Youtube videos

[Cymruflyer]

Negative. The fact that you receive "payment for the content" or not is irrelevant. Google pays creators for subscribers who watch adverts and traffic, Google does not pay for the content of your videos since they generally don't care if you post drones or cooking or horses.

Also if you promote your business by posting drone videos on a social media platform and you don't get paid at all, you still need to have your part 107 to launch your drone with the intent of taking videos in furtherance of your videos.

Sorry but you do not understand this, you are incorrect about your assumptions. If you are promoting your business, that in itself is deemed to be a monetary gain. If you have a website that is earning you money in any way at all, that is monetary gain.

I stated it correctly, as long as you are posting video that you took for fun, you can show it. When you suggest that it is driving people to your website, that is not making you any money. If eventually the hosting site begins to pay you money due to businesses wanting to advertise on your site, that is a very different situation and not what I was speaking about.

Go back and read what I wrote and try to understand what was being said. If you did understand, then you would not be suggesting Quote: "Promoting your business" also when you said Quote: "Google pays creators for subscribers who watch adverts", again, I mentioned nothing about a creator, or Google paying the person anything. All that is for gain and that is not what I was speaking about. Hope you understand that now. What you were replying with is all about being paid, or earning money in some way, which is the opposite of what I stated.

 

[BobaFut]

Love it when people ask "can I put my drone video on YT for family and friends to watch" and responders immediately jump to the monetization question. Do y'all know what it takes to be monetized on YT???

I have a YT channel with a few dozen subs. Obviously I don't make any money off it. But I do link to my business website (of which drone work is a part) there and use YouTube to showcase my work-related drone work as well as just my piloting and videography capabilities. In my mind, if my work was 0% drone related, I would still need a 107 to put drone footage on my "business" YT because I use that channel to promote my business. Perhaps this is an overly-cautious reading of the guidelines, and honestly I don't think the FAA is watching that closely, but getting a 107 is fairly easy so whatever. I also sell a fair amount of my drone photos as stock photos, so having a 107 allows me to make a little money off the "recreational" aspect of flying.

Personally, I think the rules--or at least the FAA's interpretation of them--are kinda stupid. I haven't given this a ton of thought, but I think the 107 should be needed if:

1) you post footage to an already-monetized channel (so this wouldn't include posts that might eventually become monetized but would include stuff like stock footage sites)
2) you are directly paid for flying your drone
3) you do unpaid work with your drone on behalf of a non-profit or government organization

To some degree, the actual law seems to say this, or at least this seems to be the intent, but my understanding is that the FAA takes a more expansive view of monetization in its interpretation of the law where people are afraid to post footage because their channel might one day become monetized.

 

[YRauste]

This thread (various interpretations on commercial flying) is kind of fun to follow. This discussion shows to me that EU (and EASA ?) have made a smart move by not making much difference between commercial and non-commercial UAV-flying in Europe.

 

[mavic3usa]

Sorry but you do not understand this.... Hope you understand that now.

I understand it very well, thank you.

 

[Droning on and on...]

I understand it very well, thank you.

Apparently not.

Many of us here have found the definitive answer online. It was very easy, which is likely the reason no one's bothering to do it for you.

Coming on here and simply declaring "is not!" just because that's your personal opinion doesn't mean much. The FAA has an official position on this, and if you wanted to know, you could do the (very little) work to find out.

 

[Ty Pilot]

These threads usually arise because too many members get their views and opinions from threads like this; and never bother to spend some time reading (and understanding), what's on the FAA's website.

 

[BobaFut]

These threads usually arise because too many members get their views and opinions from threads like this; and never bother to spend some time reading (and understanding), what's on the FAA's website.

To be fair the high level of ambiguity on the FAA's website is why there are so many threads like this.

 

[Droning on and on...]

My opinion: Whether you make money from flying your drone should be irrelevant to whether or not you need 107 certification. A 13yo kid should be able to take video of her friends at the skate park, following all the rules for recreational flight, and then charge them for a copy if she wants to.

Part 107 should be about the mission, and whether it requires the skills and checks necessary. Can easily see this for something like a bridge inspection. NOT for a professional photographer taking the same pictures in the same location under the same conditions as a recreational pilot that just landed.

HOWEVER, that's just not the way it is. Mandarins...

 

[mavic3usa]

My opinion: Whether you make money from flying your drone should be irrelevant to whether or not you need 107 certification. A 13yo kid should be able to take video of her friends at the skate park, following all the rules for recreational flight, and then charge them for a copy if she wants to.

Part 107 should be about the mission, and whether it requires the skills and checks necessary. Can easily see this for something like a bridge inspection. NOT for a professional photographer taking the same pictures in the same location under the same conditions as a recreational pilot that just landed.

HOWEVER, that's just not the way it is. Mandarins...

It's exactly like that. Millions of Youtubers, TikTok users, and social media users are doing it, not because they are somehow getting away with it, but because it isn't illegal.

A 13-yo cannot get a part 107.
In America, you are free to sell whatever you own, nobody can stop you.

Show me in the rules or the laws (not in some opinion piece or some verbal commentary from someone or anyone who "knows") where it talks about money and compensation. I know there is an aspect to that but let's establish the facts first before we dive further into the discussion. It's not all about interpretation, remember...the FAA laws are clear and don't need to be interpreted; this we know. Show me where it says anything about money or compensation or else frankly....please stop bringing it up.

A 13-yo does not need to get a part 107 in order to fly a toy drone in the city park and take a picture and share it on TikTok with another 13-yo in exchange for candy and admiration. Not in America.

 

[Droning on and on...]

It's exactly like that. Millions of Youtubers, TikTok users, and social media users are doing it, not because they are somehow getting away with it, but because it isn't illegal.

Incorrect.

Show me in the rules or the laws (not in some opinion piece or some verbal commentary from someone or anyone who "knows") where it talks about money and compensation.

No.

I'm not going to do your work for you.

 

[Ty Pilot]

Show me in the rules or the laws (not in some opinion piece or some verbal commentary from someone or anyone who "knows") where it talks about money and compensation. I know there is an aspect to that but let's establish the facts first before we dive further into the discussion. It's not all about interpretation, remember...the FAA laws are clear and don't need to be interpreted; this we know. Show me where it says anything about money or compensation or else frankly....please stop bringing it up.

I've learned that most folks on this forum who say "show me" really have no interest in seeing or learning, but for the benefit of those who do wish to see and learn . . . . .

The FAA considers part 107 as the default regulation (rule) for drones in the US, therefore they never say what you can (or can't do) do with a 107 certification. Thats why it is not in the code (text) of 107.

The FAA has however made an exemption for recreational flight, they refer to it as a "carve out" - it is literally an "exception" to the rule. It is when one reads about recreational drone flight in the US, that he or she will find what is excluded from recreational flight . . . . this is where the words "compensation" and "in furtherance of a business" and other such phrases are used.

Below are screen shots from the FAA's website, click on them to take you to the page.

 

[mavic3usa]

I've learned that most folks on this forum who say "show me" really have no interest in seeing or learning, but for the benefit of those who do wish to see and learn . . . . .

The FAA considers part 107 as the default regulation (rule) for drones in the US, therefore they never say what you can (or can't do) do with a 107 certification. Thats why it is not in the code (text) of 107.

The FAA has however made an exemption for recreational flight, they refer to it as a "carve out" - it is literally an "exception" to the rule. It is when one reads about recreational drone flight in the US, that he or she will find what is excluded from recreational flight . . . . this is where the words "compensation" and "in furtherance of a business" and other such phrases are used.

Below are screen shots from the FAA's website, click on them to take you to the page.


View attachment 170800



View attachment 170802

This is exactly what I was looking for someone to post, thanks for proving my point.

 

[mavic3usa]

Incorrect.

I am absolutely correct, it's not illegal.

No. I'm not going to do your work for you.

I already have it, do it for yourself; for you own knowledge.

 

[BobaFut]

It's not all about interpretation, remember...the FAA laws are clear and don't need to be interpreted; this we know. Show me where it says anything about money or compensation or else frankly....

Except this is literally what federal agencies do. The FAA doesn’t make the laws, Congress does and then empowers the FAA to interpret and enforce the law. Nearly everything the FAA says about the distinctions between recreational and commercial flights isn’t actually in the law itself but in the FAA’s interpretation of what “strictly recreational” means.

 

[mavic3usa]

Except this is literally what federal agencies do. The FAA doesn’t make the laws, Congress does and then empowers the FAA to interpret and enforce the law. Nearly everything the FAA says about the distinctions between recreational and commercial flights isn’t actually in the law itself but in the FAA’s interpretation of what “strictly recreational” means.

Ok, which is why the FAA always refer to "flights" when it talks about recreational activities. The recreational "flight" cannot be for compensation says the interpretation. When you fly and you intend to make money with that flight (i.e. you're getting paid to take off and do whatever you do with the drone) then you are "working".....go from there, please. Tell me how you end up with this situation being a part 107 requirement because a kid from Peru watches an ad on Tiktok and then watches your drone video where you are bragging about your new drone.

It's literally the argument that I have been making which is "posting videos on a monetized channel on a social media platform has not been explicitly determined by the FAA to be strictly part 107 activity." In other words, you are not required to have a government license to post a drone video on Youtube. I keep hearing something along the lines of "you need a part 107 to post a drone video on a monetized Youtube channel." I've said it over and over, it's possible there is some commercial activity going on YT (for sure) mainly because there are creators who fly their drones to further their business, we agree on that. Good on them. But there are literally millions of other posters who don't and it's not their YT channel status, their ratings or the length/content of their videos, or their viewers that determine this. It's the flight. Please tell me how a recreational flight one day turns into an illegal commercial flight because the video (from that flight) eventually found it's way to a monetized social media platform. Congress didn't intend that (even if the FAA somehow found it's way to that "interpretation" with the help of [you know who, I won't go there unless you really want to know].

 

[Ty Pilot]

This is exactly what I was looking for someone to post, thanks for proving my point.

The only thing you've proven is you have very little understanding of either 44809 or 107

 

[Ty Pilot]

Please tell me how a recreational flight one day turns into an illegal commercial flight because the video (from that flight) eventually found it's way to a monetized social media platform.

I take it not everyone knows what it takes to monetize a channel on Youtube so I'll just say this. You can't accidentally monetize a channel - it takes effort and intent. It also takes content - a lot of it, and a continuous stream of it. None of those steps can be denied. A Monetized YouTube channel is recognized by the IRS as income - therefore - a business.

If you have a monetized channel, and a video from a drone you've flown 'recreationally' shows up there - the upload was made with Intent. No Doubt. But was there intent during the flight?

While you might be able to upload one or two videos (out of many) and get away with it, at some point, your intent for flying the drone to get video, to load to your channel - becomes apparent. It was flown - in furtherance of a business.

If you have a monetized YT channel and and are a recreational (44809) UA pilot - you might get away with a video here and there, but be aware that at some point you will not be able to claim that; - at the time of your flights, you were intending to do anything other than gather content. Ask Philly Drone Guy - he seemed to think he could pull that off too.

But for recreational flyers that have a standard (no monetization) YouTube channel that is not connected to any business - post drone videos to your hearts content,

 

[mavic3usa]

The only thing you've proven is you have very little understanding of either 44809 or 107

I know more about both 44809 and 107 than you do.

 

[Ty Pilot]

I know more about both 44809 and 107 than you do.

If that is true, you may want to make posts that substantiate that.

 

[mavic3usa]

If that is true, you may want to make posts that substantiate that.

It's what I do....everyday. I'm ready to discuss substance whenever you are, let me know.