170
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 74 points 1 year ago

They claim that they use photos from satellites and fixed-wing aircraft, but refuse to show the photos to both the owner and the news outlet. I can almost 100% guarantee the company is lying about how they obtained the photos and won’t show them because it would prove they did use a drone. Admitting to using a drone would open up a can of legal issues for them that they want to avoid.

[-] 0110010001100010@beehaw.org 18 points 1 year ago

What legal issues would they be opening themselves up to? All airspace in the US is regulated by the FAA. As long as they weren't in restricted airspace, following all the regulations, and the operator had the proper part 107 license there is nothing illegal about using a drone in this manner. There have been various discussions over the years about "owning" airspace over ones property but nothing has even gone to court that I'm aware of. Not to mention the company could have well seen onto the persons property while being over public space (I.E. the road).

I'm not arguing if this was right or wrong, but I see nothing illegal here.

[-] Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 1 year ago

Complete speculation on my part, but privacy laws? My understanding is that in the US, broadly speaking, you have a right to privacy where it would be reasonably expected, which I've usually heard defined as places you can't easily see from the sidewalk. If my understanding is true, then this would be an invasion of privacy just like some creep standing on a ladder peeping on people in their high fenced backyards, and there are generally laws against such behavior.

[-] 0110010001100010@beehaw.org 12 points 1 year ago

The article touches on that part actually right at the end:

As for legality of taking drone pictures over a house? California state law only forbids that if you're specifically doing so as a sort of peeping tom.

[-] nan@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Would’ve been nice if they explained it a bit more.

For example, California has some civil laws covering such things due to paparazzi using technology, but the key with those is the intent to capture people’s activities: https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?sectionNum=1708.8.&lawCode=CIV

[-] Solemn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 year ago

Oh nice, that's what I get for not reading it

[-] MossyFeathers@pawb.social 3 points 1 year ago

Don't be like reddit, read the articles before commenting my dude. I know it's a difficult habit to break, but you're less likely to end up looking like a fool and you get to poke fun at the people who obviously aren't reading the articles either!

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 2 points 1 year ago

Yeah, I think it’s a proximity thing. The risk of a drone crashing over a yard is part of that factor I think, which makes sense. Imagine a big drone crashing on some kid’s head 😬

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 4 points 1 year ago

I don’t know the exact details, but I think there are laws about proximity to the yard and home, plus the safety risks involved. It obviously varies from state to state, but I had a friend that sold his because of how weird the laws get.

Fun fact: I used to work with a client that was a filmmaker. They did tons of drone footage for movies, commercials, tons of big client things. They had a RED camera attached to a super high-end drone that required 2 operators: a camera operator, and a drone pilot (they also had their pilot‘s license). The guy regularly worked with the FAA to help shape the FAA laws for drone footage due to how murky they can be. I always thought that was super interesting.

[-] 0110010001100010@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Oh the laws are super-weird. I have my license and a drone which is why I felt the need to comment. I used to work for a utility company and we had a two-operator drone that required that. Though it was nothing high-end for filming. We used it for inspections, to back-fill crappy satellite imagery, and occasional community events. I've kept my license current intending to do something with it, just haven't really put a lot of work into that other than creating the LLC. One of these days I'll finally get around to it...I keep thinking real estate.

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 2 points 1 year ago

That sounds super cool. I’ve got some friends that have had a studio for years and they do all kinds of stuff. Promo videos for universities, commercials, events. I bet if you put it out there, there’s a market for it. I’ve seen the higher end real estate companies do flyover videos too. That kind of thing you could probably have a few queued up a day.

[-] 0110010001100010@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

It was honestly super-fun. Loved getting out in the field with my partner in crime to fly. Hmm may have to do a little more digging. I literally have all the pieces of the puzzle: LLC, drone, insurance, experience, etc. Just have to find the right way to break into the market. I thought I had a lead on doing tower inspections around the state but that ended up falling through. :( Cheers!

[-] orca@orcas.enjoying.yachts 2 points 1 year ago

Oof, what a bummer! A city contract like that sounds like it could be steady. You could go super niche. Make fun videos for a YouTube channel lol.

[-] 0110010001100010@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah it would have been guaranteed, high-paying work forever as long as I kept up the quality. All towers need to be inspected regularly. I thought about that but I'm not even slightly creative and wouldn't even know where to begin.

[-] Overzeetop@beehaw.org 2 points 1 year ago

Honestly, Real Estate is a race to the bottom. Not that I’m complaining, I found a place that will do a Matterport scan of a small building for $250 and send me CAD files of the floors (I’m a structural engineer, so getting a full 3D photo and scan plan without having to tape a place myself if a huge help).

I got my part 107 so I could justify spending $400 on an OG DJI mini to play with. Turns out it’s actually super useful for getting roof data on existing hvac units (I can read model and serial numbers off face plates). The down side is that it works so well I haven’t been able to justify spending more for a better drone.

load more comments (15 replies)
this post was submitted on 21 Jul 2023
170 points (100.0% liked)

Technology

37697 readers
294 users here now

A nice place to discuss rumors, happenings, innovations, and challenges in the technology sphere. We also welcome discussions on the intersections of technology and society. If it’s technological news or discussion of technology, it probably belongs here.

Remember the overriding ethos on Beehaw: Be(e) Nice. Each user you encounter here is a person, and should be treated with kindness (even if they’re wrong, or use a Linux distro you don’t like). Personal attacks will not be tolerated.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:


This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS