YouTuber Drone Pilot Fined $182,000 (Phillydronelife)

[verticalflyer]

There is a very fine line between donations and profiting/marketing. This is across the board and rules are varying across regions/states.

In your example. You could accept a "donation" but if you continue to accept "donations" for your prints over a period of time then you are making a profit. Same example can be applied to a home brewer. They can brew their own beer for their own consumption but cannot sell that beer. Now if they took a "donation" on what they produced then, again, there is a fine line. Each state even has it's own line in all of those regards.

In some of the examples of this said pilot, they were accepting donations and possible monetization from not flying by the rules of the sky. And, it sounds like, flying in a manor that puts people at risk that just can't pull over to the side of a road.

 

[UasDriver]

Oh I get they were NOT playing by the rules. My point is when you DO play by the rules, convert that to art, you're still a felon for making money playing by the rules, and ya, the rules say you can't make money by playing by the rules, circular firing squad if I ever seen one

 

[Ansia]

I believe you all are misunderstanding. Part 107 is not about making money, but rather a flight with any intent other than for personal pleasure, which is the definition of hobbyist flying. When he took off, he already knew his purpose was to get footage for his channel, regardless if he made money or not, therefore making this matter fall into Part 107.

I myself fly all the time under Part 107 and I don't make any money from each flight. My money lies if I get the job of restoration. I simply use the photos to get measurements and get an idea what I am up against if I get the job. Also impresses clients when you include a 3D rendering of their building in the quote.

 

[UasDriver]

my intent this winter is study and pass the 107.
my hang-up, the day before the test, I am the same the day after, minus cash to make cash.
there should be no difference between qualified sUAV pilots, you have permission to fly, you are allowed to profit from that.

IF you break the rules about fling, then that's a separate "issue"

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Here in Canada since they changed the rules we now have a "Basic & Advance" certificate. We can work and make money from either one. Only difference is where the Basic can fly compared to the Advanced pilot. Advanced has more options like controlled air space and flying closer to buildings and people. Also for some Advanced flights you will need a aircraft approved for advanced operations and you have to follow the CARS.
Something I thought the US would do when they talked about making a hobbyist exam but it seems the exam they plan on putting out there is a joke. Canadas Basic exam is close to the US part 107 and the Advance goes even further with Flight reviews before you get your certificate. Pretty much like the rest of the world is doing come the end of the year.

 

[verticalflyer]

I believe you all are misunderstanding. Part 107 is not about making money, but rather a flight with any intent other than for personal pleasure, which is the definition of hobbyist flying. When he took off, he already knew his purpose was to get footage for his channel, regardless if he made money or not, therefore making this matter fall into Part 107.

I myself fly all the time under Part 107 and I don't make any money from each flight. My money lies if I get the job of restoration. I simply use the photos to get measurements and get an idea what I am up against if I get the job. Also impresses clients when you include a 3D rendering of their building in the quote.

I also believe you are misunderstanding as well and that is why I'm saying that it is a fine line. If a rec pilot were to go out with an intent to get footage to share with a community of other enthusiasts (no matter the medium), without monetization, then that rec pilot is taking part in recreational activities. Now if that pilot were to turn around and upload that content to, let's say youtube, and then turn on monetization on that video, or share that video in a stream and are accepting many many donations during, then that pilot is now taking part in activities that part 107 is about.

I wanted to get some decent footage of the old and new (low-noise) Autel props and then share that content with everyone here. My intention was not to monetize that in the least bit at all with just an intention of doing and providing to like minded individuals to help the community. So is that something you still find that fits what you are saying saying about intent, even if it was uploaded to a youtube channel that was not making anything at all from providing that content?

Q: Are drone pilots required to have a Part 107 certification in order to sell photos that they took using a drone?

A: If the activity is not for recreational purposes (and flying for the purpose of selling photos would seem a commercial purpose, not recreational), then yes, a Part 107 certificate and compliance with Part 107 would seem appropriate in the scenario you describe.

Webinar Frequently Asked Questions

www.faa.gov

Now let's say I want to enter into a video competition and take video with a drone and that competition has a prize of $500 that goes to the winner. This is where there is, again, a very thin line, to the point of where this isn't in my eyes a part 107 activity as nothing is being sold. The person receiving the prize may have to pay taxes on winnings but it could be well far away from a commercial activity.

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Now let's say I want to enter into a video competition and take video with a drone and that competition has a prize of $500 that goes to the winner. This is where there is, again, a very thin line, to the point of where this isn't in my eyes a part 107 activity as nothing is being sold. The person receiving the prize may have to pay taxes on winnings but it could be well far away from a commercial activity.

This is only my opinion so here goes. If the intent was to receive money being it a donation, prize or money for services then it would be considered illegal. Simple because you knew or hoped you would receive money for your video. It all comes down to the intent of when you were flying. Going out and flying recreationally is not flying for a photo contest. Now two years later someone wants to buy your footage I would say that is legal because at the time you had no intent to sell your video.
This information is not legal advice and it should not be construed as legal advice and should not be relied upon as such.

 

[verticalflyer]

This is only my opinion so here goes. If the intent was to receive money being it a donation, prize or money for services then it would be considered illegal. Simple because you knew or hoped you would receive money for your video. It all comes down to the intent of when you were flying. Going out and flying recreationally is not flying for a photo contest. Now two years later someone wants to buy your footage I would say that is legal because at the time you had no intent to sell your video.
This information is not legal advice and it should not be construed as legal advice and should not be relied upon as such.

I appreciate the thought on. I can see that example both ways as it's a grey and fuzzy area to me.

 

[UasDriver]

Thanks for all the input. I will always "believe" it's simply pay to play for $'s
I'm in it for fun, but i'm not a fool, so i'll pass the test, give the power it's shake-down money and move on. that way IF someone actually likes my work, then i'm blest by my Uncle and can take cash, no checks, no YT

 

[claudius62]

(a post by Steve Carr- Yuneec forum)

see and judge

 

[verticalflyer]

(a post by Steve Carr- Yuneec forum)

see and judge

Thanks for posting but he, as it appears most youtubers that use youtube as a business, thinks everyone that uses youtube is using it as a business. That's projection. He is incorrect, there are grey areas. People can have a monetized youtube channel but not monetize single videos. People can also have a completely non-monitized channel. Just because something is posted to youtube does not mean that it falls under part 107.

Outside of that, everything he posted is spot on and should be common sense but it's not, even for some part 107 pilots.

 

[UasDriver]

Watched the 1st one, and it was good information and basically what I already do. I did not know I could take off from the side of the road or sidewalks. I typically go to places that have no sidewalks and sketchy roads, just to keep the human factor small
hitting the road, hope to be fling in a couple days.
thanks again for the information, knowledge is a good thing......In minds that can process it

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

Thanks for posting but he, as it appears most youtubers that use youtube as a business, thinks everyone that uses youtube is using it as a business. That's projection. He is incorrect, there are grey areas. People can have a monetized youtube channel but not monetize single videos. People can also have a completely non-monitized channel. Just because something is posted to youtube does not mean that it falls under part 107.

Outside of that, everything he posted is spot on and should be common sense but it's not, even for some part 107 pilots.

hey vertical, sadly you are missing the point. I think you are getting caught up in this with the terms and money and yt as a biz and all. it's very simple, think about intent. it's a one-time shot; the "label" on that flight is applied permanently...at liftoff. it's never going to matter what happens later that night or tomorrow or next week. does that help?

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

Watched the 1st one, and it was good information and basically what I already do. I did not know I could take off from the side of the road or sidewalks. I typically go to places that have no sidewalks and sketchy roads, just to keep the human factor small
hitting the road, hope to be fling in a couple days.
thanks again for the information, knowledge is a good thing......In minds that can process it

please check the laws in your state or local area. generally, you are allowed to do pretty much anything from public property which often include the public sidewalk or the public road and the easement, etc. there may be minor restrictions based on time, place, and manner but generally as long as you don't block it or break any other existing laws (like harass the public, put the public safety in danger, etc), you are free to stand on the corner of 5th and main and launch your drone. however, you need to be careful because there are lots of city ordnances that prohibit the launch of drones from public property and it is debatable if these are lawful or not.

 

[Ansia]

I also believe you are misunderstanding as well and that is why I'm saying that it is a fine line. If a rec pilot were to go out with an intent to get footage to share with a community of other enthusiasts (no matter the medium), without monetization, then that rec pilot is taking part in recreational activities. Now if that pilot were to turn around and upload that content to, let's say youtube, and then turn on monetization on that video, or share that video in a stream and are accepting many many donations during, then that pilot is now taking part in activities that part 107 is about.

I wanted to get some decent footage of the old and new (low-noise) Autel props and then share that content with everyone here. My intention was not to monetize that in the least bit at all with just an intention of doing and providing to like minded individuals to help the community. So is that something you still find that fits what you are saying saying about intent, even if it was uploaded to a youtube channel that was not making anything at all from providing that content?

According to the FAA, any flight, monetized or not, that isn't only for personal pleasure, requires 107. Call your local FSDO and verify as much. I am aware there are many grey areas, but when in doubt, the FAA will fall it under 107. Just the way the government works, I guess.

 

[verticalflyer]

hey vertical, sadly you are missing the point. I think you are getting caught up in this with the terms and money and yt as a biz and all. it's very simple, think about intent. it's a one-time shot; the "label" on that flight is applied permanently...at liftoff. it's never going to matter what happens later that night or tomorrow or next week. does that help?

I'm not missing the point. My point of that comment was going against the person in that vid stating that youtube is a business. IE, not for everyone.

So let's say that I record photos or videos recrectionally then I am not, in any way, able to share that content with anyone without breaking part 107 rules? Or is it that if the intent is to fly recreationally then at a later time that pilot can commercialize their recreational footage? If so then I suppose I am missing that point.

There's a law (PDF) that describes how, when, and where you can fly drones for recreational purposes. You are considered a recreational user if you fly your drone for fun. It is important to know when and where you can fly and how to register your drone.

Fun is pretty broad.

Recreational Flyers & Modeler Community-Based Organizations

www.faa.gov

 

[Jagerbomb52]

Drone lawyer Jonathan Rupprecht explains $182,000 in FAA fines

After having seen a copy of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) proposed penalty letter, drone lawyer Jonathan Rupprecht explains in detail the $182,000 in FAA fines a drone pilot in Philly received. Drone lawyer Jonathan Rupprecht explains $182,000 in FAA fines In an article on Forbes...

dronexl.co

 

[UasDriver]

Fun is pretty broad.

HA, in my world, money is fun

This trip, I did check state laws, downloaded sectionals for each area, did launch from roadside, kinda puckery though. Even got a wavier to fly for 2 weeks in a state park, designated area only. I try hard to "play by the rules", but they're kinda like a muddy river, where can I jump in without..........

 

[kenautelevo2pro]

and there you have it:

...recreational guys might want to consider getting a remote pilot certificate and fly recreationally because the fines are less as a remote pilot under 107 than if you fly pure recreationally without a remote pilot certificate.