i_anderson
lvl.3
United States
Offline
|
Actually, I interpret that document *very* differently! I actually think it's a little move towards "sensible" enforcement when needed, and not at all that "they're trolling YT".
Firstly, it says this is to help them determine what action to take when notified of - They're not searching, but if someone complains about a vid that may be contrary to title 14 here's the action to take.....
Further, their personnel are expected to use critical thinking when addressing the issue - If it's below 400', not near an airport, is flying LOS etc, it sounds like we're in the clear, even if a "complaint" is received - Remarkable common sense it seems.
It then goes on to define the protocol to follow when receiving notification of videos with potentially noncompliant UAS operation. Again, they're not trolling, but defining what to do when someone bitches about one. It also lays out the "educational outreach" that is the initial follow up *if* they believe it's in contravention of CFR14. Only if the "bad boy" further pisses them off, and the evidence is strong, will they come after you - And even then only if the UAS operation resulted in a medium to high potential of *actual* endangerment to the NAS.
I have no idea what constitutes low, medium or high endangerment levels, but again guess below 400', LOS, etc is good to go.
It also says they have no authority to direct or suggest that media must be removed. [Contrary to what the Army Corps of Engineers claimed in a letter published here a while back..... Seems to me those guys way overstepped their authority.]
It finally notes that media posted does not automatically constitute a commercial operation or purpose, or other non-hobby or non-recreational use as had been claimed by people being "warned" about ad's preceding their hobby videos.
I may be wrong, but I read it that you'd *really* have to piss them off, and be blatant about it before they want to get involved.
A step in the right direction it appears to me.
Cheers,
Ian |
|