Slashdot Mirror
Americans No Longer Have To Register Non-Commercial Drones With the FAA (recode.net)
A federal appeals court on Friday struck down a federal rule that required owners of recreational drones and other model aircraft to register the devices with the Federal Aviation Administration. The FAA had announced the rule in 2015 in response to growing reports of drones flying near manned aircraft and airports. Drones have become increasingly popular with hobbyists and more than 550,000 unmanned aircraft were registered within the first year it was required. From a report: The court ruled that the FAA's drone registration rules, which have been in place since 2015, were in violation of a law passed by Congress in 2012. That law, the FAA Modernization and Reform Act, prohibited the FAA from passing any rules on the operation of model aircraft -- in other words, rules that restrict how non-commercial hobbyist drone operators fly. Now, if a person buys a new drone to fly for fun, they no longer have to register that aircraft with the FAA. But if flying for commercial purposes, drone buyers still need to register. The lawsuit was won by John Taylor, a model aircraft enthusiast, who brought the case against the FAA in January 2016. Since first opening the FAA's registration system in December 2015, more than 820,000 people have registered to fly drones.
The 2012 law explicitly prohibited the FAA from doing exactly what it did. The court's opinion is only 10 pages and gets directly to the point:
In short, the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act provides that the FAA “may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft,” yet the FAA’s 2015 Registration Rule is a “rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft.” Statutory interpretation does not get much simpler. The Registration Rule is unlawful as applied to model aircraft.
Registering or not registering a drone will not change the behavior of idiots who use them dangerously.
I had to register a foam electric RC airplane under their "drone" rules - bureaucracy run wild.
This!!
I"m curious...why do commercial drones have to be registered, but hobbyist do not?
I mean, the rules about where you fly them are the same, etc....so, why is it that commercial still have to be registered, but un-payed fliers do not? You have just as good or stupid drone operators regardless if they are making a buck at it or not...
Is this just for the govt to get its fees?
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
But isn’t the “rule of law” (FAA Modernization and Reform Act) EXACTLY what is being followed here?
Now I can operate my Telemaster (big, cheap RC plane) anywhere and any way I want, and nobody can tell me that I can't because they can't make any rules about model aircraft operations. It was in the news, it must be true.
All the close calls between manned aircraft and drones show why these regulations are needed. Unfortunately the courts have been stacked with Democrat judges who seem unconcerned with security and the rule of law. Whether it's the much-needed travel ban or drone registration, the Democrat judges have shown they will rule against security. The Democrats will be to blame when one of these drones causes a plane crash with loss of life.
- snruter rotsac
Jeez, you have great ability to blame Democrats on anything (and similar to others who are the opposite of you).
I don't have an issue whether or not a drone needs to be registered; however, I would like to see some rules for use of drone just to at least have something to hold on to when encounter any idiot drone hobbyist.
This won't end well
-Avid Hobbyist Drone Pilot
So why did this law apply?
Deregulating in 2017!!!
The Donald Rocks On!!!
Commercial flights are entirely different. The section 107 is actually a waiver that states you have permission to violate flight restrictions provided you use minimization and efforts predescribed to fly, via putting in for a NOTAM. Since you have passed a test you are legally able to fly in restricted airspace, such as across from an airport, or similar. A hobbyist can't fly a drone in a no fly zone, while a section 107 approved commercial flight may.
Registering or not registering a drone will not change the behavior of idiots who use them dangerously.
The number of drone incidents, either as a whole or as a percentage, is so vanishingly tiny in context that it's really a non-issue covered by criminal negligence and other laws and regulations already on the books. People using them dangerously is just the excuse fed to the public to justify registration. The actual reason is to be better able to track down and destroy video evidence of illegal & unconstitutional acts perpetrated by authorities obtained using civilian commercial camera-drones, and silence the owners/operators.
But of course, it's totally legit for government to fly aircraft and drones overhead with sophisticated electronic eavesdropping equipment hoovering-up everybody's communications and with high-resolution still and video cameras reading your book over your shoulder from 3,500 feet and storing it all for possible future use. In case someone becomes "inconvenient".
Strat
Progressivism (aka US 'Liberalism'): Ideas so good they need a police/surveillance-state to enforce.
Sure it would. RC aircraft have existed for more than 50 years yet most people used them responsibly. The reason for that is that RC planes used to be hard to fly, and that has kept the idiots away. Now that drones have removed the difficulty barrier, registration can create another. Most drone purchases are impulse buy Christmas presents for 5 year old Bobby, if buying a drone included a registration process only people serious about them would get one.
False flag, strawman. Relax, he's on your side trying to make the other side look like retards that they are.
They need numbers so I can report the jerks or find them and sue them when needed. Unfortuately, it's illegal to shoot drones down. And there a LOT of jerks with drones.
Probability vs consequence. Yet another person who has no clue what risk assessment and risk management it's all about. If there it's a way to find out if someone flew their drone into the window of a plane (by registering the drone) then people will use them more wisely.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
I've watched plenty of videos from hobbyist drones that went straight up at high attitudes. I wonder if such attitudes are possible in Silicon Valley, as the whole area is a flight path for multiple airports in the region. I'm thinking about getting a camera drone.
I want my 5 dollars!
Time for a class action suit by all those that already paid the registration fee(s).
I"m curious...why do commercial drones have to be registered, but hobbyist do not?
Because the type of people that become entrepreneurs and the type that become bureaucrats are polar opposites. People in government often have a reflexive hostility toward anything to do with commerce.
I'm wondering if we're gonna have to have a major airline accident over a population center from some kid's $500 drone before somebody takes action. Or am I just completely off base here? I don't know enough about aviation to say for sure and the articles I've read don't really touch on the issue. Most of the news outlets seem to have sided with the hobbyists over the FAA here.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Most drones bought for 5-year-old Bobby are cheap, plastic pieces of shit that can barely work outside - let alone pose more of a hazard to aircraft than, say, a goose. This whole thing is solving an imaginary problem.
W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
A court decision, based on a regulation promulgated under Obama, is now the responsibility of Trump ? Oh my...
Because the type of people that become entrepreneurs and the type that become bureaucrats are polar opposites. People in government often have a reflexive hostility toward anything to do with commerce.
That's probably for the best, people in commerce often have the attitude of "Who can I screw the most for the least effort" as evidenced by the plethora of spam, fraud, malfeasance, and other behavior of those who decide that if they can get away with it, it's all good.
Somebody has to reject that mindset.
Not really. The FLIGHTS aren't any different at all. Unless a 107 holder explicitly seeks and gets authorization to fly where he's not normally allowed to, the commercial user doesn't get to do anything the hobby user gets to. The number of people who seek and get authorization to fly a small quadcopter at, say, an airport or over a prison are exceedingly small.
The fact that an individual machine that weights about the same as a stick of butter must registered for one person, but not for the other, is still capricious and silly.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Ah, never actually done anything on your own, have you? Didn't think so. Your cartoon villain impression of what it means to be self employed would be funny if it weren't so childishly toxic. Grow up.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
No. There were already millions of these units flying around with untold millions of flight hours on them before the FAA decided to collect their $5 for every toy sold. And the number of collisions with aircraft that even broke somebody's NOSE? Run down the list, I dare you. While you're at it, compare that to the number of people who've died playing soccer, or who've been hit and killed by another skier on the slopes. Go ahead, do some comparing.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
That's it! You're brilliant!
We need to register soccer balls and skis!
(And bathtubs and toasters while we're at it. No problemo, they're all going to be connected to the Internet anyway.)
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
What about when some peeping tom uses one to film your backyard?
I think that if some boob runs a drone over his neighbors yard the neighbor should be allowed to knock it down. It is already like this with other intrusions. In most places if a tree crosses the property line your neighbor can trim it. Registration might have curbed some of this as the neighbor could have alerted authorities to the drone.
A court decision, based on a regulation promulgated under Obama, is now the responsibility of Trump ? Oh my...
No, the LAW, passed by congress in 2012 is the law. Period. The Obama administration decided to violate that law by conjuring up a pointless new regulatory limitation and fine threat outside the bounds of that law. The court just decided that the Obama administration's over-reach needed to be smacked down, as it deserved to be. That doesn't suddenly make the Trump administration newly responsible for anything. The law said that the FAA could act as if it had responsibility or authority in this area, and that's still the case. Obama grabbed executive power where he was not allowed, and now that power grab had been undone. How does that involve Trump? Be specific.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
But it will change the cost to find and prosecute said idiots after damages have been done. Don't forget, scaring the public is very expensive.
Wasn't the FAA going to post the whole drone registry on the internet? Hopefully they will have to destroy the illegally obtained personal information.
I want my money back that the FAA required me to spend for illegal registration - WITH INTEREST! Time to start a class action lawsuit.
Oh look, it's StenchBore, with his usual malignant ranting. Turns out self-employed, or running a major corporation, or a salesman on the showroom floor there's plenty of toxic people around, willing to cheat, defraud, and otherwise act in a fashion that truly does merit condemnation.
Of course, you'd rather pretend that recognizing that kind of mindset is the problem, because you just don't want it to be acknowledged that many people are truly deplorable. After all, if we admit they exist, then we're justified in taking action to rein them in, and that would mean you can't just declare government to be the problem. Because actually, the scariest words in America have always been "It will be good for business" as the greed and selfishness that comes from a love of money has been the root of vastly more harm than anything else.
What about when some peeping tom uses one to film your backyard? I think that if some boob runs a drone over his neighbors yard the neighbor should be allowed to knock it down.
Are you going to shoot me down in my little Cessna 172 at 1000ft as well? Because I can effectively do the same thing.
I'm not a complete idiot... Some parts are missing.
They _all_ work outside, what they have huge problems with is wind more than 1 mph.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
I wholeheartedly agree on the capricious and silly. It still bothers me the FAA knowingly tried to land grab, and forced a lot of people to pay for a registration, that they had no right to mandate. Signing the damn agreement then made you give up/agree to waive rights that they had no authority to regulate or control legally, and framed it the way they did, which still seems illegal. That being said I am seeking to fly near an airport, the 107 is the waiver request. Now that it is a fully insured, and legal FAA vehicle technically the waiver should be granted, provided the violations we need to achieve for the flight are described in how we will mitigate the hazards that are associated. I'm not expecting a lot of rapidity however.
See my accidental AC post ...
I agree with everything you said.
We need to put high power lasers on the drones now. They will make pretty looking effects for the passengers and pilots in the sky.
And all the people involved in the bureaucracy are absolutely perfect angels too.
This is why you should ignore regulations until they're vetted by the Supreme Court.
Most drones bought for 5-year-old Bobby are cheap, plastic pieces of shit that can barely work outside - let alone pose more of a hazard to aircraft than, say, a goose. This whole thing is solving an imaginary problem.
They also weight less than .55 pounds, so aren't what you imagine was trying to be solved.
It's disturbing how brazen various government agencies have gotten about flouting the law these days. From what I understand it was a pretty clearly illegal for the FAA to make this a requirement. And even from a general perspective it was unnecessary, as misuse of a drone still clearly falls under reckless endangerment/assault laws already on the books (any cop/prosecutor who says otherwise simply doesn't want to charge someone).
And all the people involved in the bureaucracy are absolutely perfect angels too.
In Trump's America? Of course not. People can love money, no matter where they stand. Even Plato knew that. And he's been dead for over 2000 years.
Because even the bureaucracy can be corrupted by the avaricious. That's one of the worst things about the noxious nature of commerce, it is an infection that requires constant vigilance to prevent.
I'd be glad to talk about that with you, if you wanted, rather than just resort to pointless rhetorical rejoinders.
Stankmoan, however, just wants the freedom to do whatever he wants without challenge. He hates admitting that covetousness actually is a problem, it's offensive to bring up the failings of Wall Street con men, Southern Plantation owners, or Junk mail scammers, or even how they are the ones who weasel into government, corrupting and manipulating it for their own ends. He can't even admit the death toll of greed, not one bit.
That's why you can't talk with him, there's nothing there except ranting and screaming like a tantrum throwing toddler. Don't emulate the RankPhony, he's really a joke, all he has is shrieks and caterwauling, no ability to contribute anything of substance.
Another win for Trump!
Every soccer field near me now has a paramedic team on game days.
The electric circuits in homes are now requiring GFCI and other safety measures.
Welcome to the world where we do spend money stopping harm from happening.
Democrats? How do you know the guy who fought this law is a Democrat? I would suspect he could very well be a Republican who wants the government to be less restrictive.
Point is you're an idiot for pointing fingers at a political party.
It still bothers me the FAA knowingly tried to land grab, and forced a lot of people to pay for a registration, that they had no right to mandate.
Putting aside whether they had the right to do it or not, they allowed free registrations - and the free registration period did not expire until after the holidays, where lots of people would have gotten drones for presents. So everyone that had a drone on or before Jan 20, 2016 could register it for free. Even paid, we are talking $5 here. They could have easily made the fee so expensive it would have killed the market.
I tried every decent and legal way I could think of to resolve the issue w/the business before I rented the chicken suit
Really? You are going to fly in circles around my home aiming your camera at my backyard? I mean, technically you could do it but I doubt you could do it for that long a period.
Your neighbors drone on the other hand, while likely to have a worse camera then you, can hover his drone upward in his own yard and get the best possible angles of your backyard with ease.
Drones cost anywhere from $50-$500, but likely could get a decent one for around $150. I don't know how much it cost to rent the plane with pilot or fly your own plane with your own pilot license, but you still pay for fuel and likely some kind of take off and landing fee for the day trip.
But yeah, your Cessna 172 at 1000ft would work just fine to invade someone's privacy but isn't really feasible for most people.
It is already illegal for model aircraft and manned aircraft to share the same airspace, and there are rules to prevent this and organizations such as AMA operate airfields for hobbyists specifically to prevent this.
But it still happens, I recall reports of a giant scale model plane (1/2 scale!) crashing into a small aircraft and while there were no injuries it was thousands of dollars of damage and a very pissed off pilot. It was another case where R/C event was held at a private airfield normally used for full size craft, but the proper notices were not filed.
That said the likely consequence of sucking a model into a commercial airliner is a very expensive fine and a tremendous civil suit for the turbine engine repair. Collision with a small aircraft can be more catastrophic as the planes are smaller and a harder to control when damaged and the pilots tend to be less experienced.
Most tragic model aircraft accidents are with bystanders on the ground. Race events where high speed planes or stunt events with large class helicopters tend to be the most dangerous for ground-based pilots and spectators. 250-size FPS drone racing is likely as safe to manned aircraft and spectators as a golf course. (i.e. small but non-zero risk)
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
it's going to be the occasional one off, like most airline accidents. It's just those usually kill people. Sometimes lots of people.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
this makes a lot of sense. I see hospital choppers all the time and a drone could screw one of those up real quick.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
Nobody understands the law. Common people don't understand what is legal and what is not legal. And government bureaucratic don't either. The legislature are frequently unsure of the laws they are supposed to read and vote on as well. Courts are about the only way anything gets done, it's not a real law until it's been tested in court. I don't have to be a lawyer to give you this advice: you don't want to be the guinea pig used for testing a new law.
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
While this might make drone operators happy, Beau still has to register as a sex offender.
posting monetized flight videos on youtube is /still/ commercial use.
Well, he isn't entirely wrong. The part to take issue is the interpretation of "often".
Most people actually behave, the problem is that it only takes one asshole to ruin it for everyone else.
Most people doesn't want to go around and murder other people, but if there is one who wants to do that we need laws against it so that we can deal with the problem in an orderly fashion.
Still won't prevent every murder, but it keeps things manageable.
Do you know about those "track your spouse" apps? How long do you think we will go until someone starts a business to track people with a drone?
To cut costs you will have one operator for many drones and just pay less attention to each drone.
Can non-commercial use be reckless? Of course it can. Commercial use can start out responsible but when going for high profits recklessness is guaranteed.
That is why some countries requires commercial drivers to keep records of how much they sleep but non-commercial drivers doesn't.
Non-commercial drivers can occasionally drive while tired, but without regulation commercial drivers started to do it at a large scale as part of the business.
Oh, I see somebody is still concocting excuses for the businessmen's ever growing list of crimes. They had to do it on their own, so that's why they defrauded customers, it was only a bill they refused to pay, they didn't think anybody would get hurt even though they knew the drywall had toxic chemicals inside!
Don't mind you, you're just upset that people get put in jail for that, it's part of your repellent mindset. One day, however, you'll face the consequences of your behavior.
Actually if you were operating your Cessena 172 below legal altitude (below 500') you would have a tag so I could report you.
The problem with the club field argument is that if you want to use a drone for photography it gets pretty boring to just take pictures of the club field. I enjoy flying my quadcopter, but if all I could do with it is fly it just for the sake of flying it I wouldn't have bothered.
Two different hobbies.
"Well, good luck finding a judge that doesn't run a bestiality site."
Wow, that's sure some insightful commentary on the specific issues I mentioned. Your keen insight is really constructive! I really appreciate how you're demonstrating your understanding of how Obama's man Huerta at the FAA had to use and end-around and use the DoT as a regulatory authority to get around the word of a plainly written law. Your grasp of the details make your personal ad hominem worth listening to.
Ooops! Silly me, you have no idea what's actually going on here, and are just acting like a child. Carry on! Your complete lack of understanding about why issues like this - which go directly to separation of powers and the integrity of the constitution - is nicely on display.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
The problem with the club field argument is that if you want to use a drone for photography it gets pretty boring to just take pictures of the club field. I enjoy flying my quadcopter, but if all I could do with it is fly it just for the sake of flying it I wouldn't have bothered.
Two different hobbies.
And this is the problem. If you fly without regard for AMA rules, then you are not part of the AMA and don't deserve the same protection. It's precisely why some people want to have everyone register their drones and pay a fee for each flight.
Some people are behaving quite reasonably. They are flying quad copters on on private property, outside of FAA restricted airspace, and below the FAA ceiling for models. This eliminates interactions between model and manned aircraft, it still annoys people on the ground which is where most of this pressure against drones is coming from. Others are flying over public roads, near small airports and doing FPV at higher altitudes and beyond line-of-sight. And none of that behavior is acceptable and we don't have to tolerate such a "hobby".
“Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
There's $5 I'm never seeing again