As the costs and skill required keep coming down, watch the tabloids/paparazzi really start using hobby aircraft to to stalk targets. Then somebody relevant will scream for a law, and there will soon be a law.

The most clever defense I read in one thread would be for the OP to change his advertising to just "Photography" and then note that Complementary Aerial shots would be included with each order.

of course I don't necessarily suggest using even a camera-carrying hawk to follow the pointer/flight-leader R/C plane ....

Alula glider - Hawk attack 2 (2 min 3 sec)

Note that during WWII, Skinner successfully trained otherwise dumb pigeons to ride inside bombs and peck at the quickly approaching target on the ground on a matrix-wired glass plate, steering the bomb.

Birds are very visually adept, and could be trained to recognize targets to film, either from hobby aerial photos OR simple drawings. I can make a super-quick line drawing of a bird, and my birds will instantly kiss the drawn bird's beak.

Not all birds are smart, but it has been now proven that the smartest birds are smarter than the smartest great apes. Including "Lucy" and other signing language-skilled apes.


L

One could also have a "hobby" camera in an R/C aircraft and another on the bird. With the bird following the plane over the same target it might be hard to prove which photography came from which IF one was careful.




and reality being what it is, the bird might actually get the better shot ....

What if you give away the Pics and RC time for free, but only charge for pc processing time.
loophole?

Originally Posted by HigherFlyer420

What if you give away the Pics and RC time for free, but only charge for pc processing time.
loophole?

Good idea!

All manner of "loopholes" have been discussed in the A/V A/P forum, and I believe
the consensus is, there are none. The people who operate commercially, just do it anyway.

ian

Originally Posted by xlcrlee

One could also have a "hobby" camera in an R/C aircraft and another on the bird. With the bird following the plane over the same target it might be hard to prove which photography came from which IF one was careful.




and reality being what it is, the bird might actually get the better shot ....

it's part of many birds' natural repertoire: example >

Originally Posted by ZeroPitch

No good hawk stories, but back in the late 80's I was prone to carrying around my first sailplane, a beat-up 1.8M 2ch ARF bought at Hobby Shack, in the back of my car, so I could play "can I actually slope it there?" Didn't always work out, but found some rather interesting flying spots that way :-)

On this particular day, I had to drive near downtown Huntington Beach, and return via PCH and Goldenwest. There was a perfect on-shore blowing, and it made me recall there is a 20'-25' bluff overlooking the beach at that corner. So, I flipped a U-turn, pulled over, strapped the wings on, got my nerves together, and chucked it off the cliff.

Made one pass and thought to myself, "the lift ain't great, but it's flyable! Yes!!!"

Preoccupied with my elated success and zoned in on the plane, I turned back around to make another pass... and... holy crap! More seagulls than I could count were right there, heading straight towards my plane, almost on top of me, and the plane heading straight towards them! I knew this wasn't going to end well.

Instantly reacting, I flipped her around in the tightest turn I could manage, ending up maybe 10-15' in-front of the lead birds, narrowly avoiding a head-on collision.

Calm down a little. Try to fly clean.

At the end of the bluff, I turned WAY out from the cliff, hoping I could keep it in the air long enough to get around the 300 or so obstacles presented by the flock as they flew by me.

To my utter shock, rather than keep going, the lead bird turned-in right behind me! And, the rest of the flock followed, one after the other, until the whole lot of them were flying in formation, with me setting the pace.

We kept this up for about 15 minutes, slope soaring the ridge back and forth, the gulls matching move for move and speed for speed, until I caught up with the tail-end stragglers and the lead bird got tired of the game... finally calling it quits.

I'd say that, and the day I kept my Oly II aloft for 7 hours straight and spec'ing out countless times (with only a forced landing for lunch), were about my most memorable RC experiences ever...

- Jay

Originally Posted by Daemon

All manner of "loopholes" have been discussed in the A/V A/P forum, and I believe
the consensus is, there are none. The people who operate commercially, just do it anyway.

ian

Yes they do and the whinners whine about them.

As I said on my forum - I don't get paid to fly - I get paid to leave. I fly for free.

Even if you could get around the FAA issues, how do you fly FPV on ham frequencies for the video downlink without violating the prohibition on commercial use of an amateur radio license?

I know you might not need FPV at all, if you're just panning a quad around a house or something, but the OP said he was flying FPV. That's a second, and potentially much larger regulatory problem, right?

Originally Posted by bmschulman

Even if you could get around the FAA issues, how do you fly FPV on ham frequencies for the video downlink without violating the prohibition on commercial use of an amateur radio license?

I know you might not need FPV at all, if you're just panning a quad around a house or something, but the OP said he was flying FPV. That's a second, and potentially much larger regulatory problem, right?

I would think so, but it does not seem to slow anyone down who is going to do it anyway. What's one more govt. agency?

A question for the OP? Do you have a HAM license?

It's simple... you can fly 72mHz for control - and have a cam operator work out the live link. But that sounds pretty boring to me. And in fact - it's LESS safe to fly LOS around targets than it is to fly FPV.

Originally Posted by SENTRY 62

It's simple... you can fly 72mHz for control - and have a cam operator work out the live link. But that sounds pretty boring to me. And in fact - it's LESS safe to fly LOS around targets than it is to fly FPV.

I would guess the tricky part is the cam link. Unless you use a part 15 device, (not likely), you would be operating it illegal if any compensation took place.

You guys are trying too hard.

I tell my clients all the time that don't/can't get paid to fly. But it is NOT illegal to sell video/photo footage that you own. I'll leave it at that.