Comment by trappy on April 25, 2012 at 11:45am

Paul Marsh, missed the first paragraph there. The rangers admitted that we didn't break any rules. and that the citation they gave us did not apply. They said, however, that if we were to contest that we'd need to get back to Arizona, get a lawyer and get a court date. They also said they'd make sure they'd throw us in jail for a series of other violations if we were to contest the ticket. I'm not really sure as to why they would do that, but my assumption is to avoid any kind of legal ramicifactions as well as bad publicity for them breaking the law (illegal search & seizure). I don't really think that law enforcement follow laws in the USA. I mean, theoretically they're supposed to ... sure. but practically ... well, they just do as they please.

Comment by Ellison Chan on April 25, 2012 at 12:08pm

Just sounds like a bunch of glorified gardeners power tripping.

Were you trying to nab some pic-a-nic baskets?

They must have seen this training video for Park Rangers, about the Pic-A-Nic Basket Nabber 2000:

Comment by Richard on April 26, 2012 at 12:37pm

Clearly the necessary thing to do is to get the rangers' actions mentioned on television.

"Park Rangers steal tourist's videos of Grand Canyon!" (and other such juicy headlines).

You really should go ahead and crucify them. That ranger is saying that they will steal any tourists' videos just because they didn't like the camera used, and that's the kind of attitude that will have a serious effect on tourism.

Who wants to go to the Grand Canyon if a park ranger can arbitrarily decide to take away your photos and videos?
I certainly don't!

Pictures of the invalid citation (complete with the ranger's ID number, yes?), choice quotes from the ranger issuing it, coupled with the beautiful videos you did take the day before will go quite a long way in 'outrage points', and is pretty much the only way they will behave.

I'm pretty sure you can find a TV station willing to take up the cause, especially given the quality of your video footage.

I'm not a lawyer (and don't play one on TV either) but I'm pretty sure that if you do not get your SD cards back then they have committed an act of theft of both the SD card and intangible, and if they do return them but have deleted anything from the SD cards they have deliberately and knowingly destroyed your rightful and valuable property.

(If they copy anything, then apparently existing caselaw puts the going rate for copyright infringement at several million USD per minute.)

The minimum value of the data on the cards is also quite high - for example, the UK NUJ suggests £270 for 8 seconds of video*, and £1182 for 2-3min shot and edited on your own kit.
(Fees actually paid vary considerably, and I would suggest that your high quality UAV footage is valued considerably higher given the specialist nature of the work.)

*Essentially the You've Been Framed/Funniest Home Videos rate.

(My day job is in television. Dammit, I promised myself I wouldn't combine these!)

Comment by Matthew Schroyer on April 27, 2012 at 2:00pm

I'm (of course) not a lawyer, but as it's been stated here, but it's basic First Amendment legal knowledge that law enforcement cannot take your memory card like that. Under normal circumstances, police would need to subpoena the media in court, but they cannot confiscate anything offhand. Only if you're using that camera in commission of a crime can police legally take the camera and/or media from you.

Having said that, however, I personally would not pursue any such legal action. You probably would win the card back in court, if they don't already mail it back to you to avoid legal wrangling, and I'm not sure about punitive damages. However, if you get in a fight with these authorities on the matter, it's going to kick up some dust. That will probably not work in your favor.

I don't know who these people are that you are dealing with, but they don't have the authority to enforce FAA rules. Having said that, they could take an hour to call the FAA and tell them about the case, who could then file charges against you for flying without authorization. I don't exactly know what the fines are for that (or possibly jail time), but it is not insignificant.

The FAA made it pretty clear in its Significant Guidance Document FAA-2006-25714 that flying a UAS for hire is not legal without authorization. And the FAA is not giving out that type of authorization for the time being. Sure, the rules from a legal standpoint seem capricious -- why is a hobby-grade UAS authorized when its used for recreation under 500 feet, yet the same platform used at the same altitude for commercial purposes is somehow unauthorized? -- but that takes time and money to argue in court. Winning that legal argument is not guaranteed.

I only say this because my organization has been in contact with the FAA to get authorization, and they've let us know they are building cases and pursuing the people who fly without authorization. You may not hear it in the news, or on boards, but it is happening. Anyone can call up the FAA themselves to verify this.

You've got some awesome footage, and by far some of the most impressive shots I've ever seen anyone produce using this equipment. Please do be careful, so that you can continue learning and making these videos.

Comment by trappy on April 27, 2012 at 2:06pm

Matthew Schroyer, how do you figure that the flight was done commercially? In that case we'd have needed a permit from the GC NPS for commercial filming. However, this is simply not the case. We do not receive cash or any other form of payment for these flights.

Richard, we have quite a few interview requests from media about the issue. I am awaiting one last mail from the Chief Ranger at the GC NPS before I go ahead and pretty much do what you suggested to do :)

Comment by Matthew Schroyer on April 27, 2012 at 2:37pm

Trappy -- I figured the drone was flying commercially because you begin your video with several logos from HobbyKing and GoPro. If they are financing you with the expectation that you place those logos in your video, that makes your video promotional and therefore makes the operation of your UAS "for hire." Likewise, your website seems to be a store front for FPV equipment, and you also advertise "for hire" services (http://www.team-blacksheep.com/hireus), which makes the video ostensibly promotional and thus commercial.

I'm not just saying that "commercial" or "for hire" is the litmus test for non-authorization, either. The SDG is clear that even operation of UAS for educational purposes requires authorization. Every UAS that is not recreational requires FAA authorization. Even nonprofit journalism, which is the purpose my organization is developing UAS for, requires a COA - and we are only able to do that by being adopted through a Federally-funded land grant institution, with a POC at that university, and a legal document from the state's attorney verifying that the university is, in fact, a university. In other words, a ton of red tape. And we have to own or lease the drone for 90 days before we have authorization.

It's very confounding, but them's the rules.

Comment by trappy on April 27, 2012 at 2:48pm

Well, all I can say is I've been hard at work for TBS since 2 years and I wanted to get some time off and fly with a few buddies in a place far away from home and work. It was as recreational as it gets. We put logos in our videos so people stop asking us what kind of gear we use. we don't advertise our site in our videos (or any other website). the fact that we sell what we fly with doesn't make the flight commercial.

the rules for commercial operations are relaxing, though, so that's good. I hope the non-commercial stuff stays the same. it's the most awesome hobby in the world :)

Comment by DJ Raz55 on April 27, 2012 at 2:54pm

Contact the news media for that area and explain what the dirty law in forcement did maby make national news law enforcement does not like bad publicity they loose funding that way

Comment by Ed Kirk on April 27, 2012 at 9:47pm

Beautiful video, beautiful day.  Obviously the park rangers didn't want to waste the day (days) on papework. 

The Grand Canyon is  a national treasure for all to enjoy.  I still remember the ************* that flew his RC plane into the Goodyear blimp in Carson, CA back in the 70's.  We lost a lot of good flying sites over that one.  It made national news too.

It looks like the North Rim, there are lots of areas with no handrails and fewer people.

Ed

Comment by Matthew Schroyer on April 27, 2012 at 9:52pm

Trappy - Well, you've certainly accomplished a lot in those two years, as your latest video has shown. Truly incredible footage. And I think you deserve kudos for doing this on a student's budget (I've only recently come out of that status, and I'm still paying my dues financially and have no grants or funding helping me out, so I feel you on that one). It shows dedication and a lot of innovation.

Just be careful is all I recommend. Again, my advice would be to not kick up any dust from local authorities in this matter. They could really make it hard on you. Other than that, again, great footage.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• Next ›
• Page