Drone Trespassing Bill Shot Down In California - InformationWeek

InformationWeek is part of the Informa Tech Division of Informa PLC

This site is operated by a business or businesses owned by Informa PLC and all copyright resides with them.Informa PLC's registered office is 5 Howick Place, London SW1P 1WG. Registered in England and Wales. Number 8860726.

IoT
IoT
Government // Mobile & Wireless
News
9/11/2015
04:35 PM
Connect Directly
Google+
LinkedIn
Twitter
RSS
E-Mail
50%
50%

Drone Trespassing Bill Shot Down In California

The UAV flight limits imposed by SB 142 could have led to excessive litigation, said Governor Jerry Brown. So drone flights are OK for now.

Drones: 10 Novel Uses For Your City
Drones: 10 Novel Uses For Your City
(Click image for larger view and slideshow.)

A California bill to outlaw trespassing drones has been vetoed by Governor Jerry Brown.

Senate Bill 142, introduced by State Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson (D-Santa Barbara) in January, sought to prohibit drones from trespassing over private property without the property owner's permission, with exemptions for drones operated by government agencies and other organizations with land access rights.

California law already bans trespassing by people. SB 142 would have extended the law to apply to drones, effectively creating a no-fly zone below 350 feet.

The FAA classifies recreational drones (less than 55 pounds) as model aircraft, which means they must fly below 400 feet. Commercial drones (less than 55 pounds) are currently required to fly below 500 feet, but the FAA's commercial drone rules have yet to be finalized.

A 2013 Oregon law prohibits drone flights up to 400 feet over privacy property without permission.

(Image: Pixabay)

(Image: Pixabay)

In a statement explaining his decision, Brown wrote:

Drone technology certainly raises novel issues that merit careful examination. This bill, however, while well-intentioned, could expose the occasional hobbyist and the FAA-approved commercial user alike to burdensome litigation and new causes of action.

The bill was supported by the American Chemistry Council, the California Police Chiefs Association, the City of Camarillo, and the Privacy Rights Clearinghouse. It was opposed by a handful of technology and industry groups, including the California Chamber of Commerce, the Consumer Electronics Association, CSAC Excess Insurance Authority, DJI Technologies, GoPro, and TechNet.

Opponents of the bill argued that lawsuits could be brought under SB 142 even if a drone's trespass was unintentional.

Jackson, in a statement posted to her Facebook page, expressed disappointment in the decision while noting that the bill has prompted further discussion of how drones affect privacy and property rights. "Obviously, the public wants some action on this issue," she said. "I hope to continue this discussion and continue working on this issue next year."

Last month, US Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) said he wants to amend the FAA Reauthorization Bill with a requirement that drone makers support geofencing, to make UAVs respect lawful boundaries.

Drone sightings by aircraft pilots have been increasing. Last month the FAA said that pilots reported more than 650 drone sightings between January and August 9. That's up from just 238 sightings in all of 2014.

As drones have become more common, they've caused conflict and controversy. Over the summer in California, firefighters had to call off several water drops over a wildfire in San Bernardino Country due to the presence of civilian-operated drones.

In New Jersey last year a man shot down a drone, claiming it had been flying over his parent's property. The drone owner sued the man, who had to pay $850 in damages. The shooter was fortunate not to have been charged to the full extent of the law -- the FAA considers drones aircraft, so shooting at one could be charged as a felony, subject to up to 20 years in prison.

Technology companies, led by Amazon, Facebook, and Google, see drones as a promising delivery platform for goods and services and have been investing to develop UAV systems. A report published in February by CB Insights found that drone industry investments in 2014 increased 104% year-over-year, exceeding $108 million across 29 deals.

[Read about weaponized drones in North Dakota.]

Companies, along with government groups, also see potential demand for drone defenses. One such company is Dedrone, which makes a multi-sensor drone detection system designed to alert users to the presence of a drone.

Brian Edmonds, president of Dedrone, said in an email that preventing drones from flying over one's property is difficult. "Today's drones are relatively quiet, and their cameras are powerful, capable of 4K images that can be zoomed in for great up-close views," he said. "One could be hovering outside of your house right now and you wouldn't know."

But Edmonds advises against taking steps to down a drone. "At this time, identification and threat evidence for law enforcement is the best defense," he said. "When you see a drone around your property, your first instinct may be to bring it down. But you should consider the consequences and potential liability of doing so under today's laws. ... There are ways to bring them down, but they are not legal, at least yet."

Edmonds expects laws offering protection from drones to pass in the future, but cautions that there will be people who willingly break those laws. Enforcement will be a challenge, he said.

Thomas Claburn has been writing about business and technology since 1996, for publications such as New Architect, PC Computing, InformationWeek, Salon, Wired, and Ziff Davis Smart Business. Before that, he worked in film and television, having earned a not particularly useful ... View Full Bio

We welcome your comments on this topic on our social media channels, or [contact us directly] with questions about the site.
Comment  | 
Print  | 
More Insights
Comments
Newest First  |  Oldest First  |  Threaded View
MyW0r1d
50%
50%
MyW0r1d,
User Rank: Strategist
9/14/2015 | 4:11:52 PM
Re: Privacy
I have no problem generating legitimate work for lawyers if it means protecting a individual's rights on their own property.  Just as each individual has property and trespassing rights now, that should perhaps extend to a reasonable height above their property (maybe 200 feet).  This places it at a heighth which would make a shotgun (which arguably represents little danger even within city limits depending on the cartridge load) a poor choice to down a drone.  The list of technology companies supporting Brown have clear business concerns in play.  Any pilot who says they overflew by accident are either lying or not skilled enough to overfly populated areas without representing a danger (you might remember the drone pilot who chopped his own head off).  They need to limit themselves to parks or other unpopulated areas.  
MyW0r1d
50%
50%
MyW0r1d,
User Rank: Strategist
9/14/2015 | 3:54:19 PM
Re: lawmaking all over the world.
True other states are used as examples, so wouldn't the Oregon law already be the precedent?  I understand California believes itself to be a unique state which the rest of the US follows, but why would it be any more of a precedent than other states which have already established norms?  Now, rather than paying the high prices to enter sporting venues, I'll just in a parking lot and overfly them.  Or, and more directly related to California, they have just made paparazzi's job easier because one can use their drone to overfly residences without fear, protected by the law.
Gary_EL
50%
50%
Gary_EL,
User Rank: Ninja
9/13/2015 | 1:55:32 PM
Wait
It won't be too much longer until one of these things causes a trajedy. I just hope I'm not a passenger on the airliner that becomes the precident setter.
nasimson
50%
50%
nasimson,
User Rank: Ninja
9/12/2015 | 7:08:25 AM
lawmaking all over the world.
Laws in Califronia would have an impact in areas more than just California. These would be widely quoted as a precedent in lawmaking all over the world.

This is a question of trade offs. Perfect law can not be drafted the first time. Conditions will evolve. Law will evolve.
Charlie Babcock
50%
50%
Charlie Babcock,
User Rank: Author
9/11/2015 | 8:15:40 PM
More than machines in the line of fire
I sympathize with anyone trying to bring down a drone flying over their property, but in a densely populated city, I don't want to be caught in the line of anti-aircraft fire. We have to keep a sense of proportion.
danielcawrey
100%
0%
danielcawrey,
User Rank: Ninja
9/11/2015 | 6:06:47 PM
Privacy
I certainly think there's something to be said about people having privacy from drone surveillance from private operators.

Yet I think Brown is considering the impact a bill like this would have on the California legal system, which could become burdensome. I'm sure this will not be the last we hear of this. 
News
Data Science Salary Survey Reveals Market Shift
Jessica Davis, Senior Editor, Enterprise Apps,  6/27/2019
Commentary
A Practical Guide to DevOps: It's Not that Scary
Cathleen Gagne, Managing Editor, InformationWeek,  7/5/2019
Slideshows
How to Land a Job in Cloud Computing
Cynthia Harvey, Freelance Journalist, InformationWeek,  6/19/2019
White Papers
Register for InformationWeek Newsletters
Video
Current Issue
A New World of IT Management in 2019
This IT Trend Report highlights how several years of developments in technology and business strategies have led to a subsequent wave of changes in the role of an IT organization, how CIOs and other IT leaders approach management, in addition to the jobs of many IT professionals up and down the org chart.
Slideshows
Flash Poll