This won't be the first prosecution we'll see, is what I'm guessing:
http://www.coloradonewsday.com/news/reg ... -lake.html
http://www.coloradonewsday.com/news/reg ... -lake.html
German tourist banned from Yellowstone Park after crashing d
- Thread starter GoodnNuff
- Start date
Re: German tourist banned from Yellowstone Park after crashi
Thanks.
Sorry, I guess I thought dangerous flying was a general discussion topic.
Thanks.
Sorry, I guess I thought dangerous flying was a general discussion topic.
Re: German tourist banned from Yellowstone Park after crashi
Regarding stuff like destroying volcanic formations in Yellowstone and landing on the head of a Mt Rushmore carving, it seems to me that an obvious rule ought to be that if people aren't allowed to go somewhere due to concerns about them damaging things etc, sending a RC vehicle or robot of any sort there isn't any better than just walking over there yourself. An obvious law to me would be one based on some sort of "tresspassing by proxy". After all, the concerns with a human trespassing are largely the same as "tresspassing by drone." (Safety, privacy, damage, theft, etc., all things any sort of RC or autonomous vehicle/robot/done/whatever could do.) I mean if someone builds a robot that breaks into your house and steals things, I'm pretty sure whoever built it would be put on trial for theft. The fact that they used a drone to commit the crime would be mostly irrelevant except that it might be considered armed burglary (with the machine being considered a type of weapon. Even if it had no gun or knife on it, it might pose additional safety risks to victims similar to a person with a weapon vs someone without one.)
Regarding stuff like destroying volcanic formations in Yellowstone and landing on the head of a Mt Rushmore carving, it seems to me that an obvious rule ought to be that if people aren't allowed to go somewhere due to concerns about them damaging things etc, sending a RC vehicle or robot of any sort there isn't any better than just walking over there yourself. An obvious law to me would be one based on some sort of "tresspassing by proxy". After all, the concerns with a human trespassing are largely the same as "tresspassing by drone." (Safety, privacy, damage, theft, etc., all things any sort of RC or autonomous vehicle/robot/done/whatever could do.) I mean if someone builds a robot that breaks into your house and steals things, I'm pretty sure whoever built it would be put on trial for theft. The fact that they used a drone to commit the crime would be mostly irrelevant except that it might be considered armed burglary (with the machine being considered a type of weapon. Even if it had no gun or knife on it, it might pose additional safety risks to victims similar to a person with a weapon vs someone without one.)
Similar threads
