Poll: Invasion of Privacy or Not...

Outta Control · Oct 30, 2015

Saw this one of FB and wanted y'all's thoughts.

IrishSights · Oct 30, 2015

If with permission no invasion. If no permission Oprah is the one who should be being asked if she felt her privacy was invaded.

For me the moment it stops, hovers and lingers or even flys very slowly over a residential home without permission the line is crossed. Its when it is precieved to be 'monitoring' even though no person is filmed.

lake_flyer · Oct 30, 2015

IrishSights said:
If with permission no invasion. If no permission Oprah is the one who should be being asked if she felt her privacy was invaded.

For me the moment it stops, hovers and lingers or even flys very slowly over a residenial home without permission the line is crossed. Its when it is precieved to be 'monitoring' even though no person is filmed.

I agree.
Obviously Oprah invested a fortune in getting privacy, hence the enormous estate, with practically everything a person would need to spend his entire life, without ever opening the main gate.

Imagine the bad press when that UAV would have come down on her lawn. She knows how to handle the public. And if she's going to raise an issue about this video and the use of UAV's in general, in one of her worldwide watched shows, I would understand.

Unless the pilot had her permission to do it and put it on Youtube, which I doubt, this is another example of someone trying to get a viral on Youtube at the expense of someones privacy.

But @Outta Control
Thanks for sharing.

DodgeP · Oct 30, 2015

I do not think it's an invasion of privacy and here's why. Invasion of privacy occurs when there is an intrusion upon your reasonable expectation to be left alone and with that definition in mind, since Oprah nor any other person(s) could be observed, no privacy was invaded (in my opinion).

Arriguy · Oct 30, 2015

It's private property. So, yes, it's an invasion of privacy.

Carlsberg · Oct 30, 2015

Arriguy said:
It's private property. So, yes, it's an invasion of privacy.

Can you (or someone else) plz post a picture of her estate from Google Earth.
(I don't know the address or i would do it, (are they invading her privacy)?
I see owners of homes in their backyards all the time using street view

Unless there is a large NFZ around her estate, couldn't a common local news helicopter be able to zoom in on a deck of cards sitting on her picnic table?

Lots of ultralights flying around these days, should pilots look away or shield their eyes while crossing her property? (what if they see her bush)?

We already have privacy laws in place.
It is unlawful to look into someone's window, whether you do it with a camera, binoculars, telescope, just creeping up and looking in, or spending 10 loud minutes trying to hover a drone outside their window.
Those are all examples of "invasion of privacy" and there are already laws against it!

DodgeP · Oct 30, 2015

@Carlsberg

Here you are.. From google earth. People are always crying privacy this and privacy that. They tend to pick fights only with those entities they feel they can defeat.

oprah's house in montecito from google earth - Google Search

Carlsberg · Oct 30, 2015

DodgeP said:
@Carlsberg

Here you are.. From google earth. People are always crying privacy this and privacy that. They tend to pick fights only with those entities they feel they can defeat.

oprah's house in montecito from google earth - Google Search

thx Dodge,
Just what I thought, this threat is phuked - lol

why not send that link to the dude in CA who wanted to pass the law "no flying over private property"

wtf, privacy?
once u walk out your door, you are videoed hundreds of times until u reach the Walmart bathroom, (and then don't be too sure)

DodgeP · Oct 30, 2015

Bottom line is, you can set your max ceiling height at 390' and fly over the property at that altitude if you really want to fly over private property.

Carlsberg · Oct 30, 2015

lake_flyer said:
Unless the pilot had her permission to do it and put it on Youtube, which I doubt, this is another example of someone trying to get a viral on Youtube at the expense of someones privacy.

Please view this link then post your thoughts.
oprah's house in montecito from google earth - Google Search

IrishSights · Oct 30, 2015

I think it should be out of respect for ones personal privacy. Privacy invasion by law is a different matter.

Arriguy · Oct 30, 2015

He asked for opinions. I gave mine. There is no right or wrong here fellas.

Carlsberg · Oct 30, 2015

IrishSights said:
I think it should be out of respect for ones personal privacy. Privacy invasion by law is a different matter.

So I see you have changed your tune my friend, good, glad you see the light.
you also say "personal" but there were no persons, or people filmed and the OP specifically asked you to comment on THAT video alone.
I bet you wouldn't waste your time telling Google Earth people or the Local News Stations

I do respect your opinion though because you seem to be a very respectful person (and no one can fault that).

IrishSights · Oct 31, 2015

Carlsberg said:
So I see you have changed your tune my friend, good, glad you see the light.
you also say "personal" but there were no persons, or people filmed and the OP specifically asked you to comment on THAT video alone.
I bet you wouldn't waste your time telling Google Earth people or the Local News Stations

I do respect your opinion though because you seem to be a very respectful person (and no one can fault that).

Not-my-friend, no tune changed, For me anyway 'personal' means more than a person in the shot, its, as far as UAVs is concerned, mainly something that a person regards as being private, usually their property. We can debate what invasion of privacy means to the cows come home, and there is also the law, however once you start to loiter over what someone else regards as being private then that respect has gone.

Proper pre-flight planning avoids such hurts and possible alienation of UAVs by the landowner and the public. Despite all the images already being available it does not do away with this principal nor does it make it right.

Only Oprah will know if she feels her privacy has been invaded. Maybe she doesn't feel that way at all!

For me 'with permission' with a notification to ajoining properties which are also in shot, is the only way I would have taken on the job to avoid the risk of alienation. Just the way I work, restrictive as it may seem to some.

DodgeP · Oct 31, 2015

IrishSights said:
Not-my-friend, no tune changed, For me anyway 'personal' means more than a person in the shot, its, as far as UAVs is concerned, mainly something that a person regards as being private, usually their property. We can debate what invasion of privacy means to the cows come home, and there is also the law, however once you start to loiter over what someone else regards as being private then that respect has gone.

Proper pre-flight planning avoids such hurts and possible alienation of UAVs by the landowner and the public. Despite all the images already being available it does not do away with this principal nor does it make it right.

Only Oprah will know if she feels her privacy has been invaded. Maybe she doesn't feel that way at all!

For me 'with permission' with a notification to ajoining properties which are also in shot, is the only way I would have taken on the job to avoid the risk of alienation. Just the way I work, restrictive as it may seem to some.

The problem I have with this response is; with this way of thinking you pretty much make all flying illegal because not one acre of any land in most civilized countries is not private property. Which would mean that regardless of where you place your bird in the sky you'll inevitably have someones property within your lens.

IrishSights · Oct 31, 2015

DodgeP said:
The problem I have with this response is; with this way of thinking you pretty much make all flying illegal because not one acre of any land in most civilized countries is not private property. Which would mean that regardless of where you place your bird in the sky you'll inevitably have someones property within your lens.

Its not illegal generally to fly over any property, thats not what I'm trying to suggest. I am talking here of of flying over a particular personal property where that is the focus and purpose of the shot.

I am not trying to make a legal case, just being polite to the owner.

Carlsberg · Oct 31, 2015

IrishSights said:
Not-my-friend, no tune changed.

Maybe change your Depends, you're developing a rash and it's making you grumpy

IrishSights · Oct 31, 2015

Carlsberg said:
Maybe change your Depends, you're developing a rash and it's making you grumpy

A really constructive statement and contribution to the debate there.

As usual your posts I find are condescending. Maybe you should go fly a kite, just like you suggested to an individual in another thread here.

I'm un-following this thread...just not worth it, I should have known better.

Gregg Smith · Nov 6, 2015

In Texas that would be breaking the law since you focused solely on her property and you even stopped and hovered.

huppe · Nov 6, 2015

Gregg Smith said:
In Texas that would be breaking the law since you focused solely on her property and you even stopped and hovered

I think that's the point.Flying over a house is not recommended,but sometimes it happens.But hover and filming is not what I want when this would happens over my house.
I think if this happens why would you put this on Youtube?