jwuman said:
if anyone wants to pull a stunt like this, get permission first from law enforcement as a basic common sense courtesy,,,,,
here is what i know:
1. the hartford journalist was not acting in official capacity as ajournalist with a phantom. thats why his employer is not happy since potentially they would bear some liability if it crashed,,,they do malfunction....and he stated he works for the tv station whether on the clock or not, they become involved,,,,,
[Not intended to be legal advice]
The station would bear no liability. The doctrine of "respondeat superior" would not apply at all. What an employee does on his or her own time does not implicate liability on the part of the employer.
jwuman said:
2. the other tv journalist's were not flying a camera creating a DISRACTION TO EMERGENCY SERVICES AS THIS GUY WAS.....
He was 150 feet in the air, not buzzing the scene at low altitude. Even if someone found it "distracting," that is not legally actionable. "Interference" is, and he was not interfering.
jwuman said:
3. He didnt use any common sense when he failed to request permission to fly over or near the incident which would have at least been a common courtesty to the incident commander, who would have likely had no problem since they would have known prior who is operating it and why, and he may have directed him to fly from a certain distance and location...
No one need ever request permission to do something that is perfectly legal. That's not how the law works. He could have given a "heads up" I suppose if he felt like it, but he had absolutely no obligation to do so.
jwuman said:
( I will bet that the Branford,CT FD guy didnt just willy nilly fly over the fire scene without permission last week, and if he did, he would have gotten the same treatment from law enforcement....)
I am the Branford, CT FD guy. (I'm involved in both of these incidents.) I was requested to do the flyover. I was not requested to walk within 100 yards of the fire because there was a 1-mile evacuation zone in place. But I did so anyway
without formal permission. So, technically they ought to go after me too, but they didn't.
jwuman said:
4. It attracted negative publicity for the DJI Phantom and all who use it responsibly. ITS NOT A DRONE "PEOPLE NEED TO STOP CALLING THESE THING DRONES" this is a stigma that also projects the perception you have a spy camera....note the word perception.
It attracted publicity (in my mind) about the issue of the First Amendment right everyone has to photograph anything in public view from a public place. As for being called "drones," it's unfortunate but that's the moniker that will forever be used. No way to undo that now. The media has already latched onto the word.
jwuman said:
5. there was a dead body covered partially with a blanket, it was partially ejected from the car which was visible for all to see including ground journalists with zoom camera's..... so what? the issue is not comparable, the DISTRACTION it caused because he failed to use common sense and lacked the forethought that the curiousity factor was about to bite him from police, who, not knowing whom, why or from where this RC HELO was being piloted have the duty to investigate and which are all valid concerns at an active scene or investigation,,,its just plain stupid and irresponsible no matter how you cut it,...
Again, I see no "distraction" at all, unless you're considering "curiosity" to be synonymous with "distraction." I see no duty to investigate an r/c aircraft flying overhead. What is there to investigate? I fly mine all the time. Police have seen me fly it from time to time. Never have they seen a need to "investigate."
jwuman said:
It would be a really different story if he lost control and it crashed into someone or something creating another incident,,,there is a personal injury attorney on every corner in hartford waiting for that client to walk thru the door...
That would be the case without regard to the accident scene. If he were to have crashed at anytime he flew anywhere he'd face the same possibility of lawsuit.
jwuman said:
i quarantee this WILL NOT help the hobby........Perception , theres that word again,,hmm?
as far as decency: there is no decency in journalism, this isnt about journalism, its about common sense,,,,some people have zero......
You are certainly entitled to your opinion and I welcome opposing views. (it would be boring if we are agreed on everything)
But I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this one.
Peter Sachs
dronelawjournal.com
