read the case... i dunno, this was the government flying over his house with big airplanes, not a civilian with a 2x2 foot quad coopter lol. 86feet probably wouldn't apply to us, if it does then yeah something changed since 1946.So for discussion sake. Let us say the subject was found guilty for such action. My question is what damages has that land owner suffered. What would be the right amount of retribution for plaintiff.
I would say zip. Plus also that drone pilot most likely has no monetary value to provide and if the indictment was for trespassing then yes he will serve but again that is fairly hard to prove this because they have to prove he had a malicious intent to enter the property to invoke fear or harm.
read the case... i dunno, this was the government flying over his house with big airplanes, not a civilian with a 2x2 foot quad coopter lol. 86feet probably wouldn't apply to us, if it does then yeah something changed since 1946.
these privacy laws don't really compensate someone for "damages" sure punitive damages are always there but the big fear is the time in prison if convicted and the fines to the accused. again if there is nothing in it for the lawyer it's going to be the plaintiff's time and money to come after you, unless they are a lawyer. i doubt a person could "come out ahead" for going after a i1 pilot for privacy or trespassing.
i think anything but putting the thing 2 feet from someone's window for 5 minuets is just fine.
Yes I've read the case and most of the different Law Schools interpretation online.
I would argue that since the Feds calls our drones aircraft it should fall in the same category as a passenger plane but it is lighter and smaller.
I agree I would doubt any plaintiff will come out ahead or even break even in this case and again you have to prove that the pilot had a malicious intent to trespass.
So to add to this I can only state the law in The People's Republic of Kalifornia.
The Legal Definition of Penal Code 602 PC "Trespass" in California
Penal Code 602 PC (together with related sections of the California Penal Code) describes over thirty activities that are considered criminal trespass.7
The most common acts that are prohibited by California trespassing laws include:
As y'all can see they have to prove you had intent and a motive to trespass onto one's property.
- entering someone else's property with the intent to damage that property,8
- entering someone else's property with the intent to interfere with or obstruct the business activities that are conducted there,9
- entering and "occupying" another person's property without permission,10 and
- refusing to leave private property after you've been asked to do so.11
DJI's no fly criteria are not identical to the FAA'a. DJI is 3 miles with an ascending angle, and the FAA is 5 miles from an operating control tower. So DJI will actually let you get as much as 2 miles inside of the FAA limit (depending up on your altitude.).y..., dji is in compliance with the FAA with no-fly zones.....