Filming in Public Places?

[ovrszd]

Sidewalk filming/what the recorder can see: you can record what you can see, but you can't violate what a "reasonable person" would expect to be private. Like you can't use a 1000mm telephoto to catch pics of me from the county road without violating my privacy.

I was surprised when the Drone industry started offering zoom lense's on their cameras. Without the zoom the Drone has to get close enough that it's obviously tracking you. With the zoom, as I mentioned earlier, you'll never know I'm invading your privacy.

Now you can also get "heat seeking" and night vision on a Drone.

 

[stumblinhorse]

I did a lot of research about drones before I bought one 6 months back. My main goal was to get video to save of one of my horses that is amazing now but is breaking down quickly.

There is a lot of misconception about drone flying. You can pretty much fly a drone anywhere. It can fly over peoples property and do whatever. There obviously is restricted air space. My newer drone won’t take off in those areas. It will tell you it is restricted and take off is not allowed. By law as of 9/1/23 All drones must transmit their location and location of the controller. They will show for ATC. If you shot one down, it is the same as shooting down any aircraft, the crime is the same.

I was surprised.

 

[ning]

In California it's trespassing to fly a drone in someone's "private airspace".

However, I can't find a definition of what that is.

edit: SB 142 Senate Bill - Bill Analysis
350' above the property

 

[stumblinhorse]

In California it's trespassing to fly a drone in someone's "private airspace".

However, I can't find a definition of what that is.

That is not exactly true. It is unlawful to trespass with a drone to take pictures or video. But you can fly across someone’s airspace with a drone or with a helicopter, pretty much treated the same.

Here is the law.

Bill Text - AB-856 Invasion of privacy.

 

[Torvy]

Or sure how that is legal. Airspace is under federal, not state control. Not the first time CA has deliberately violated federal law.

Imho, we simply need the federal courts to define your property to include that space above. If 350' works, great. FAA restricts drones to 400' max. These are within range of a shotgun. Fly your drone over your own property or public property, but the law needs to stop favoring the drones over the property owners.

We need to regain control over our personal spaces.

 

[stumblinhorse]

Or sure how that is legal. Airspace is under federal, not state control. Not the first time CA has deliberately violated federal law.

Imho, we simply need the federal courts to define your property to include that space above. If 350' works, great. FAA restricts drones to 400' max. These are within range of a shotgun. Fly your drone over your own property or public property, but the law needs to stop favoring the drones over the property owners.

We need to regain control over our personal spaces.

Well property rules do define your property into the space above, forever. But it is not trespassing to enter your airspace. The 400’ max has a lot of loopholes and is mostly used as a guideline. There are a lot of exceptions. I did a lot of research and talked to some experts before I spent my $500 on one.

But I will say that I was surprised to find out that the FAA will treat the shooting down/at a drone the same as shooting down/at a helicopter or plane. It is the same criminal charge.

Part of the reason that the remote ID law started 9/1 is to make drones and their operators easy to find. And this scared the drone industry a lot.

 

[Torvy]

Well property rules do define your property into the space above, forever. But it is not trespassing to enter your airspace.

These concepts are legally incongruous.

If you fly your $500 drone over my place, it will be shot down. I'd be happy to be the test case. Of course, I live out in the middle of nowhere and have no restrictions on things like shooting.

 

[ovrszd]

I did a lot of research about drones before I bought one 6 months back. My main goal was to get video to save of one of my horses that is amazing now but is breaking down quickly.

There is a lot of misconception about drone flying. You can pretty much fly a drone anywhere. It can fly over peoples property and do whatever. There obviously is restricted air space. My newer drone won’t take off in those areas. It will tell you it is restricted and take off is not allowed. By law as of 9/1/23 All drones must transmit their location and location of the controller. They will show for ATC. If you shot one down, it is the same as shooting down any aircraft, the crime is the same.

I was surprised.

Sounds like you have a DJI drone?

 

[ovrszd]

In California it's trespassing to fly a drone in someone's "private airspace".

However, I can't find a definition of what that is.

edit: SB 142 Senate Bill - Bill Analysis
350' above the property

That's a good one. "private airspace" of an individual. I think you'll find that you don't have any "private airspace" over your head.

Drones are limited to a 400' legal elevation. Not sure how high my Drone will go. I've heard it will go 2,500'. This is to keep them out of normally used airspace of planes. Has nothing to do with your trespassing rights.

Sadly there aren't many clearly defined laws regarding drones. That's why each pilot should be considerate of other's space.

 

[stumblinhorse]

These concepts are legally incongruous.

If you fly your $500 drone over my place, it will be shot down. I'd be happy to be the test case. Of course, I live out in the middle of nowhere and have no restrictions on things like shooting.

I am not saying I want to fly my drone over yours or any others property. I am just saying that if you choose to shoot a drone down be aware it is a serious federal crime. Don’t care if you shoot or not, just here passing on what is a fact. I live more remote than you. My drone doesn’t leave my property, and I don’t care what you do on your property. But if you pick **** with others sounds like it would be an easy thing to lure you into a legal problem by passing a drone over your place and you shooting at it…

In the US there is an easement above your property for aircraft. You own it but it can used without trespass.

 

[ovrszd]

Or sure how that is legal. Airspace is under federal, not state control. Not the first time CA has deliberately violated federal law.

Imho, we simply need the federal courts to define your property to include that space above. If 350' works, great. FAA restricts drones to 400' max. These are within range of a shotgun. Fly your drone over your own property or public property, but the law needs to stop favoring the drones over the property owners.

We need to regain control over our personal spaces.

I agree. That's why I try real hard to not violate someone's perception of their space. My perception of that and yours might vary.

Again, we need to define personal space. Torvy, do you consider your personal space to go vertically an unlimited distance? If so, you are violated daily. Possibly hourly. Depending on where you live.

Give me your address and I'll post an aerial pic of your property detailed enough to know if you are home or not.

Again, I believe, it's up to the pilot to not violate what you consider your space. And I do that with diligence.

 

[ovrszd]

Part of the reason that the remote ID law started 9/1 is to make drones and their operators easy to find. And this scared the drone industry a lot.

Doesn't concern me in the least. I am a registered pilot.

 

[P0234]

I’m ok with it, cameras are everywhere, but if someone is making money off you, IMO, you deserve compensation. For example the YouTube pranksters.

 

[ovrszd]

These concepts are legally incongruous.

If you fly your $500 drone over my place, it will be shot down. I'd be happy to be the test case. Of course, I live out in the middle of nowhere and have no restrictions on things like shooting.

So Torvy, your ideals might be more debatable than mine as a pilot that flies over what you consider your space.

We need to be very careful about what we claim as our "position" in this regard.

If I fly over you at an altitude of 400' and you can successfully shoot me down, the military needs you.

 

[ovrszd]

I am not saying I want to fly my drone over yours or any others property. I am just saying that if you choose to shoot a drone down be aware it is a serious federal crime. Don’t care if you shoot or not, just here passing on what is a fact. I live more remote than you. My drone doesn’t leave my property, and I don’t care what you do on your property. But if you pick **** with others sounds like it would be an easy thing to lure you into a legal problem by passing a drone over your place and you shooting at it…

In the US there is an easement above your property for aircraft. You own it but it can used without trespass.

Well stated.

 

[ovrszd]

I’m ok with it, cameras are everywhere, but if someone is making money off you, IMO, you deserve compensation. For example the YouTube pranksters.

I'm pretty sure today I have not been photographed. Never went to town. Only left the property and drove 6 miles one way thru the country to my Son's house and back. But you never know.

For the city dwellers, if they leave their house they are photographed. If money is made off that act or not I cannot declare. But the chances are very great.

I enjoy watching YouTube videos of street musicians. Some very amazing talent. During a single song, posted on YouTube generating advertising revenue, there might be 100 people in the background that unwillingly participated in the scenario. You believe each of them are entitled to a piece of the action?

 

[4570Man]

These concepts are legally incongruous.

If you fly your $500 drone over my place, it will be shot down. I'd be happy to be the test case. Of course, I live out in the middle of nowhere and have no restrictions on things like shooting.

Actually hitting a drone from 400ft high would be a dang good shot for starters. But if you did manage you might find yourself in a heap of trouble. It’s basically the same crime as shooting an actual aircraft.

 

[newbury]

On the subject of drones - I mentioned it before -
I like to use them to "inventory" my roofs. I've got about 6,000 square feet of roofs in Mississippi and it's the easiest way to look at the roofs.
BUT
I can't do that in Northern Virginia because the whole blasted area I'm interested in is a "no drone zone". (The area for 15.5 miles from the Whitehouse.)

I just want to take pictures of my darn roof!
So instead I have to get out my 30' ladder.

 

[ovrszd]

Actually hitting a drone from 400ft high would be a dang good shot for starters. But if you did manage you might find yourself in a heap of trouble. It’s basically the same crime as shooting an actual aircraft.

I consider you a very good shot. If you can hit a drone slightly larger than my hand moving at 25mph at 400ft altitude I'll elevate you to an exceptional shooter.

 

[ovrszd]

On the subject of drones - I mentioned it before -
I like to use them to "inventory" my roofs. I've got about 6,000 square feet of roofs in Mississippi and it's the easiest way to look at the roofs.
BUT
I can't do that in Northern Virginia because the whole blasted area I'm interested in is a "no drone zone". (The area for 15.5 miles from the Whitehouse.)

I just want to take pictures of my darn roof!
So instead I have to get out my 30' ladder.

Sometimes we legislate ourselves into ineffectiveness.