Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by janrinok on Thursday October 27 2016, @08:27AM   Printer-friendly
from the I-see-what-they-did-there dept.

The Swedish judiciary has ruled that camera drones are surveillance devices, meaning their pilots will have to get a seldom-issued permit to use them for private flights.

The judgement from the highest court in the land looked at two cases, one against private drones and the other against a camera mounted on a bicycle. The judges found that the bike-mounted camera is fine – because it goes where its owner goes – but that airborne drones were capable of spying things out of sight and therefore must be characterized as surveillance devices.

"The Court further found that the camera can be used for personal monitoring, although it is not the purpose," the ruling reads. "The camera is therefore to be regarded as a surveillance camera."

Private drone operators will now have to apply for a permit stating that the use of the camera drone is for monitoring personal property. Since that excludes the vast majority of drone flight for things like racing, nature photography, and the odd wedding, fliers and the industry association are in full Viking mode over the proposal.

They should not have made the drones angry...


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday October 27 2016, @09:15AM

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Thursday October 27 2016, @09:15AM (#419334) Journal

    The camera on the bicycle is alright - cameras mounted on drones not alright.

    So, get six drones to lift your bicycle into the air, and record whatever you want!!

    Yes, I'm just being a smartass here - TFS specifies that the bicycle mount is fine BECAUSE it goes where the owner goes. So, if the owner has his bicycle aloft, while he controls the drones from the ground, he would be violating the law. Which is cool with me. The neighbors don't need to be snooping on my side of a twelve foot high privacy fence. well - if I had a privacy fence. Hmmmm - maybe I can define my trees as a privacy fence, to get out of paying the timber tax? Food for thought . . . .

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Thursday October 27 2016, @12:55PM

    by LoRdTAW (3755) on Thursday October 27 2016, @12:55PM (#419381) Journal

    Someone already solved this problem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpko3CPHonQ [youtube.com]