Judge dismisses case against “drone slayer” because drone was invading property owner’s privacy Bullitt County (Kentucky) Judge Rebecca Ward dismissed all charges against William H. Merideth for shooting down John David Boggs’ drone that Mr. Merideth claims was “hovering” over his property. Judge Ward ruled that “I think it’s credible testimony that [Boggs’] drone was hovering from anywhere, for two or three times over these people’s property, that it was an invasion of their privacy and that they had the right to shoot this drone. . . And I’m going to dismiss his charge.” While the FAA fusses over its drone regulations, this type of case will become more prevalent. The interesting part of this case is that Merideth’s defense was “invasion of privacy,” not trespass. Boggs’ claim was that his drone was “sailing” over the property at 200 feet and was not “hovering.” This ruling leaves unanswered the question as to whether a drone operator can legally fly above private property. The ancient legal doctrine of cuius est solum eius est usque ad coelum et ad inferos, which, roughly translated, means whoever owns the soil, it is theirs up to heaven and down to hell. While U.S. common law has tempered this doctrine by adding a “reasonable” limitation, it would still seem to apply here. Other coverage of this story: Drone carrying cellphones, drugs, hacksaw blades crashes at Oklahoma prison While there is no doubt that prisons must be “drone-free” areas, it is interesting to note that the drone was not shot down or otherwise removed from the sky by prison guards, but it crashed when it hit the prison’s razor wire and the UAV’s operator. This raises the question about how best to enforce “drone-free” areas. Geo-fencing? That is in a proposal currently before Congress. However, certainly a criminal intent on getting contraband into an associate in a prison can override a geo-fencing chip in a drone. Another idea that is currently undergoing testing is this “rifle” that overrides the UAV operator’s controls. But this requires that the prison guards, or security guards, actually see the drone before they can “shoot” it down. Moreover, just think what it would be like if a rifle of this sort got into the hands of the wrong sort of person. Your Amazon or Wal-Mart delivery would not be safe! Other coverage of this story:
Drone crashes into power lines in Hollywood and causes blackout Someone in West Hollywood is missing their drone and the police would really like to return it to him or her. On October 27, 2015, a drone operator in West Hollywood, California, accidentally (presumably) flew a drone into power lines, which caused a power outage for about 650 people in the neighborhood. The recently passed Los Angeles ordinance restricting the use of drones certainly did not have the effect that the City Council intended. This raises a question about drone operators themselves. Should there be a requirement that in order to operate a drone – whether recreationally or commercially – you must pass a test that shows that you are aware of the laws and regulations and that you are a “responsible” operator? The FAA has long maintained that only individuals with a pilot license should be operating drones, at least commercially. That, however, would put a huge damper on the emerging drone economy.
Other coverage of this story:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
RSS Feed