Hello all, I'm new here. I have been researching this for the last 2 days and have not found a definitive answer. I've read old and new articles stating different stances on this issues and became more confused. I have my part 107 and fly commercially but was wondering the law in Florida about photographing and videoing private property for commercial use. One of my clients want to feature a few holes from a local golf course in their real estate video. No logos, no signs, no branding just the course itself. Some of these holes can even be seen from public areas(streets, neighborhoods, and other public spaces). This would be used for commercial use and of course I would take off from public property. What is the law on this? Is this legal without getting permission?
Law/rights of using photo/video content of private property
- Thread starter Creative Visions FL
- Start date
If it were me, I would advise the client that we can certainly feature the golf course, but would require permission first. It's the professional thing to do. You run the risk of disturbing their customers and interfering in their day-to-day operations. I expect they will want some sort of compensation unless they can get their name in there somehow. If the course is in the background, I don't see where permission is necessary.
I can tell you the resort I work in has appeared in numerous TV commercials. Several were shot on the beach and it's us in the background. No permission needed. Those shot on our property obviously needed permission and cooperation.
I can tell you the resort I work in has appeared in numerous TV commercials. Several were shot on the beach and it's us in the background. No permission needed. Those shot on our property obviously needed permission and cooperation.
Thank you for the quick response, but I'm not to sure the course would allow this if asked. 50/50 chance. If I have to, of course I would, but thats last resort. Also, I was looking for a more definitive answer. I've read "A person, a state agency, or a political subdivision as defined in s. 11.45 may not use a drone equipped with an imaging device to record an image of privately owned real property or of the owner, tenant, occupant, invitee, or licensee of such property with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property captured in the image in violation of such person’s reasonable expectation of privacy without his or her written consent. For purposes of this section, a person is presumed to have a reasonable expectation of privacy on his or her privately owned real property if he or she is not observable by persons located at ground level in a place where they have a legal right to be, regardless of whether he or she is observable from the air with the use of a drone."
(e) “Surveillance” means:
(e) “Surveillance” means:
- With respect to an owner, tenant, occupant, invitee, or licensee of privately owned real property, the observation of such persons with sufficient visual clarity to be able to obtain information about their identity, habits, conduct, movements, or whereabouts; or
- With respect to privately owned real property, the observation of such property’s physical improvements with sufficient visual clarity to be able to determine unique identifying features or its occupancy by one or more persons.
I can't think any golf course where anyone would have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Maybe the thing to do is purchase some stock footage of a golf course. If there are no identifying features, whose to say it's not the local golf course you speak of.
Think about it this way: imagine you are arguing this in court before a judge and jury. If you can present a sufficient statement for a preponderance of the evidence, or even clear and convincing evidence, in a civil court that you are not in violation of the surveillance laws or any laws relating to privacy, then you are fine. If you do not feel comfortable with this, you could contact an attorney on this.
Alternatively, as was suggested, you could do the easier thing and simply ask the golf course for permission.
Alternatively, as was suggested, you could do the easier thing and simply ask the golf course for permission.
If you take a landscape scene that happens to have a golf course in it, you will be ok. If you feature specific private property in your commercial use, I would expect that a judge will settle the issue, and probably not in your favor.
In most cases, you are allowed to take photos of anything that can be seen from a public spot, you can use these images for news gathering or editorial use. Commercial use is a whole different matter, you must get permission and I’d advise a model release signed before using in any commercial use.
This is in Canada and I’d imagine the USA has similar rules.
And that brings to mind , how does this effect drone usage, because there is much more view from above then from day a sidewalk at ground level.
This is in Canada and I’d imagine the USA has similar rules.
And that brings to mind , how does this effect drone usage, because there is much more view from above then from day a sidewalk at ground level.
Similar threads
