Should DJI promote drone law-breaking?

[Spark 317]

Most of those who view but don't comment have already had their minds spoken through other's words ... MOST... And find it pointless to repeat what others have said

Yep.
Hit that LIKE button .

Time saver.

 

[Splaterspark]

It seems to me that DJI have a vested interest in drone operators doing the right thing and behaving responsibly with their drones. If drone operators do the wrong thing and behave irresponsibly it will generate negative media coverage, resulting in governments bringing in stricter drone laws. Stricter drones laws will discourage people from buying drones. This must have an effect on DJI sales and their profitability. I think their No Fly Zones as part of the DJI Go App shows that they understand their shared responsibility that people do the right thing with their drones.



So when DJI announced they were starting a Facebook page I went to have a look at it (to follow and get my 1000 points also). On the DJI Facebook page there is a lovely photo of Sydney Harbour, obviously taken by a drone operator named Yiran An. Australia is a beautiful place, and Sydney Harbour is one of our most famous landmarks, known worldwide.

Sydney Harbour, and almost all surrounding areas – including Middle Harbour, White Bay, Rose Bay and the Parramatta River up to Ryde are all part of a restricted airspace due to the large number of helicopters and seaplanes that fly there. Now I am not saying that Yiran An has broken the law (as only qualified and licenced drone pilots, with specific permission per flight from Civil Aviation and Safety Authority (CASA) can fly in this space) but if this is not the case and I was this person I would be worried. It is known in Australia that CASA monitors drone footage uploaded to Youtube and other social media and prosecutes individuals who break our drone laws. (Drone pilot fined over 'hazardous' Jeffreys-Stefanovic wedding flight)
Now I am not expecting that DJI should know the drone regulations of every country, or even if every photo or video that gets uploaded to their Facebook page complies with local regulations, but if they promote these photos and videos are they at least encouraging drone operators to do the wrong thing? If I didn't know any better, I could have seen this image and thought "that looks cool, I'm going out with my spark to take some shots of Sydney Harbour too".
What people do with their drones affects all of us, and as I stated earlier, the more people who do the wrong things with their drones will result in bad press and stricter regulations. This is our hobby - is this what we want? Do you agree that DJI should only be showing people using their drones responsibly? Or is this beyond their corporate responsibility?

Interested to know what you think. (I have also posted this on DJI forum. I just have sneaking suspicion that DJI moderators may take this down if they think it reflects negatively on them).

That wedding video is an interesting one. Surely everybody standing looking at that drone prior to the pull back knows what's going on, consents to the flying of the drone and is thereby 'under the control of the operator'? I'm not sure what the grounds for the fine are (granted, I don't know Australian aviation law). I'm pretty sure the 30m/50m take-off/flight rules in the UK only apply to people who aren't 'under your control'.

 

[RaWine]

I would expect DJI to operate somewhat like other big companies. In such cases, pull official endorsements, issue retractions, and in some cases offer apologies. But more or less make reasonable efforts to ensure what they are sponsoring is ethical as well as legal. Or else, they become an outlaw company I guess. Some companies do get a reputation for pushing the edge. But with all the possible risks of reducing their customer base with legal restrictions raining down, I can't imagine why they would pursue such an option.

 

[Sparkbart]

Maybe because I live in the USA, I believe "innocent until proven guilty". As long as no laws were "obviously" violated (like the one video in Tel Aviv, I believe, where the guy was operating his drone right in the middle of an Airport take-off/landing approach) I make the assumption the person made the video/took the pics legally. Of course unless the make statement to the contrary...

 

[Lastrexking]

Short answer - no, they shouldn’t.

Longer answer..... I think Drone use is over regulated. Yes, there’s a need for tight control near large aircraft airspace and some sensitive areas. But, in general Drones are incredibly safe now and there are very few incidents of people getting hurt by them - especially now they’re getting smaller. Some may argue about privacy, but someone can do just as much invading of privacy with an iPhone or DSLR with a zoom lens.
I think maybe DJI hope if they and other manufacturers get enough units out there then they become a big enough lobby group to initiate change in regulation. To do that hey need to make buying a drone attractive- hence the add.

 

[guest191]

That wedding video is an interesting one. Surely everybody standing looking at that drone prior to the pull back knows what's going on, consents to the flying of the drone and is thereby 'under the control of the operator'? I'm not sure what the grounds for the fine are (granted, I don't know Australian aviation law). I'm pretty sure the 30m/50m take-off/flight rules in the UK only apply to people who aren't 'under your control'.

Drone regulations in Australia are really clear, and waivers do NOT override the law. This guy puts it really well...
watch

 

[guest191]

Short answer - no, they shouldn’t.

Longer answer..... I think Drone use is over regulated. Yes, there’s a need for tight control near large aircraft airspace and some sensitive areas. But, in general Drones are incredibly safe now and there are very few incidents of people getting hurt by them - especially now they’re getting smaller. Some may argue about privacy, but someone can do just as much invading of privacy with an iPhone or DSLR with a zoom lens.
I think maybe DJI hope if they and other manufacturers get enough units out there then they become a big enough lobby group to initiate change in regulation. To do that hey need to make buying a drone attractive- hence the add.

Or is it one of those "it's all fun and games until someone get's hurt" kind of thing? I'm also concerned about over-regulation, but condoning or tacitly approving of inappropriate drone usage, won't that result in more regulations making it more difficult to responsibly enjoy our hobby?

 

[RaWine]

Some may argue about privacy, but someone can do just as much invading of privacy with an iPhone or DSLR with a zoom lens.

I agree though public perception is important. If a property owner inquires what you're flying near or over his property, probably better to say a drone, than emphasize it's a flying video camera which is recording what it sees, and may end up on the Internet.

To me if someone is recording over my place, I'm not concerned, but can't assume everyone feels the same way, and many people vote.

Of course, I'm not burying bodies in the backyard or running a drug lab, and what not. YMMV.

 

[LuvMyTJ]

Since there is the possibility he was legal no one can speculate if it was or wasn't without more facts. Without more facts, this conversation is not valid. Also, I had to do some cleaning of the thread, please refrain from profanity as per the rules.
Thank you. Thread closed.