First, I understand that to fly commercially or to be hired for jobs in which someone is paying you-you have to have your FAA 107 license.   With that said, can I legally sell a landscape sunrise photo I took if the photo was taken for the fun of it and not for commercial reasons without an FAA 107 license?  In other words,  I didn't take the image with the intent of selling it or because I was hired by someone to do so.

In my opinion if you sell the photos it now become commercial endeavor.

There is a long thread on a DJI Facebook forum regarding this which is why I asked.  One side says if the "intent" wasn't for commercial purposes than it is legal.  Another side says you simply can't make a profit on anything, ever, without your FAA 107.   The funny thing is all those arguing supposedly have taken and passed the test which just goes to show how confusing this can be.

My weak understanding is, if somebody out of the blue wants to use the photo and wants to give you money for the photo, it may be okay.  If you actively sell the photo, it probably isn't ok.  

In other words, if I am out there marketing an image trying to find buyers it would be for commercial use.   But if someone sees an image of mine through social media, one that I didn't take with the intent to sell, it would be different.

fans0ab4d934 Posted at 2018-1-15 10:14
There is a long thread on a DJI Facebook forum regarding this which is why I asked.  One side says if the "intent" wasn't for commercial purposes than it is legal.  Another side says you simply can't make a profit on anything, ever, without your FAA 107.   The funny thing is all those arguing supposedly have taken and passed the test which just goes to show how confusing this can be.

It's not just part 107, but what actually constitutes flying "for compensation or hire" is equally confusing for part 61 pilots too. Lots of grey areas, hidden traps and individual interpretations of individual situations by FAA. It's a mess. So it's not necessarily the fault of part 107 certificate holders.

In any case, the general rule is to avoid anything that could even faintly smell like "flying for compensation or hire" (other than the explicit exceptions regarding "incidental" flying to a commercial purpose, paying "pro rata share" for your costs incurred in the flight, etc)....

As for that specific question, I bet it could go either way......

The accepted response in most commercial circles is, "the intent at the time of flight determines if 107 is applicable". If you just wanted a photo while you are out flying your drone and took it and 5 days later someone saw it and was willing to pay for it, no 107 is required. If someone told you they would pay you for the photos of the subject and you flew with the intent to sell the photos, you need a 107.

I was told by the FAA, if it has to do with a business(yours or someone else’s)/exchange of money, Part 107.

Rvrrat14 Posted at 2018-1-16 06:00
I was told by the FAA, if it has to do with a business(yours or someone else’s)/exchange of money, Part 107.

There it is...straight from the horses mouth.  Strict interpretation, no grey areas.   

I'll throw my 2 cents in. You cannot sell of make money off of videos or photographs taken by your drone. Only a 107 certified pilot can.       Now as for fines. Lets say a real estate company hires you to do a fly over of a house they are trying to sell. If the FAA finds out about this, They fine the real estate company $11,000 for each video and the person that flew the drone will have a fine of $1000 for each instance. So theres that.

Not that I’m condoning anything, but their is no way they actually monitor this with any sort of system.  The FAA is super underfunded and understaffed.  

The FAA is concerned with aviation safety.
Fly in a reckless manner and endanger people and they will take action.
The FAA are not the who-can-sell-photos police and whether you sell a pretty landscape photo or not would be about the last thing they would have any interest in.

https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2018/ ... -without-a-license/

If you receive any compensation for the photo you need a Part 107.

It is a little complex and can be confusing, but I think it breaks down like this:

Was your flight a 101 or a 107?  This must be determined ahead of your flight.  If it's deemed to be a Part 101, you must plan to follow all the 101/Sec 336 rules, and that would include, of course, flying as a hobbyist.  So you go about your 101 flight, and during your 101 flight, you know you must follow all the 101 rules and not break a single 101 rule.  And you do.  At the end of your flight, you must have completed your flight having not broken a single 101 rule.  So now you have landed and completed your 101 flight.  The flight is over, and the flight was a legal 101 flight.  

At some point in the future, somebody sees your wonderful photo posted on social media or wherever.  But it's a 640x480 and he'd like the original 4K photo.  He offers you money for it.  Can you accept the money and give him a copy of the 4K photo?  The answer would be yes because you didn't break any FAA rules during your flight.  It was a legit 101 flight and it is completed.  Being offered and accepting money for a random hobbyist photo does not suddenly cause your completed 101 flight to change and become a rogue 107 flight.  Hence, as Labroides points out, the FAA would be completely uninterested in this case since the pilot did in fact follow all the FAA rules during the flight.  

For interest in the UK the answer would be categorically that you would need to be qualified before you can sell any image. Labroides put it correctly that the FAA over there would not be interested if you sold a photograph. The police might be if it was a slow day for them. I think it might also depend on where the image ended up. If it was your friend's house then no one would really notice, if it was for a giant billboard in New York then that may be another story.

I don't think there is enough solid historical evidence or facts to not let you just sell the picture period and take the money for it.  What is the worst thing that can happen and how much money are we talking here?  Are you going to do this as a business or is this just a one or two time thing?

The way I understand it is that if the flight was determined to be under Part 107 BEFORE the flight was initiated, then and ONLY then can the photo be used to "further business interests" (be exchanged for currency or services).  So, if you don't have your Part 107 license, the flight would automatically be under Part 101, thus you cannot sell it in any situation.  That being said, I would imagine unless you make a habit of it, the FAA isn't going to come knocking down your door.  But be aware that you are not compliant with the law and base your decisions on that.

That's how it was explained to me from multiple sources, and I'm set to take my 107 test on Monday (wish me luck)!

The FAR’s are crystal clear on this. No. Will they catch you....maybe.  Just get a 107 and not worry about it and make money legally.