Why is it so hard to distinguish 107 or hobby flight?

[flockshot]

I have to politely disagree that I can not hobby for whomever I choose to. I have 2 neighbors, whose homes I have done, and a local farmer who wanted a video of his son plowing a field. All hobby flights, with no promotion of any business. There is no violation of any rule in those flights.

 

[BigAl07]

I have to politely disagree that I can not hobby for whomever I choose to. I have 2 neighbors, whose homes I have done, and a local farmer who wanted a video of his son plowing a field. All hobby flights, with no promotion of any business. There is no violation of any rule in those flights.

That's your own personal opinion but the FAA doesn't see it that way. Merely shouting "this is a hobby flight" at the top of the hills does not changes the FAA's definition of hobby.

While what you did was not "hobby" it also was harmless and if there was no incident it wouldn't even raise an eyebrow at the FAA.

 

[flockshot]

That's your own personal opinion but the FAA doesn't see it that way. Merely shouting "this is a hobby flight" at the top of the hills does not changes the FAA's definition of hobby.

While what you did was not "hobby" it also was harmless and if there was no incident it wouldn't even raise an eyebrow at the FAA.

As you are aware, I have been doing aerial work for a long time, just like you have, and you would need to help me understand what FAA regulation I may be in violation of before I could agree with you on this one.
I realize that there are very few folks left that don't need to be paid for everything they do in this world , but a while back I folded my business and just enjoy the photog now. I no longer file taxes for photography and am vey well versed in FAA regs. I can legally take pictures and videos as much as I want, and so long as it does not further the cause of any business whatsoever, I can do with them as I please. That includes sharing them with my friends and acquaintances.
Perhaps you are making some technical point that I am missing here, so if that is the case please help me understand what that point is.

 

[Meta4]

I realize that there are very few folks left that don't need to be paid for everything they do in this world , but a while back I folded my business and just enjoy the photog now. I no longer file taxes for photography and am vey well versed in FAA regs. I can legally take pictures and videos as much as I want, and so long as it does not further the cause of any business whatsoever, I can do with them as I please. That includes sharing them with my friends and acquaintances.
Perhaps you are making some technical point that I am missing here, so if that is the case please help me understand what that point is.

There's nothing wrong with the scenarios you outlined above.
There's a tendency for some to get too caught up in the difference between recreational and commercial and they get the idea that sharing photos you took for pleasure is somehow wrong.
Fortunately the FAA is a lot more reasonable.
They have no rules about sharing photos.
They don't even have rules about selling a photo.
They have rules about commercial flight, not what you do with the photos you take.

 

[flockshot]

Perhaps our discussion will help show the importance of understanding all the rules that we fly by.

Reasonable people can disagree on how to interpret the regulations that apply to our drone flying, but we will not disagree that studying for and obtaining a Part 107 license is the best way to assure yourself that you are operating within the regulations, regardless of technical interpretation.

For people who have no aviation experience this can seem a little difficult, but if you are serious about drone driving, it is well worth the effort.

 

[BigAl07]

The problem with the scenario above is INTENT of the flight. If the INTENT of the flight is to do something for someone else it's now outside of Hobby/Recreation flight.

The mere fact you can "sell" photos etc you've taken is a moot point. The FAA has stated the images/video/data taken during a hobby flight can be later sold. Once again it is the INTENT of the flight that matters in terms of the FAA.

If you INTEND to share/sell images from the flight then it's not hobby. If you capture data during the flight that you later determine to have value then sell/share because the INTENT of the flight is unchanged.

This has been discussed to exhaustion and has been well dissected by the FAA both in written form and in live (Q&A and Streaming) over the last couple of years. If you chose to go against it the odds are nothing will come of it unless there is an incident but that doesn't change the fact that your flights can not HOBBY for someone else.

 

[flockshot]

The problem with the scenario above is INTENT of the flight. If the INTENT of the flight is to do something for someone else it's now outside of Hobby/Recreation flight.

The mere fact you can "sell" photos etc you've taken is a moot point. The FAA has stated the images/video/data taken during a hobby flight can be later sold. Once again it is the INTENT of the flight that matters in terms of the FAA.

If you INTEND to share/sell images from the flight then it's not hobby. If you capture data during the flight that you later determine to have value then sell/share because the INTENT of the flight is unchanged.

This has been discussed to exhaustion and has been well dissected by the FAA both in written form and in live (Q&A and Streaming) over the last couple of years. If you chose to go against it the odds are nothing will come of it unless there is an incident but that doesn't change the fact that your flights can not HOBBY for someone else.

I respect your opinion, and that of the FAA folks you are referring to. I will continue to read FAA prosecutions as I come across them and perhaps some day I will read one that fits this.

 

[Ansia]

 

[Meta4]

If you INTEND to share/sell images from the flight then it's not hobby. If you capture data during the flight that you later determine to have value then sell/share because the INTENT of the flight is unchanged.
...
that doesn't change the fact that your flights can not HOBBY for someone else.

I'd have to disagree with that .
Sharing photos is NOT commercial use.
If you like flying and photographing, there's nothing commercial about sharing images you took for your own enjoyment.

 

[sar104]

I'd have to disagree with that .
Sharing photos is NOT commercial use.
If you like flying and photographing, there's nothing commercial about sharing images you took for your own enjoyment.

I think it's just a subtle difference. I'm sure that you can intend to share your photos without necessarily jeopardizing the recreational status of the flight. However, if you are flying specifically to obtain photos at the request of a third party, irrespective of whether you are compensated for them, then it starts to get iffy, even though it may not get you into trouble. But, obviously, if the third party wants to use the photos to further a business then that has crossed the line.

 

[flockshot]

Some people take videos and share them with me on this site.
Is that recreational pilot in violation of FAA regulations?
I will suggest that they are not, even though they may have intended to share on this site when the video was taken.
And just as a side note, this site is a business.

When considering 'furtherance off a business' there is the "letter of the regulation" and there is the "spirit of the regulation" that any FAA official worth their salt would consider if researching a complaint.

If you want to deny recreational pilots from having fun with their work by sharing it, then continue to make your argument, but start right here on PhantomPilots

 

[Meta4]

When considering 'furtherance off a business' there is the "letter of the regulation" and there is the "spirit of the regulation" that any FAA official worth their salt would consider if researching a complaint.

The frequent discussions of this topic take the subject far more seriously than the FAA does.
The FAA is interested in the important task of aviation safety, not whether you can give a photo to a friend.
Last time I checked, the FAA still hasn't fined anyone for blatant unlicensed commercial drone flying although there's no shortage of prospective offenders out there.
They certainly aren't going to bother going to the nth degree to determine whether a shared photo constitutes commercial activity.
It's the modern equivalent of debating how many angels can dance on the head of a pin: How many angels can dance on the head of a pin? - Wikipedia

 

[sar104]

Some people take videos and share them with me on this site.
Is that recreational pilot in violation of FAA regulations?
I will suggest that they are not, even though they may have intended to share on this site when the video was taken.
And just as a side note, this site is a business.

When considering 'furtherance off a business' there is the "letter of the regulation" and there is the "spirit of the regulation" that any FAA official worth their salt would consider if researching a complaint.

If you want to deny recreational pilots from having fun with their work by sharing it, then continue to make your argument, but start right here on PhantomPilots

This risks being a pointless argument and, potentially, a slippery slope fallacy. If you want to take that route you can argue that DJI is a business and, therefore, any use of their equipment is "furthering a business". In reality, any reasonable person can tell the difference between a recreational flight and a flight with a different purpose. Simply posting to this site, for example, is clearly consistent with flying as a hobby. Flying to inspect your neighbor's roof to save him the expense of hiring a roofing contractor, for example, is not a "purely recreational activity", which is the FAA's test for whether you can claim the exemption of the Special Rule.

Now, whether the FAA would be interested in pursuing the occasional, minor violation is a completely different question, and the answer is clearly no - they would not.

 

[flockshot]

Remember, I am the guy arguing that sharing is legal, so long as it benefits no business, mine or the other guys.

I support sharing with friends, acquaintances, and forums I choose to participate in, or the public at large.

My intent is to share the unique perspective of flight and that violates no law. I do not share content with any business. I don't 'back door' any business interest. I simply share the aerial perspective when I choose to do so.

Some experts on PhantomPilots disagree with the legality of sharing, and I will never change their mind, but I stand by my contention that it is all perfectly legal and proper.

 

[Javiejav]

Since we are on this topic I figured I’d throw it out there real quick. We don’t have to go off topic with the question. In the regs about not flying in a national park, I remember a conversation at some point where people were saying you can’t take off from a national park, but you can take off from outside the park, photo, video, and return to your take off from outside the park... is that the case?? I remember everyone was all up in arms about the Symantec’s but is that the case?? I forget

 

[BigAl07]

Since we are on this topic I figured I’d throw it out there real quick. We don’t have to go off topic with the question. In the regs about not flying in a national park, I remember a conversation at some point where people were saying you can’t take off from a national park, but you can take off from outside the park, photo, video, and return to your take off from outside the park... is that the case?? I remember everyone was all up in arms about the Symantec’s but is that the case?? I forget

The National Park can only control what happens on THEIR land... once the aircraft is in the air (National Airspace System) it's ruled by the FAA. So the NPS can mandate what can or can NOT happen on their land (just like any land owner or designated land manager can) but not what happens OVER it.

Now if you have a mishap and your sUAS goes down on NPS they have you cited for trespassing etc.

 

[Harleydude]

I was just wondering that every time someone post a problem with their drone and mention that maybe they're doing a photograph or video and giving it to somebody else that there is always this question of whether it's a part 107 or hobbyist flat. There were even post where someone was asking a question because their drone did something strange but they mentioned the purpose of their flight and the discussion went off track. To me it seems clear if the flight is for anyone else then it is not a hobby flight. If you fly as a hobbyist and someone contacts you about a video or pictures you have posted on social media and you give that to them I would assume and believe that to be a hobbyist flight as long as no money actually exchanged or some other gift for receiving those pictures or videos. Just wondered what you thought?

Because you have self-appointed FAA trolls who, unfortunately, know FAR more about "regulations" than they do the hobby / profession of model flying and/or photography and/or cinematography. I suspect they're bored to tears or bitter because they aren't getting work, so they lash out their frustration by trying to elevate themselves to some kind of self-appointed policing position in a public forum. "How dare you fly..." blah, blah, blah.... But that's just a theory....<;^)

I've worked for YEARS without a 107, including the film industry. I'm sure I could pass the test tomorrow. It's on my list of 'things to do.' Some make the unfortunate mistake of ASSUMING that just because someone lacks certification they lack knowledge or are ignorant of the NAS, regulations, etc. So for now, I work under part 101 (now a bunch of 107 trolls can go look that up)....<;^)

Some people live for bureaucracy. I've always been a "private sector" guy myself. So I focus on efficiency and quality. I follow procedure and protocol because I embrace the spirit of safety.

D

P.S. That should be sufficient FAA troll bait to make some heads explode...LOL....

 

[BigAl07]

Careful with the TROLL remarks my friend.... that's trolling in and of itself. We're better than that.;

 

[flockshot]

If you are wild and bold enough to drive 2 miles per hour over the speed limit, you are probably wild and bold enough to take some pictures for your friends and neighbors.

Don't ask, don't tell, has served aerial photographers well since the beginning of regulations, and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.

We all know what the FAA is attempting to prevent and we respect that. It is not snap shots amongst friends.

 

[Javiejav]

The National Park can only control what happens on THEIR land... once the aircraft is in the air (National Airspace System) it's ruled by the FAA. So the NPS can mandate what can or can NOT happen on their land (just like any land owner or designated land manager can) but not what happens OVER it.

Now if you have a mishap and your sUAS goes down on NPS they have you cited for trespassing etc.

Thank you sir. Just wanted a second on this topic... back to your regular scheduled broadcast