Suwaneeguy said:
In my opinion, a state owned and operated school is still public property.
Then you would be in the minority, as far as the law is concerned. School campuses, even state owned and operated schools, are still considered private property. In fact, in most cases, there are large placards at every entrance that states exactly that.
They have the legal right to prohibit any individual from using school property, for any reason.
And, according to most legal precedence, that "property" includes a certain amount of airspace above the ground.
Suwaneeguy said:
So if I'm standing on property beside the stadium which is not owned by the school, I have the legal right to fly over their property without their permission.
Airspace is controlled and regulated by the FAA. Not the state.
Only partially correct. As I stated above, and in a previous post, for the sake of enforcement, the private property owner "owns"
at least as much of the space above the ground as he can occupy or use in connection with the land*
(* keep in mind that this description is intentionally kept loosely defined. Some courts have deemed that it extends to somewhere around 80', others have deemed it goes to 500'... and also keep in mind that up until as recently as 1946 you owned
all the airspace above your property)
While that airspace is technically controlled and regulated by the FAA (they are the ones who came up with the italicized description, after all), they will typically allow the "owner" to govern it's use.
So, even if you are standing on public property, you do not have the right to fly over private property, at least at the altitude that is deemed "usable" to the owner. And, in most cases, any higher and you
would be entering the airspace governed by the FAA and wouldn't be able to fly there, either.
But, beyond that, the owner of private property also has the right to conduct business and or activities (ie - a football game) on it's property unfettered by interruptions and/or distractions from other parties.
And, if that weren't enough... you know that legalese we always hear at the beginning/end of an NFL game that goes "Any other use of this telecast or any pictures, descriptions, or accounts of the game without the NFL's consent is prohibited"? Well... guess what... the NCAA and colleges have that same clause.
The NCAA retains exclusive copyright to all audio (natural sound) and video footage (e.g., television, digital, photographs) to all NCAA 89 championships. Local venues, local organizing committees and/or host institutions must gain written permission to license NCAA championship footage after the completion of the event. The television or radio entity that originated the game(s) must give permission for use of announcer calls of NCAA championship broadcasts
So you wouldn't legally be allowed to fly over the stadium/game anyway... particularly with a camera.
You can read this article, which captures much of this quite well. Notice, in particular, the section where it talks about "while the Supreme Court hasn’t explicitly accepted [500 feet] as the upper limit of property ownership, it’s a useful guideline in trespass cases"... meaning, in the Supreme Courts eyes (in the United States, mind you... other countries definitely have their own rules), if you are flying over my property at anything lower than 500 feet, you are trespassing.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... u_own.html
(now, also take note of the statement that "the upward boundaries of private property may be changing." Things are in flux. But as it stands right now, you can not fly over private land (at least, not without expressed permission).
