I don't have Part 107 nor do I intend to get one.   1) Can I sell photos/videos I have taken with my drone that have not been commissioned/contracted by the entity I am selling to???  In otherwords, I take a drone photo and two years later someone sees it and wants to buy a copy of it???  Or can I set up a table at a flea market and sell photos/videos I've taken with my drone???  2)  Can I gift drone photos/videos to relatives and then they sell them (either with or without my knowledge)???  Bottomline, if I don't go out and contract to sell my photos/videos (for example, I contact a realtor and offer my services to photo/video the exterior of houses...or I run an ad in a publication/internet), am I able to sell my photos/videos without a Part 107???

There are others far more qualified to answer this, but here are my conclusions:

(1) There are no loopholes.  If you are gaining value (i.e., receiving money or gaining something, including cost avoidance by doing your own roof inspection for example) -- then it is commercial activity.  So no, you can't sell your photos from a "recreational" flight.

(2) The gifting is less clear, but again, if it is considered something of value -- which presumably you wouldn't be giving someone if it wasn't -- then it is commercial activity.  Whether they sell them later or not is irrelevant.

(3) See #1.

The FAA is clear on generating monetary value with a Part 107.  The answer is you need a Part 107.  This would also be applicable with a monetized YouTube channel.  

I agree with Scott108 interpretation of Part 107.  As for gifting, I think it comes down to the intended use of the content and if that person or entity intends to use it to profit or gain value.  

1) Can I sell photos/videos I have taken with my drone that have not been commissioned/contracted by the entity I am selling to???  In otherwords, I take a drone photo and two years later someone sees it and wants to buy a copy of it???
This topic is guaranteed to bring out the folks that will tell you that the FAA won't let you sell a photo and turn into a silly bunfight.
The first two replies have already done that and they are wrong).
They imagine that the FAA are the who-can-sell-photos police (but they aren't).
The first two replies are getting hung up on the idea that your  hypothetical photos are commercial photos, and they think that's  important (but it isn't).
The FAA has no rules about your photos or what you do with them.
Their regulations don't mention a commercial photo anywhere, but they do mention commercial flight.

Were the photos in question taken during a legal, recreational flight?
If so, that's all the FAA cares about ... that flight and was it legal.
If you have the good luck to sell a photo shot during a legal recreational flight a year ago, that flight can't retrospectively become an illegal commercial flight

Or can I set up a table at a flea market and sell photos/videos I've taken with my drone???
You could .. maybe you could make lots of money too (or maybe you'd be lucky to make your stallholder fees).
But if it really took off and you were making real money and flying to make money, it would be a good idea to get a 107.
It's not hard or expensive.

2)  Can I gift drone photos/videos to relatives and then they sell them (either with or without my knowledge)???
Yes, you can.
The FAA has no interest in the photos, and certainly no interest in what someone else does with them.
They are interested the flights and flight safety.

Labroides Posted at 11-7 22:40
1) Can I sell photos/videos I have taken with my drone that have not been commissioned/contracted by the entity I am selling to???  In otherwords, I take a drone photo and two years later someone sees it and wants to buy a copy of it???
This topic is guaranteed to bring out the folks that will tell you that the FAA won't let you sell a photo and turn into a silly bunfight.
The first two replies have already done that and they are wrong).

I agree with you.  If at the time the photo was taken I was flying recreationally with no commercial intent, then the photo/video would not fall under the purview of FAA Part 107.  If, on the otherhand, my flight's intent was to take pictures to sell to others or at the request of others wanting to purchase them, then I should have the Part 107 license. Thanks for your input, Labroides!!!

While the FAA does consider intent, they also look at the "result" -- and more so a pattern of results.  I have been through this exact scenario with an FAA investigation as related to manned flights, and I can tell you that their interpretations of commercial vs recreational activity are identical for unmanned flights.  

There are some examples in the FAA's "Interpretation of the Special Rule for Model Aircraft" here:
https://www.faa.gov/uas/educatio ... craft_spec_rule.pdf

One of the specific examples given as a flight that is NOT considered recreational is:  "A person photographing a property or event and selling the photos to someone else."  It doesn't require being "hired" beforehand, and it doesn't require "intent to profit" before the flight, and it doesn't put a time limit between flight and sale.  

And this specific question/answer on the faadronezone site:
Q: Are drone pilots required to have a Part 107 certification in order to sell photos that they took using a drone?
A: If the activity is not for recreational purposes (and flying for the purpose of selling photos would seem a commercial purpose, not recreational), then yes, a Part 107 certificate and compliance with Part 107 would seem appropriate in the scenario you describe.

Some here will say that the phrase "for the purpose of selling" provides a loophole.  It doesn't, at least not in a wholesale fashion.  Call up your local FSDO and ask if you want it directly from them.

The FAA has great discretion, and contrary to popular opinion, they "aren't out to get anyone."  The investigators with which I have dealt were professional and fair.  If you occasionally give someone a photo or even sell one, you're unlikely to be on the FAA radar to begin with -- and if you were, evidence of a few sporadic sales would likely be looked at as "incidental" (depending on the particular investigator) and you wouldn't be hassled.  But if you regularly sell photos, asserting later that the flights from which they came were "purely recreational" would be viewed as a self-serving fabrication that is inconsistent with the observed facts.  You would be well served to get a 107 if you intend to sell photos.

Sell um' and enjoy the cash - just don't tell anyone

A J Posted at 11-8 12:55
Sell um' and enjoy the cash - just don't tell anyone

Agreed -- and from a practical perspective,  you are absolutely correct.  That approach will likely be no problem for the "occasional after-the-fact" hypothetical sale posed in the first post.  

Whether "within the letter of the law" or not, it is really unlikely that the occasional sale of a photo is ever going to draw the FAA's attention.  Why would it?  Unless there is some other kind of accident, damage, or privacy violation claim that is linked to the operation where the photo was sourced, they just aren't going to be involved.  They aren't running around looking for photo sales and cross checking for 107's.   Not getting caught doesn't mean the violation didn't occur, but it has the same practical result.

In other words...  The "legality" question is completely different from the "likelihood of getting caught" question.   

Scott108 Posted at 11-8 14:34
Agreed -- and from a practical perspective,  you are absolutely correct.  That approach will likely be no problem for the "occasional after-the-fact" hypothetical sale posed in the first post.  

Whether "within the letter of the law" or not, it is really unlikely that the occasional sale of a photo is ever going to draw the FAA's attention.  Why would it?  Unless there is some other kind of accident, damage, or privacy violation claim that is linked to the operation where the photo was sourced, they just aren't going to be involved.  They aren't running around looking for photo sales and cross checking for 107's.   Not getting caught doesn't mean the violation didn't occur, but it has the same practical result.