[BrianL99]

Don's letter to the other drone operators, as published in local news sources.

Seems much more conciliatory than "Game On B!t.h

BTW, "BVLOS" means: "Beyond Visual Line of Sight".

[Stu from NYC]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Don's letter to the other drone operators, as published in local news sources.

Seems much more conciliatory than "Game On B!t.h

Vey interesting thanks for sharing

[Bogie Shooter]

“Game on Bi@#h” doesn’t come across as very professional. The PDF is more like what I would expect from Don.

[BrianL99]

I'll go out on a limb and speculate on the "settlement" that will likely be forthcoming, before any real litigation starts.

Don and at least 1 other, will be allowed to continue making drone videos, with restrictions and vetting by the Developer.

Anyone who violated an FAA standard (BVLOS) will be threatened and as a condition of the Developer dropping the action, they'll apologize & get out of the TV Drone over-fly business.

The "other shoe to drop", is how this might effect Don Wiley's career as a County Commissioner, vis a vis, ethical standards for elected officials, involved in a controversy with someone who is often interacting with the Board of County Commissioners.

Expect an opinion letter from the Florida Commission on Ethics, if a settlement is reached.

.... just reading between the lines and rampant speculation.

[BrianL99]

Call me cynical, but is this part of the letter somewhat disingenuous?

The Developer used (presumably) snail mail to address his issues.

Within minutes, every drone operator ran to social media and posted the letter and/or new videos, decrying the Developer's actions. Now, the social media activity is doing harm to the community and county?

To say nothing of the fact, either the sender or one of the recipients of Don's letter, immediately went to the press and/or social media and posted it.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Call me cynical, but is this part of the letter somewhat disingenuous?

The Developer used (presumably) snail mail to address his issues.

Within minutes, every drone operator ran to social media and posted the letter and/or new videos, decrying the Developer's actions. Now, the social media activity is doing harm to the community and county?

To say nothing of the fact, either the sender or one of the recipients of Don's letter, immediately went to the press and/or social media and posted it.

Live by the sword, die by the sword.

I wouldn't use the word disingenuous, I would use futile. Wiley can attempt to take the lead on this and work with the Developer to find a resolution but he can't control what the other operators do. "Herding cats" is a phrase that might apply.

[asianthree]

Guessing legal counsel was involved with any letter written, that could be made public

[VAtoFLA]

This is the "Game On". He realistically sees the best and least expensive path to what he wants as working with the Developer. If the Developer also gets what they want, why would he care? He's only interested in the outcome he prefers.

Don didn't run to social media. Papa Pineapples did and then several questioned why Don hadn't received a letter and made speculations, then Don revealed that he received the letter as well. Addressing it and then also recognizing that the harm of continuing to address it publicly isn't disingenuous, it's a balancing act and Don seems to have chosen his current point of equilibrium.

Knowing the Developer's concerns, I also have a softer feel for the letter. I have seen at least one drone video where the pilot flys it through a partially built home. That could certainly be dangerous.

I hope they resolve it in a way that makes both sides as happy as they can be.

[charlie1]

Don stated that he met with the developer and that there WERE VIOLATIONS by some of the flyers that apparently triggered the developer's action. That news would also make me "back off" as then the developer has a case to maybe stop all from flying. Don wants to fly and do the videos. He loves doing it. He mellowed to help not only himself but other drone operators who do obey the laws! I would guess there will be an agreement in this dispute. Just not sure what it will be at this time.

[Topspinmo]

IMO FAA rules clean cut.

QUOTE from Google.

While generally legal to fly drones over private property in Florida, operators must adhere to FAA regulations and avoid violating privacy and trespassing laws, particularly regarding capturing images or videos of people in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:
FAA Regulations:
The FAA governs drone usage in the United States through Part 107, which outlines safety guidelines and registration requirements for both recreational and commercial operators.
Key FAA Rules:
Maintain a visual line of sight (VLOS) with your drone.
Fly at or below 400 feet above ground level (AGL).
Keep your drone away from airports and restricted airspace.
Privacy and Trespassing:
It's illegal to fly a drone over a person who is not participating in the drone operation.
It's illegal to use the drone to take a photo of any person on private property in a place where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Trespassing and nuisance laws apply to drone use over private property.
Landowner Rights:
Landowners can take steps to address unwanted drone activity, including collecting records and evidence, reporting incidents to the police, and considering drone tracking technologies.
Some landowners may also want to register their land as a no-fly zone.
Moving Vehicles:
Drone pilots should avoid flying over moving vehicles as much as possible.
The FAA regulations require drone pilots to ensure that the small unmanned aircraft will pose no undue hazard to other people, other aircraft, or other property in the event of a loss of control of the aircraft

[Bill14564]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

IMO FAA rules clean cut.

QUOTE from Google.

...

Where did you find those FAA rules? What I have found looks a bit different.

Which of those rules do you claim the TV drone pilots have violated?

The clear violations listed in the letter absolutely must be discontinued but they seem to account for a tiny amount of the content that has been produced.

[BrianL99]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

IMO FAA rules clean cut.


It's illegal to fly a drone over a person who is not participating in the drone operation.

Some landowners may also want to register their land as a no-fly zone.

Can you please provide the web address where I would go to register my land as a "no-fly zone".

Where would one report a drone flying over me, when I'm not participating in the drone operation?

[asianthree]

Originally Posted by BrianL99

Can you please provide the web address where I would go to register my land as a "no-fly zone".

Where would one report a drone flying over me, when I'm not participating in the drone operation?

Aprils fools, or Sheldon sign?

[BlueStarAirlines]

Originally Posted by Topspinmo

IMO FAA rules clean cut.

QUOTE from Google.

While generally legal to fly drones over private property in Florida, operators must adhere to FAA regulations and avoid violating privacy and trespassing laws, particularly regarding capturing images or videos of people in places where they have a reasonable expectation of privacy.
Here's a more detailed breakdown:

We found one of the internet lawyer Don was referencing!

[txfan]

All of these aerial views of The Villages construction was started as a hobby - for most.

In one flyer's case, it became more than that. This person now poor mouths himself exhaustively that the videos cannot be made without subscribers and advertisers, when early on, there were none.

The chastising of Villagers supposedly driving in construction zones is exactly what he does flying low through neighborhoods, or buildings under construction, parking on Villages property and operating his business along the roadsides.

I've witnessed first-hand him chasing prospective homeowners down on their dirt lots to solicit his business of documenting their home's construction - for a healthy fee.

The hobbyists all do a good job telling the story of The Villages, but only one continues to beg for support of his advertisers by soliciting subscribers. It makes the videos hard to watch when someone who for years did just fine as a hobbyist, now requires financing to continue making videos.

And as a paid county commissioner, there seems to be some level of conflict of interest when someone uses his "real" job to help dig through files and records to pride himself in "scooping" the developer on what's to come. That's what has led to the developer's response, I believe.