You need to be a member of diydrones to add comments!

Join diydrones


  • This article provides a little more information, including those sponsoring the bill:

  • Typical idiotic political nonsense. I guess there ar eno real problems to address so the legislators are feeling creative.

  • The problem I see is that the FAA currently doesnt say you can't fly, and Oregon is proposing that you need to be permitted.  I dont know of any NAS airspace where the State's jurisdiction comes first.  It would be a big problem if the FAA says you need a license as a hobbyist.  That would make "permitted" mean something very unfriendly.



  • Maybe the Oregon politicians don't want pictures of them with their girl friends or other not so good for public relations business deals?  Maybe the politicians are worried about folks using the infrared cameras to find all the marijuana and other illegal activities that pay for campaigns and other bene's?  But, they will probably Ok their use to check out your property for taxation purposes.  I guess the use of UAVs will lead to transparency, but not popular with those with something to hide.  Hope this hobby doesn't get squelched.

  • Moderator

    This is one of many such bills being put forward. Folks remember the AMA is no longer at the UAS table. They have ring fenced their activity.

    I chose to highlight this particular bill at sUAS News because it is the one with the most bunkum in it.

  • If the Bill is to control privacy issues then the location of the camera is irrelevant. The higher up you go the more powerful a camera you can use.  Just look at Google Earth!

    I think they are scared of where the the hobby/industry can go. By nipping it in the but they hope to control it. As everyone has indicated earlier there are lots of holes in the proposed regulations.

    Or its just a hoax.

  • Here's a look at the NAS.  FAA claims control right down to ground level, so when Oregon says airspace of Oregon, the FAA would have to cede jurisdiction.  As of now, FAA hasnt tried to take away hobbyists' right to fly.


  • It seems as test to public reactions on such restrictions. If success, it is possible same actions would by accept more wide forms in future ...

  • SECTION 1. As used in sections 1 to 7 of this 2013 Act:

    (1) “Airspace of Oregon” means the space above the ground that is not part of airspace

    governed by federal law.

    That doesnt make it illegal to operate a kite with a camera in NAS when all Oregon airspace is NAS.  Hobbyists are permitted by the FAA to fly in NAS, uncontrolled airspace, but still NAS.

    Bill Paul pointed out they are setting it up for police and government use of drones.  It could still be regulatory capture by big UAV money since the bill's author is anonymous. 

  • The bill makes an exemption if you are over private land that is yours or land you have been given a right to fly over, yet merely possessing a drone that COULD fly over someone else's land is illegal. So as the bill is written you ca only own a drone that is incapable of flying over someone else's land.

    Is this a hoax?? It is logically flawed in so many ways.

This reply was deleted.