http://www.inman.com/2014/06/25/faa...es-to-shoot-listing-photos-are-not-hobbyists/
What are your thoughts on this? One of many such examples.
What are your thoughts on this? One of many such examples.
HarryT said:Seems pretty flipping obvious that if you're taking pictures of a property in order to sell it, it's commercial use, not a hobby.
HarryT said:Eg in some parts of the world it's illegal to charge someone for sexual services, but absolutely fine to do those same things as a hobby .
HarryT said:Seems pretty flipping obvious that if you're taking pictures of a property in order to sell it, it's commercial use, not a hobby.
HarryT said:On a more serious note, I think the point is that if you're doing something commercially, it's very common for there to be training or licensing requirements above and beyond what would be required from a hobbyist.
ProfessorStein said:It makes less sense in this situation, where a realtor taking photos is no more or less dangerous than an average hobbyist using the same equipment to take those same pictures. And that is why the FAA says they're trying to implement these rules. To "ensure the public safety". Very disingenuous.
CaptMike said:I'd considered shooting Real Estate for FREE. We (HVAC Bus) do work for numerous Real Estate Companies in NMB, SC. I've spent some time digging in the News and people still don't know. Some are saying "Yes, It's Legal" then you read where FAA says they have Contacted some companies. At this point, I almost think it's too wide spread to start going after everyone.
As usual... Tax and Control.
"We're Here From The Government To Help You". NOT.
CaptMike said:As usual... Tax and Control.
"We're Here From The Government To Help You". NOT.
HarryT said:Are there no rules in the US dictating how close to people or property you're allowed to fly?
ProfessorStein said:HarryT said:Seems pretty flipping obvious that if you're taking pictures of a property in order to sell it, it's commercial use, not a hobby.
I'm not sure that's the point. At least in my head. Yes, it's obvious that it's commercial use. What's less obvious (or, rather, completely without basis) is why commercial vs. non-commercial is even the differentiating line.
As someone said on another thread... if I go out, as a home-owner, and take a photo of my house with my Phantom, just to have, that's non-commercial and legal. But if I, as a realtor, take a photo from that exact same spot in order to add to a listing or flyer, that's commercial and illegal. At that point, we're not talking about safety (presumably it didn't somehow suddenly become less safe to take the photo just because I'm now using it to market the property for sale, as it was when I was taking it just for my own photo gallery). And... what happens if I later decide to sell my home, and use one of the drone photos that I took long before I even had any intention of selling my house in an ad or flyer... does that suddenly make it commercial and illegal?? It's the same photo?!?
The whole dividing line between commercial and non-commercial just doesn't make any sense.