That rules & regulations are being broken on a daily basis.
No one is arguing about that. The question was - is Part 107 required for this purpose? If you are answering - "no it isn't if you break the law" then that's not very helpful.
That rules & regulations are being broken on a daily basis.
No one is arguing about that. The question was - is Part 107 required for this purpose? If you are answering - "no it isn't if you break the law" then that's not very helpful.
My opinion is if he used the pic to sell his own house then that is ok, but this is only my opinion. If you want to find out definitely if I am wrong or right ask one of these guys Best Lawyers for Aviation Law in America | Best Lawyers.
On this matter I have a question. Let me first state I'm in Canada so 107 isnt a law here but, I'm strictly a recreational pilot. Recently a friend asked me if I could shoot some promotional footage of property he bought to turn into a campground. I'm happy to help, at no charge since I dont believe I could legally charge anyway. But would free footage I provide him for promotional use on his own behalf be allowed?
The requirement to fly under Part 101 is not determined by whether it is commercial - it's determined by whether or not the flight is recreational. The FAA has several criteria for assessing that. Being paid is the most obvious one, but not the only one. Anything in furtherance of a business also means that it is non-recreational, whether or not the pilot is paid. And using photos or video for personal profit (e.g. to help sell a house) is non-recreational.
Different countries - different laws maybe?
In Oz a commercial endeavour requires some sort of reward.
Copy/paste from CASA site.
The term adopted by CASA to define commercial UAV/UAS/RPAS use. Any form of remuneration for flying an unmanned aircraft in an aerial work operation (AWO), however small the AWO task, the reward or UAV; it constitutes ‘hire & reward’ and is therefore defined as commercial. Refer to CASR101.270.
You are restricting your enquiry to the meaning of hire and reward. The definition of commercial is not purely restricted to hire and reward. To demonstrate the flight was not for a commercial purpose you would need to show the “flight activity” was “only for the pleasure, leisure or enjoyment of the remote pilot”.Different countries - different laws maybe?
In Oz a commercial endeavour requires some sort of reward.
Copy/paste from CASA site.
The term adopted by CASA to define commercial UAV/UAS/RPAS use. Any form of remuneration for flying an unmanned aircraft in an aerial work operation (AWO), however small the AWO task, the reward or UAV; it constitutes ‘hire & reward’ and is therefore defined as commercial. Refer to CASR101.270.
You are restricting your enquiry to the meaning of hire and reward. The definition of commercial is not purely restricted to hire and reward. To demonstrate the flight was not for a commercial purpose you would need to show the “flight activity” was “only for the plecy uhhasure, leisure or enjoyment of the remote pilot”.
Ok so for the sake of argument, lets say I asked if I could fly over his property for fun/practice and afterwards while watching the video he says wow that would be awesome to use in a promotional video. Would that be allowed?You are restricting your enquiry to the meaning of hire and reward. The definition of commercial is not purely restricted to hire and reward. To demonstrate the flight was not for a commercial purpose you would need to show the “flight activity” was “only for the pleasure, leisure or enjoyment of the remote pilot”.
Ok so for the sake of argument, lets say I asked if I could fly over his property for fun/practice and afterwards while watching the video he says wow that would be awesome to use in a promotional video. Would that be allowed?
I will check however from recollection 270 does not specify commercial use- it says that an operator certificate is required if RPAS is flown for hire or reward. Producing footage/images for a marketing a property for sale would be covered- particularly where it is your property and in supplying the footage/images you have saved on the cost for engagement of a licensed operator. It doesn’t need to be directly demonstrated monetary consideration, reward takes many forms.What I've posted above is the definition of commercial use fromom the CASA site.
Search CASR 101.270
If that was the facts- that is your intent for the flight was fun/practice.Ok so for the sake of argument, lets say I asked if I could fly over his property for fun/practice and afterwards while watching the video he says wow that would be awesome to use in a promotional video. Would that be allowed?
I will check however from recollection 270 does not specify commercial use- it says that an operator certificate is required if RPAS is flown for hire or reward. Producing footage/images for a marketing a property for sale would be covered- particularly where it is your property and in supplying the footage/images you have saved on the cost for engagement of a licensed operator. It doesn’t need to be directly demonstrated monetary consideration, reward takes many forms.
101.270 makes no mention of or attempt to define commercial use or remuneration. Have a look at the legislation. The distinction of relavence is if the flight is being conducted in the pursuit of a hobby or not.
101.270 makes no mention of or attempt to define commercial use or remuneration. Have a look at the legislation. The distinction of relavence is if the flight is being conducted in the pursuit of a hobby or not.
Yes. It’s a guide/example. You need to go to the legislation for the answers. I also saw the original CASA official fly safe video on YouTube where the drone footage was in restricted airspace close the Sydney Harbour Bridge. As you are probably aware renumeration, as it is ordinarily understood, defines salary and other benefits in connection with employment. If that definition was correct every self employed operator could do whatever they felt like....Did you check the link above where it says
The term adopted by CASA to define commercial UAV/UAS/RPAS use.
LOL- well drafted rules have little room for interpretation. The reality is the worst you might get is a warning letter assuming the authorities knew about it and could be bothered doing anything about it.We'll just have to agree to disagree.
Like most rules it's open to different interpretations.