Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Sunday September 06 2015, @05:03AM   Printer-friendly
from the a-picture-is-worth-a-thousand-words dept.

The LA Times reports:

An organization representing news photographers urged California Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday to veto legislation that would restrict the use of drones over private property without the owner's consent.

The legislation would make flying a drone less than 350 feet above private property without consent a trespass violation. Sen. Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara), author of the bill, has said the measure would prevent camera-equipped drones from peeping into windows or other invasions of privacy.

Additional coverage has been seen in Forbes magazine of the original bill and the significantly different amended bill. Most of the differences include the removal of the provisions that would require the person whose property is being overflown to actually prove that there was some intent to invade their privacy.

The second blog post (on the amended bill) goes into some detail as to Amazon's proposal for a high speed transit zone in the 200ft-400ft range. The Federal Aviation Administration requires any structure that goes above 200 feet to be marked with lights, etc, as an obstruction to aviation.

Is it possible that the removal of the provisions that would require proof of intent will allow for baseless lawsuits, and be the precursor to the outright outlawing of drones in California?

Another thought in this, is this law being driven by the celebrities in their quest to prevent the paparazzi from invading their private lives?


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This discussion has been archived.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: 3, Interesting) by Nuke on Sunday September 06 2015, @12:28PM

    by Nuke (3162) on Sunday September 06 2015, @12:28PM (#232953)
    Runaway1956 wrote :-

    350 ft. Hmmmm. That roughly coincides with the "effective range" of a lot of centerfire firearms

    Until recent years, the "territorial waters" of any seaboard nation was up to 3 miles. The basis of this was practical, in that it was the maximum range of a cannon shot.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Interesting=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by Joe Desertrat on Sunday September 06 2015, @05:43PM

    by Joe Desertrat (2454) on Sunday September 06 2015, @05:43PM (#233016)

    I can foresee anti-drone kits being sold by an enterprising business. Something that quietly shoots a net of fibers, or even a single long fine one, that will tangle in the drone propellers and slowly bring them down. You don't want something that brings the drone crashing down immediately, that would be too obvious. I'm thinking of something more along the lines of fishing line wrapping around a an outboard motor's prop, or even cat hair clogging up the little scroll wheel on your mouse.