Tort law for drones and the ULC - How can it affect you?

Рет қаралды 1,652

Күн бұрын

In this video, Sarah Nilsson, JD and Greg Reverdiau go over the concept of tort and how it can be applied to drone operations. They also explain what proposed laws the ULC has drafted and how they can affect your daily operation.
Find more about Sarah's drone law practice at www.nilsson-law.com/ and her aviation website which contains lots of aviation information www.sarahnilsson.org/
Become a Part 107 commercial drone pilot with my test prep course. It has already helped over 3000 students successfully pass the test. Over 12 hours of content, hundreds of questions, lifetime access, get 25% off with this link.
pilotinstitute.com/course/par...

Пікірлер: 17

@SarasotaExperience 5 жыл бұрын

This channel will do very well Greg! Great video! keep doing this kind of stuff. awesome !

@PilotInstitute 5 жыл бұрын

Thank you so much, Lenny, I really appreciate it.

@georgee3401 5 жыл бұрын

Thanks for a very clear and useful presentation.

@souocara38able 4 жыл бұрын

This was great, thank you! It's interesting that Sarah mentioned the Newton case. I recently came across a lawyers blog which had a summary of the case and I thought that the summary basically substantiated something that I've been thinking for a while, that while cities can regulate what happens on the ground they can't do so in a way that would effectively ban aircraft, especially drones with their limited range from the national airspace. Anyway I had a discussion about this with somebody in the Facebook UAS legal group and this other person got very frustrated and angry with me because they kept saying I was completely wrong and I wouldn't accept that. I wonder if you or Sarah have published anything on that case that I could read or if somehow she would even be available to briefly go over the point of contention? Thanks!

@PilotInstitute 4 жыл бұрын

We have not published anything about the case but you might want to check Rupprech law, he has a lot of great posts, this might be one of them. I'll see if Sarah can come over here and leave a comment.

@souocara38able 4 жыл бұрын

@@PilotInstitute Thanks!

@Starlite4321 8 ай бұрын

Could you please provide a link to the Arizona preemptive law you mention in the video ?

@horacesawyer2487 2 жыл бұрын

4:05 What about flying over but not landing? Circling someone's house? Hovering outside a window? At common law a person's ownership of property extends from the lines on the ground to the center of the earth and all the way up to the heavens. I believe a drone in within the curtilage of your property lines would be a trespass. Or if I flew a squadron of drones and surrounded Sarah's office, would there be a separate trespass for each?

@PilotInstitute 2 жыл бұрын

You don't own the airspace above your house. Otherwise, you'd have to tell the airlines they can't fly their airplanes over your property. A drone flying over your property is not trespassing. A drone looking inside your window is invasion of privacy.

@horacesawyer2487 2 жыл бұрын

@@PilotInstitute : I beg the differ. We clearly don't own up to the heavens anymore, but we sure do own something. A person definitely owns the airspace in her property that he or she owns - or lawfully possesses. The question is, how much and to what extent? This is not clearly defined in most states, but rest assured we will see laws addressing it. Very interesting food for thought you have sparked for debate and I'm going to look into this further. For now, these are my unrefined thoughts. Have a good basis to believe that I'm more correct than not. Let's look at this: Let's say Sarah is outside in her yard working on a project. She is in deep thought drafting new legislation for a local government pertaining to zoning and airspace laws to more clearly protect property owners. If you drone around Sarah's yard creating an annoying distraction to her, then have you violated her property rights? Most states have codified laws that clearly state a person has a right to the 'quiet enjoyment and use' of the property she owns or legally occupies under lease. In the example, your drone is flying at an altitudes of 1 inch, 2 feet, 5 feet, zooming around up and down, performing aerobatics, buzzing about her yard to and fro, lights flashing, air whirring, probably won't fly as a lawful pursuit. So, you say, well I can cross 'over' property and go somewhere else. Ok, well are you allowed to do that? At what altitude? What about 20 feet? "Treetop" level? 100 feet? Or just be safe and take it up all the way to the 400 feet drone ceiling limitation? Good questions! Is it interfering with the quiet enjoyment and use of her property? At some altitude, federal law preempts state law in regard to navigable airways.* She can't prevent you flying over in an A150K Aerobat or a DC-3 as long as you don't violate the altitude restriction that applies to that area. You can stir up all the wingtip vortices you want, right? You can take pictures, give instruction, do turns around a point. But can you do stalls? Sure. If you're high enough, right? But how low can you go in a 'manned-womaned' aircraft? We all have to know that to get a Private Pilot license. FAR 91.119 says you have to maintain 500 feet AGL unless she is in a 'congested area,' then you cannot descend below 1000 above the highest obstacle with a horizontal radius of 2000 feet except when necessary for take-off or landing. But that regulation is directed at pilots operating aircraft, not necessarily the rights of property owners. So, how low can you go 'in' your drone? I'm not sure that is clearly defined. In some jurisdictions no doubt - but not all. The answer will probably turn on the 'quiet enjoyment' and 'use' issue, and of course whatever specifics are set forth in a particular jurisdiction. When it comes to "jurisdictions," we have many in the United States. Think about it. Federal, state, county, parish, city, town, (municipality), and yes there are some more terms. Each one may exercise dominion over its realm. Believe me. These are not easily 'findable' to the average person, or even attorneys. Try it and you'll see what I mean. It depends on the jurisdiction. Remember that. One more 'jurisdiction.' If you are 'lucky' enough to live in an exclusive gated community, or something similar, if you call that luck, then don't forget the rules that you agreed to when you signed your land purchase documents about mandatory membership in a Home Owners Association. Not my definition of 'good' luck. Fly your drone over your neighbor's swimming pool party and you may find the HOA will pounce upon you like a hungry panther demanding payment for infractions. As for the desire for uniform laws, that is something has been on the minds of many ever since someone discovered other human beings living somewhere else, and those other people followed a different set of rules. The goal for the same laws, everywhere, every when, every how. Except, the world is not all the 'same.' Do you want legal authority in your home town or have to go your nation's capital to try to get some answers, or "justice?" Or, world government. Give all the power over our lives to a supreme dictator over all the world and she can announce all the rules. As you can see, there are many views on "government." Don't forget "laws" come from government. Another discussion for another day. Read philosophy. Read political philosophy. Read the Bible. I don't mean to exclude any religion. In short, read all you can of the works of the great masters. When you read, you'll know who they are. I cannot hold a candle to any of them. The more I think I know, the less I realize that I know. Back to the little drones in your yard and about your person and property: (and the BIG drones) I can tell you this for certain, if you fly your drone and SPY on me in Georgia while I have an expectation of my privacy, you have just invaded my privacy. I am protected from that type of intrusion. Georgia was the first state to pass an invasion of privacy law. Invading privacy by drone can be done outside of my property lines also. We can all imagine many scenarios. If you damage me or my property with your drone, you are more than likely responsible. Do I have the legal authority to set up an anti-aircraft battery to bring down drones over my airspace? Let's save that for another discussion : ) Being silly, of course. But silliness can be used to help people remember. Conclusion Drone operators have the ability to and do trespass, violate property rights, and a host of other infractions. Personal Bias Am I against drones? Not at all. But I don't want to hit one and tear a hole in one of my deicing boots or bust my hot plate on my windshield, or force me to ground the aircraft for other repairs. We won't even talk about a crash. Life is short. Fly every chance you get ! I have been blessed to have been in the pursuit of things legal since 1985. An attorney in Georgia for going on 33 years. That privilege, (not legal right) the representation of people and doing my part to make the greatest legal system in the history of the world work for real and actual truth and justice, is the greatest honor and privilege that I have aside from my family. All the rest will be dust and ash. The second has been to be able to enjoy the freedom to fly aircraft. It did not come easy. It was not given to me. Add to that, the freedom to just participate in the world of all things related to aviation. A great big wonderful world! Nothing else even comes close. Note: the research I did for this comment consisted of thoughts inspired by the video and a cup of Dunkin Donuts coffee. THANK YOU Greg. Your channel is devoted to aviation. You work hard at it. Your logo is very cool. Bravo! THANK YOU Sarah. You are an accomplished scholar of aviation. You live in and have lived in a world where you are under tremendous pressure to be legally right and correct - all the time, everyday. Would love to hear from Sarah to correct me or point out anything at all. __________________ *Just like navigable waterways. (Another interesting topic: people damming up streams and diverting water to their own selfish uses)

@PilotInstitute 2 жыл бұрын

@@horacesawyer2487 Unfortunately none of these arguments are correct. You don't own the airspace. Period. No further argument. It has been discussed ad noseum and the answer is always the same. 91.119: read the last paragraph about helicopters. The Newton Case: Completely different, there are many articles online explaining the case in more detail. It is not an ownership case.

@ironhorsegladiator5034 Жыл бұрын

You can own anything and violate any laws in the book if you have some connections with the trump family, 'period'.