Then you realize that you've made a cool video that others might enjoy viewing so you upload it to YouTube. At this point you're asked if you want to monetize it, and you say "sure, that's cool". Then you make $27.53 over the following 12 months.

Is the FAA going to look for and spend their time and money attempting to fine all of the hobbyists who find themselves in this position?

 

[tcope]

As mentioned that article is old (something like 5 years old) and the FAA came out with a correction soon after it went public. They have stated that they won't go after people who post videos on YT.

Can you imagine if they tried? They would be pursuing _millions_ of people right now. Have we seen that happen?

 

[lilewis]

That was my point. Sorry, I missed seeing sar 104's comments above.

 

[Skychs]

Thanks again guys. There is the ever changing rules and regulations vs what happens in reality. I’d just hate to be the guy they start going after when they stop looking the other way.

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Can you copy and paste here the statement you are referring to?

+1. I'd like to read that as well . . .

 

[PoonDog]

I consider commercial use involving some kind of personal compensation , of which my YouTube vids have given me zero. The FAA would have a hard time trying to prove my profiteering from a few amateur videos. One look at my bank balance and they might consider me a charity case and toss me a few quid.

Jake

The FAA would have a hard time proveing anything for that matter.

 

[Skywatcher2001]

Imagine the FAA trying to get 15 cents from every 10-year old with a Mavic Spark and a YT following of 10,000 12-year olds. Those spark videos plaster YT like grains of sand on the beach. After prosecuting 525,000 children, they would collect $13 and .77 cents . . .

 

[sar104]

I am going to disagree with the previous comments. The FAA has clearly stated that posting videos to youtube, facebook, etc have the potential for monetization however the exchange of money for services is not the determining factor for "commercial use". Recreational flying or flying for fun ends when you start advertising your flight. Under the current regulations the posting of videos on social media and video services constitutes commercial operations because you are now flying for more than just recreation.

You are correct that commercial is only one characteristic that makes a flight non-recreational, but simply posting to YT or similar is not inconsistent with recreational flight, any more than posting photos or videos of your family vacation makes the vacation non-recreational.

And whether you agree or disagree with that argument, the FAA has clarified that posting to non-monetized YT channels, or posting your photos on Instagram or wherever, is not inconsistent with commercial flight.