Governor Jerry Brown Signs Bill Putting New Restrictions on Drone Flights Over Private Property

[Cerone]

I noticed this article in my news feed this morning, it appears that some changes have been made to what defines "invasion of privacy" in California.

Two articles:
Governor Jerry Brown Signs Bill Putting New Restrictions on Drone Flights Over Private Property | Fstoppers
Gov. Jerry Brown approves new limits on paparazzi drones

The articles don't give a lot of details so I looked up the actual bill, which is much more comforting to me as a Phantom pilot.

Bill Text - AB-856 Invasion of privacy.

1708.8.
(a) A person is liable for physical invasion of privacy when the person knowingly enters onto the land or into the airspace above the land of another person without permission or otherwise commits a trespass in order to capture any type of visual image, sound recording, or other physical impression of the plaintiff engaging in a private, personal, or familial activity and the invasion occurs in a manner that is offensive to a reasonable person.

As I understand this, it is not illegal to fly over private property for the purposes of shooting wide landscape/cityscape shots. It just means you can't point your camera down over someone's wife sunbathing by her pool. How do you guys feel about this?

 

[ianwood]

This is considered an anti-paparazzi bill designed to keep them from stalking celebrities with drones. It also works to stop your neighborhood peeping tom from using a drone get his jollies.

 

[GadgetGuy]

It will ruin my TMZ video sales!
Guess I'll have to go back to drone prison drug drops to afford this hobby!

Seriously, though, it creates a civil claim, not a criminal offense, and requires that you be intending to photograph a person who is actually present while engaging in some private activity, while flying over their property, and you could not have otherwise obtained the images in any other legal manner, such as flying a helicopter overhead with a zoom lens, or shooting with a long lens outside the property from a higher vantage point. It would not apply if the drone was outside the perimeter of the property. It only applies if the drone is actually over their property. They still have to sue you, and prove all the elements in court. A fine of $5,000-$50,000 can be imposed if they win in civil court and you used the images commercially. You would also have to give up any money you made from selling the images. Don't do it!