Quote:
Originally Posted by CybrSage
I am not a legal expert, but reading Florida SB 767, which was signed into law, it appears there must be an expectation of privacy in order to ban the drone flights. Line 82 forward defines what that is. The drone also has to stay in a line of sight and he greater than 50 feet. I believe that part is from federal law
"72 (3) PROHIBITED USE OF DRONES.—
73 (a) A law enforcement agency may not use a drone to gather
74 evidence or other information.
75 (b) A person, a state agency, or a political subdivision as
76 defined in s. 11.45 may not use a drone equipped with an imaging
77 device to record an image of privately owned real property or of
78 the owner, tenant, occupant, invitee, or licensee of such
79 property with the intent to conduct surveillance on the
80 individual or property captured in the image in violation of
81 such person’s reasonable expectation of privacy without his or
82 her written consent. For purposes of this section, a person is
83 presumed to have a reasonable expectation of privacy on his or
84 her privately owned real property if he or she is not observable
85 by persons located at ground level in a place where they have a
86 legal right to be, regardless of whether he or she is observable
87 from the air with the use of a drone."
|
Yes but here's the phrase that will be of debate in court -
"with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property"
From a legal perspective the word surveillance has to be determined in this context, these guys aren't actually performing surveillance, now if they are hired to monitor the build of a home, then yes they COULD lose this battle, however the fly overs for what is going on and where it's headed is not considered surveillance.