DJI GEO Coming to Your P3 Soon

He better have a pocket full of money and a cadre of lawyers if he gets nailed-- the fines they are considering will buy about 2 dozen P3's
Tough call.
Fines are levied as penalties for violations of administrative or criminal regulations. If you modify DJI firmware to disable a private database that prohibits you from flying over zones that are privately established but you self impose compliance with legally established "no fly zones" you are more than likely safe from the FAA and any other governmental action.
Not so clear is the issue of whether DJI would ask the feds to go after you for criminal "hacking" because arguably they could.
Also, not so clear is the issue if DJI would go after you in federal civil venues for violations of Intellectual Property protections.
However all that said, and by way of analogy, the FCC has not reacted in any way to the "more channel hack" which arguably extends the approved DJI frequencies into zones that are not approved for the Phantom 3 or Inspire and are very close to frequencies reserved for private radio operators. You will also note that DJI has not, as of yet, either asked the FCC to take action on its behalf, or brought private civil actions against any person for unauthorized modification of its proprietary firmware.
Just some food for thought
 
  • Like
Reactions: bobmyers
Sorry but they already have happened
No Fly Zone
and DJI through is association with Airmap (a client of NFZ) is helping to implement a vigilante FAA.
This is way more than simple registration as envisioned by the FAA.

This is self rule. We all vote for the representation to figure it out. The States run the show thru Congress with the Feds as Godfather, to enforce State will. It is how we got a Navy in the first place. 13, self appointed "States" almost went bankrupt to build 2 modern (at the time) 44 gun Frigates,

So, fast forward to now, when dumb-asses will crash UAVs into National Security Zones, WE the States, will have rules. When the 9th Amendment works, no rules. No law against it. But, when delusional dumb-asses show off their stupidity, the rest of us want order.

The very idea that the FAA is vigilante here means you are a little unclear what is the meaning of the word.

FAA is sanctioned and funded by We the people, and it is for the people. Thousands of citizens do write to them every day about this. BAN DRONES FOREVER!!! But, the FAA will not be stampeded. And unlike all the other countries in the world WE will integrate UAS into our airspace.

Self Rule! Heck Yes! We always attempt to protect ourselves from Stupid.
 
Last edited:
Tough call.
Fines are levied as penalties for violations of administrative or criminal regulations. If you modify DJI firmware to disable a private database that prohibits you from flying over zones that are privately established but you self impose compliance with legally established "no fly zones" you are more than likely safe from the FAA and any other governmental action.
Not so clear is the issue of whether DJI would ask the feds to go after you for criminal "hacking" because arguably they could.
Also, not so clear is the issue if DJI would go after you in federal civil venues for violations of Intellectual Property protections.
However all that said, and by way of analogy, the FCC has not reacted in any way to the "more channel hack" which arguably extends the approved DJI frequencies into zones that are not approved for the Phantom 3 or Inspire and are very close to frequencies reserved for private radio operators. You will also note that DJI has not, as of yet, either asked the FCC to take action on its behalf, or brought private civil actions against any person for unauthorized modification of its proprietary firmware.
Just some food for thought

Hack away. All Drones will be registered. They can find you.

But, you are correct. No law against it.....yet. :)
 
Depending on where you live under www.noflyzone.org's easy peezy Personal No Fly Zone creation, it would be simple mater for a group of your neighbors (or even one malicious one) to potentially trap your multi-rotor within your home's airspace...meaning you might have go some where else to even test or work on your multi-rotor. I think there has to be a limit to the effective altitude of these personal no-fly zones, seriously speaking, the sky is not the limit. Commercial planes fly over our homes all the time, however at an altitude for most of us that is too high to even worry about. These zones should be limited in their reach. Perhaps be viewed as more of a bubble of air space one should not intrude.

When I was a child, the airport near my home changed it's main runway flight pattern and planes start flying overhead at relatively low levels and the noise levels shot up tremendously. People complained but we were told it was progress and that we could always move but in the end we could do nothing to stop the flights over our homes, the FAA controlled the airspace above our homes. Eventually, as I recall, homes very near the new flight path were purchased (below market value) and the area cleared, then turned into Airport Industrial zoning. My fear here is that not what DJI is doing but it is what their partners in this GEO initiative are doing, which simply lacks any formal check and balance to determine the authenticity of ownership of a no-fly property. Yet, they will TAG us multi-rotor owners for any future accountability, be it financial or whatever may be decided, that is yet unknown.

The laws in this country are suppose to work both ways equally, but it appears in this case that some of us are being held to different standard. In other words, some of us are more equal than other in this aerial funny farm...

Only the FAA may regulate flight and only the FAA may create a no-fly-zone.
49 USC §40103 - Sovereignty and use of airspace
(a) Sovereignty and Public Right of Transit...
(1) The United States Government has exclusive sovereignty of airspace of the United States.
 
The only enforcement against it is the website's TOS. If you want to block a second or more address' then you have to provide some form of proof such as a utility bill. Don't think that that's rock solid proof of ownership either.
A copy of a property tax statement would be solid proof in their minds, though. It's simple to get anybody's tax statement in the 3 counties where I have property. Just zoom into the online tax assessor's map until you get to the lot you want to claim as yours and you'll find a link to the tax statement. Everything you need to prove you're the owner of any property is there - owner's name, street address for the lot, mailing address.

You can even search properties by owner's name. So, for example, if I know the OP has a house on the Oregon north coast, I can just go to the county website and search for all properties owned by anybody named Ian.

Just give a different email address to NFZ.org and your target can't fly over their own property.

P.S. I only know this because I was going to be gone before my tax bills arrived. Downloading the statements was the only way to avoid late penalties.
 
Just give a different email address to NFZ.org and your target can't fly over their own property.
This is my thoughts exactly, it's is far to easy to abuse this free no-fly-zone service. One can only imagine how much this will be abused and I can't think this company would have any motivation to correct unauthorized requests, as the more requests it get proves their need. How am I to respect it?
 
The big problem is that they want access to your personal identifying information before they will let you opt out. They admit they will share your info willingly. That is extortion.
 
Conversely, it would be a positive if DJI would do more to allow people to fly where they actually have business to fly. With their current firmware implementation and flight model they have had to place limits ("max height relative to homepoint" in particular) as a means to convey a "safety for all" message. If the landscape were flat everywhere, then that approach works. Not rocket science (no pun intended).
When I say no business to fly, I mean close to airports, National parks by law, prisons, nuclear plants etc. Or do you think you should be let free to fly there? DJI has limited the height you can fly to in accordance with the worldwide regulations concerning UAV's. (each country has its own but they are pretty much the same)The height max relative to the home point is 400ft... from the ground. Not the sea level. So if you take off from the top of the mountain, you will still have your 400ft above allowed. DJI heard just like you that earth was not flat. No pun intended...
 
How can it be sensible when any Tom, **** or Harry can create their own no fly zones?
Given the cost of a DJI I would guess there tend to be a larger percentage of responsible fliers than with some of the cheaper toy drones.
We have very few freedoms left. We shouldn't give them up to a handful of ignorant politicians who have been stirred up by the media!
I don't believe that anybody can create a NFZ without a good reason. I understood from the video that it will be reserved to authorities for security reasons, during exceptional events, and for sensitive zones such as power plant, nuclear plants, wildlife migrations and stuff, etc. The average Joe will not be able to do that for his backyard. And even though, this is his property and you don't have to be there do you? No frankly, I don't see where is the problem here. And for those living in a NFZ because too close from an airport, they will now be able to fly there, as long as they are taking their responsibilities. This is all about that, too many just don't want to be responsible.
 
The most important part of all of this is that it isnt LEGAL to establish a no fly zone over anything the FAA doesnt deem a no fly zone (in the US). So the second this BS starts to roll out the lawsuits will start, and places like the two companies mentioned will cease to exist. Within no time the system will fail, we will all be grounded because we cant get updated flight restrictions, and DJI will nuke the program. Just my prediction though.
 
Not so clear is the issue of whether DJI would ask the feds to go after you for criminal "hacking" because arguably they could.
It is not illegal to modify hardware or software you own. Might be against the software license, but not illegal. Just like it's not illegal to jailbreak your iPhone.
 
  • Like
Reactions: aka1ceman
I don't believe that anybody can create a NFZ without a good reason. .... The average Joe will not be able to do that for his backyard.
They are, in fact, doing what you "don't believe" they can. NoFlyZone.org and Airmap.io are both part of NoFlyZone, Inc. It's right there on every webpage and in the terms of use.

NoFlyZone.org, is actively encouraging people to register their property and promising to include it in their next database release to Airmap.io, which in turn will supply that data to their partners, currently DJI and 3D Robotics.

This is all very clear in NFZ.org's FAQ. As I posted earlier, it's really simple to get other people's property on the list too.
 
They are, in fact, doing what you "don't believe" they can. NoFlyZone.org and Airmap.io are both part of NoFlyZone, Inc. It's right there on every webpage and in the terms of use.

NoFlyZone.org, is actively encouraging people to register their property and promising to include it in their next database release to Airmap.io, which in turn will supply that data to their partners, currently DJI and 3D Robotics.

This is all very clear in NFZ.org's FAQ. As I posted earlier, it's really simple to get other people's property on the list too.


This is just like MD outsourcing it's speed cameras to a company who at this point are only held accountable by an officer signing and verifying the ticket. MD as came up with the idea to no longer need officer sign to give you a ricket. ......and some don't see the harm in this. Same issue here. Airmap/ Noflyorg become God's without checks and balances
 
  • Like
Reactions: III% Streve
You have the right to post your property as No Hunting. And you have the right to post No Trespassing. I think it is fine for property owners to post NoFlyZones if they want to.

I think this is perfectly reasonable, think about Hotels and Resorts only allowing guest access.

Now it may make sense to make it NoFly up to 500' above that it is currently legal to fly an airplane in rural setting, in dense Urban settings it is 1000' and 2000' horizontally from buildings.There is an exception for Helicopters so maybe it makes sense to limit 200' AGL for remote MRs. In other words, you have to fly in line of sight, but over a private NoFlyZone you have to be above 200' but below the FAA 400' AGL.

I know it may sound complex but we need to do this to keep everyone happy. And to keep more draconian regulations from being legislated.

And remember all these NoFlyZones can be excluded by registering for a flight, I think that is a great solution. Get the land owners permission and then file it by smartphone and fly away.

I never fly over anybody's or business property w/o permission anyway. I always ask permission if I can find someone to ask. Over national forest or town property with nobody around I fly carefully and not close to people or houses. I think this is just common curtesy and if we all did this there would be no need for regulations.

I have personally stopped other MR operators from flying in our town park because I deemed it foolish on a Sunday, town was full, and lots of kids running around in the park. It was just unsafe. And this was a t a meeting of Drones Are Good movement, after I explained why, everybody agreed it was a bad idea to fly there.
 
A person doesnt own the air above their property. Its that simple. A person has the right to ASK me to not fly over their house. But it ends there! I have no responsibility to make anyone happy! So they can request away. I have the right to fly where i want to fly, short of the few places the FAA says no.

Sent from my SM-G920P using Tapatalk
 
...yes that may have been a bad scenario but remember not all are that way. S9metimes all it takes is a disgruntled neighbor just getting back at you because you called the animal warden on him??

Food for thought .....do we put a breathalizer in everyone's car because a few people drink and drive??

No, punish those who break the law and not everyone else.( which is still hard since nobody has a clear answer on who owns the air above your property and how high)
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,354
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic