Please see this warning from the Los Angeles Police Department, sent to the California Association of Realtors. Discussion on helifreak here. More background and discussion here. I'll be talking to the NYT about this tomorrow.
Short form: Amateur UAV use within the usual FAA guidelines (under 400ft, within visual line-of-sight, away from built-up-areas) is allowed, as always. But commercial use requires a COA, which you're not going to get. So there's nothing new here, but it's a reminder that the guidelines will be enforced.
LAPD Warning Against Hiring Unmanned Aircraft Operators for Aerial Photos
Los Angeles authorities have asked C.A.R. to communicate this warning to REALTORS® who hire unmanned aircraft operators to take aerial photographs for marketing high-end properties. Using these devices (also known as drones) for flight in the air with no onboard pilot may violate, among other things, the Federal Aviation Administration's (FAA) policy on unmanned aircrafts, and Los Angeles's local ordinance requiring permits for filming commercial motion pictures and still photographs.
The Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) investigation has apparently revealed that aerial photos where unmanned aircraft were observed have appeared on certain real estate sales websites. According to FilmL.A., the LAPD Air Division has issued this warning as it intends to prosecute violators in the near future. FilmL.A. is a public benefit company created by the City and County of Los Angeles to manage film permit activity and related issues.
Under the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)'s current policy, no one can operate an unmanned aircraft in the National Airspace System without specific authority. Operators who wish to fly an unmanned aircraft for civil use must obtain an FAA experimental airworthiness certificate, which will not be issued to an unmanned aircraft used for compensation or hire. Although the FAA allows hobbyists to fly model airplanes for recreational purposes under specific guidelines, that authority does not extend to operators flying unmanned aircraft for business purposes. More information is available from the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Notice on Unmanned Aircraft Operations and the FAA's policy.
Comments
This is the land of the free ????????????????
This is what is driving the whole issue with the LAPD. Film permits and city fees.
"Los Angeles's local ordinance requiring permits for filming commercial motion pictures and still photographs.
The Los Angeles Police Department's (LAPD) investigation has apparently revealed that aerial photos where unmanned aircraft were observed have appeared on certain real estate sales websites. According to FilmL.A., the LAPD Air Division has issued this warning as it intends to prosecute violators in the near future. FilmL.A. is a public benefit company created by the City and County of Los Angeles to manage film permit activity and related issues."
Its a money thing. The LAPD would otherwise not give a rats butt about the FAA issue. Film LA created by the City to moniter and keep the Film permits coming in.
So what happened with the writ of habeas corpus and every man’s home is his castle and you know, the Constitution?
I've invited someone take pictures of my home by a remote device and that's illegal?
That's just stupid.
This reminds me of Tower regulations regarding Amateur radio in a concentrated population with CCR's.
I am not too sure how a picture or a video is a crime.
However a camera showing a crime taking place on a neighbor is a good thing.
Unless law enforcement does not want the see or hear such.
thats a valid concern hightechhobbie.
so are these rules/laws just for local law enforcement? i dont mean to sound uneducated but i was considering using mine to film weddings, festivals,parties,etc. I was also considering using it to film automotive lines and having it just go down the path while building a vehicle.
there probably just worried that the paparazzi are going to use suas to photograph celebrities .
If the car dealership baloon is under size/weight limit then it is not required to have a flight termination device or follow other requirements listed in the regulations. There is a limit for all baloons, kites and rockets.
Sorry about the double post above. <-- removed for you -->
What blows my mind is that people are still surprised by this. Ignorance of the law is no defence.
The pilot on board a balloon is the cut down device that is required just like should be fitted to that car dealers blimp should there be a flyaway.
For me the biggest issue with a lack of regs is that it has held back small business and ground has been lost. Oh and look January is over almost and no word from the FAA. All that pre Christmas hype.
Oh look that rumour was around in 2010 http://www.suasnews.com/2010/09/1331/euphemisms-for-progress%E2%80%A6/ Then raised its head again last September, I wonder if nothing happens soon it will rise from the ashes this September.
I do think around April/May there will be some sort of movement. AV and the others are desperate to sell to 18k police stations. What might then happen is that the Police will find its not as simple as the brochure said it would be.
I will say it again, RCAPA is free to join but judging by the way the FB page is not filling apathy still rules the day over there. http://www.facebook.com/groups/317984811558233/
Once rules come in, and they will one day, the FAA will have scores of small business people willing to shop people operating in an unlicensed manner as its in their interest to make sure they do. Its how these things work.
-
6
-
7
-
8
-
9
-
10
of 12 Next