[JMintzer]

Originally Posted by Stu from NYC

Don's latest video was here he made a bit of a reference to this and now do not see the thread.

It's still here...

Construction News Update #154 - 3/30/2025

[PootleK]

Originally Posted by Altavia

There could be hints something like a fire station, sewage processing, power distribution facility, future commercial site, etc. they don't want buyers to be aware of prior to selling nearby homes.

This is exactly what I was thinking. Originally I'd thought the houses in Lakeview (is that the name now?) would be great, right next to Eastport and a walking trail around the lake. It was only from the drone videos on Youtube that I realized there would be a "water treatment facility" right beside it. Is this sewage? Is it going to reek? I don't know if it would be a problem, but I do know The Villages weren't planning on putting it on their maps!!

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by JMintzer

It's still here...

Construction News Update #154 - 3/30/2025

It was gone I tell you, gone

[margaretmattson]

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."

Interesting. I am now seeing a thin line between who is right and who is wrong. The pilots are flying drones over a construction site with AN INTENT to report it to others for financial gain. (Their gain is through ads appearing on their videos) Is this the definition of surveillance? I'm not certain. IMO, this seems to be an issue the courts may have to weigh in on.

No, I am not on the Developer's side. I am simply trying to understand both of the grievances.

[asianthree]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Interesting. Are the drone pilots conducting surveillance of the construction site? And, reporting it to the masses? I am now seeing a thin line on who is right and who is wrong.

Wikipedia: Definition of surveillance

Close observation, of a suspected spy or criminal.

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by asianthree

Wikipedia: Definition of surveillance

Close observation, of a suspected spy or criminal.

The legal definition I read before posting states: careful observation of a person or place to track activity. Kinda vague. This is why I believe the courts may need to get involved.

[Maker]

Originally Posted by margaretmattson

Interesting. I am now seeing a thin line between who is right and who is wrong. The pilots are flying drones over a construction site with AN INTENT to report it to others for financial gain. (Their gain is through ads appearing on their videos)

Revenue won't be very much. Not likely to cover their expenses.
Please clarify how you know their "intent" is to make money?
BEWARE: Libel is the publication of a false statement about someone in writing that harms that person's reputation by exposing them to public hatred, scorn, disgrace, ridicule, or shame.

You then said "to report it". That is news gathering activities There are numerous court decisions that broadly protect that activity from arbitrary restrictions and legal threats or harassment. And libelous accusations.

[Laker14]

My suspicion is that The Developer would like to have 100% control of all information disseminated to the public, for reasons mentioned in previous posts. It's what they've always had, and it's what they've always done, and it's how they'd like it to remain. It's understandable that's what they want.
It's predictable that they'd wield their financial might via legal actions to get what they want. Whether they are actually correct in their legal posturing is probably never going to get to the point of a legal decision, because the droners simply won't have the money to match The Developer's.
Too bad, because I think it would make for interesting theatre to see if a well compensated legal team could force a distinction between The Developer's "right to privacy", and its "wish for secrecy".

[ElDiabloJoe]

Originally Posted by Laker14

My suspicion is that The Developer would like to have 100% control of all information disseminated to the public, for reasons mentioned in previous posts. It's what they've always had, and it's what they've always done, and it's how they'd like it to remain. It's understandable that's what they want.
It's predictable that they'd wield their financial might via legal actions to get what they want. Whether they are actually correct in their legal posturing is probably never going to get to the point of a legal decision, because the droners simply won't have the money to match The Developer's.
Too bad, because I think it would make for interesting theatre to see if a well compensated legal team could force a distinction between The Developer's "right to privacy", and its "wish for secrecy".

I pretty much agree with you. My only caveat is that there is no "right to privacy," only a legal "reasonable expectation of privacy." Question is, in this circumstance, does the Developer have a "REASONABLE expectation of privacy?

[margaretmattson]

Originally Posted by Maker

Revenue won't be very much. Not likely to cover their expenses.
Please clarify
how you know their "intent" is to make money?
BEWARE: Libel is the publication of a
false statement about someone in writing that harms that person's reputation by
exposing them
to public hatred, scorn, disgrace,
ridicule, or shame.























You then said "to report it". That is news gathering activities There are numerous court decisions that broadly protect that activity from arbitrary restrictions and legal threats or harassment. And libelous accusations.

You are putting words into my mouth. I said, I believe this is something the courts may have to resolve.

The drone pilots are flying over the construction site with the INTENTION of placing their video on social media. They are
not using what they captured via their drones for personal reasons. Instead, they are REPORTING news and updates of the construction progress TO THE MASSES. They accept money from advertisers. Nothing in my statement is libel.