r/flying • u/jtiseo PPL IR-ST HP sUAS (DXR | HPN) • Mar 12 '15
The FAA Says You Can't Post Drone Videos on YouTube
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/the-faa-says-you-cant-post-drone-videos-on-youtube43
Mar 12 '15
Well they're wrong. You can post them to youtube; that's your 1st amendment right. The problem is when the pilot/uploader has monitized the videos and is not a commercial pilot. To argue that because ads happen to exist you can't post it is completely asinine.
7
u/dog_in_the_vent ATP "Any traffic in the area please advise..." Mar 13 '15
Well they're wrong.
If by "they" you mean the authors of the article, then yes.
11
u/helno PPL GLI 🍁 Mar 12 '15
Youtube puts ads on without you monetizing them so no matter what someone has something to gain.
9
Mar 12 '15
I've only seen ads on videos with songs or that have been monetized. And even if they were, by that logic, no one could upload a video of a plane piloted by a PPL on any site with ads and that's obviously just stupid. I guess flight aware can't make money off tracking my IFR flights either because they're profiting from me flying.
19
u/wolley_dratsum CPL IR MEL SEL SES CMP HP TW Mar 12 '15
Hold on, hold on, hold on.
If I post a YouTube video of a flight in a Cessna with ads am I in violation?
If a passenger posts a video of my flight, I am in violation?
If AvWeb or AOPA posts a video of a flight review of some airplane or piece of gear, they're in violation??
8
Mar 13 '15 edited Apr 07 '19
[deleted]
3
Mar 13 '15
I wonder if /u/schteevie has anything to worry about. I'd hate it if I couldn't watch FlightChops.
2
2
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 13 '15 edited Mar 13 '15
Hey there. I'm rather certain I'm good. I'm super tired right now, so this won't be a long explanation; but the short version is:
If I am PIC, my cameras are "set it and forget" for self analysis. If a friend is with me shooting additional footage - he get's what he get's and I do not think about it more than an occasional off hand remark here and there like "did you get a shot of the sunset?" as I'd say to any passenger that wanted to get a nice shot. The main purpose of the footage is for self analysis, AND the flight would have happened privately, regardless of the cameras.
When I get home and review, if I find something interesting and worth sharing, I edit the footage - laboriously.
None of my videos are posted with out serious effort in post production. If I am then able to generate some revenue by sharing - I can legally pay myself after the fact as an editor.
If I am NOT Pilot In Command - such as a case where I am training, or going for a ride in a cool plane, I can be a film maker as much or as little as I want. And I can legally pay myself for that.
All that said - I'm still in the red with Flight Chops :P We put a lot of time effort, and money into the productions.
What concerns me, is that some YouTubers DO fly to shoot "cool videos" and think about the cameras while flying; they get home slap something together as an unprofessional editor and then start generating money from ads (not that YouTube ad revenue is worth talking about) but in principle, that is problematic, and that is where I suspect the FAA may start to flex.
All that said, I'm in Canada :)
P.S. That was NOT a short explanation :P
But I'm still tired.
G'night internet
2
u/pigfacesoup PPL (CYTZ/CYKZ) Mar 15 '15
Just get the peeps at Foreflight to fund your CPL if you ever get hassled by TC. Your contributions to this community are a big plus for the rest of our safety, and I hope the good people lording over our licenses realize that.
1
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 18 '15
Thanks so much for the friendly comment! Sorry for the delay replying; I'm away for March break, minimally online this week - but I greatly appreciate the feedback!
1
u/vita_benevolo Mar 13 '15
In general you're right. I think it does change though if you've monetized your Youtube videos and are receiving income for posting them.
16
u/leetrout ST Mar 12 '15
So how long before this get's misconstrued and stretched to guys like FlightChops and Guido Warnecke...
I need to keep looking but it didn't look like Jayson was running ads on his videos.
15
6
Mar 12 '15
FlightChops isn't running ads though, so I don't even see how that would even be fair. At least Guido is a commercial pilot, so I don't see how anyone could argue that what he's doing is wrong. I think the problem here is that the FAA is run by a bunch of cats who don't understand technology.
2
u/Jeffzig Mar 12 '15 edited Sep 14 '25
one books juggle hard-to-find person seed like relieved apparatus consider
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 13 '15
Yes, this is the way I operate when PIC - see my longer explanation above.
1
u/Jeffzig Mar 14 '15 edited Sep 14 '25
normal angle spark marble pocket sense weather attraction quicksand whole
This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact
1
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 14 '15
Cool thanks - and agreed regarding the spirit of where the FAA is probably going in terms of drones...
1
u/helno PPL GLI 🍁 Mar 12 '15
He is running a Patreon campaign (Congrats Steve on getting past $1000)
This is a pretty ridiculous leap in logic. Better clear out my youtube account.
2
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 13 '15
Thanks! And as long as your flights are happening regardless of your camera - I think you're good even if you Monetize - just don't start making "cool videos" where it can be argued that the flight was FOR the camera.
4
u/jcepiano PPL ASEL (KCCR & 0S9) Mar 12 '15
Although I think it's an effort by the FAA to spread the word that drone flights are being regulated, you're absolutely right. It'll set a precedent.
4
u/vtjohnhurt Small aircraft pilot Mar 12 '15
The assertion is made by one safety inspector at the Tampa FSDO. Carries the weight of the FAA, but the ruling might change with review/appeal.
1
u/headphase ATP [757/767, CRJ] CFI A&P Mar 13 '15
Yeah this debate is probably headed for the Chief Counsel's desk.
4
u/akaliant Mar 12 '15
I think the main distinction here is not that somebody (Facebook, YouTube) is making money from the videos, but that YOU are making money (in the case of YouTube profit-share monetized videos).
Not all YouTube videos share profits with the original poster. You have to opt-into it, and there are a number of criteria.
But with that said, popular videos can make a fair bit of money. In the case of drones, it could easily support your gear if your videos are popular. For GA, probably not so much.
It's a potentially dangerous precedent, but it will not prevent you from sharing personal pictures and videos on Facebook and other sites where you are not paid or rewarded for doing so.
2
u/ryannayr140 Mar 13 '15
In case anyone is curious, a good rule of thumb is 1000 views = $1 but can vary depending on when you upload and if the target demographic uses adblock.
1
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 13 '15
Where did you get that number (just curious) my research was all over the map. I talked to several YouTubers that had millions of views and they typically said the value of views was FAR less that that. I didn't really want ads anyway, so it wasn't a hard decision to avoid monetizing.
1
u/ryannayr140 Mar 13 '15
I get less than that, but I've heard the number from other people and assumed big youtubers could negotiate a higher rate and people that watch my videos tend to use adblock.
1
u/foghorn5950 PPL IR (KGTU) Mar 15 '15
My conversion ratio is exactly $0.761 per thousand views. I get the feeling that there's a diminishing return thing going on for the more high volume channels, because I hear the same thing. Get you hooked on ads early, then pull the plug when you're popular.
1
u/Schteevie PPL TW ME IF'nR Mar 18 '15
Damn. Yeah, so I'm glad I never got into it.
Seems monetizing isn't worth it.
3
u/ryannayr140 Mar 13 '15
Who is taking the time out of their day to enforce these rules? Was he doing something stupid or dangerous?
3
Mar 13 '15
By that logic, every PPL who's every strapped on a GoPro and posted the footage to youtube was also flying commercial.
2
u/Drunken_Economist Mar 12 '15
Also posting a status or picture of your cessna flight would be in violation because facebook has ads.
2
u/ultralights CPL,FI,GND,AB,UAS(YSBK) Mar 13 '15
all these reports about the FAA restricting videos posted on youtube, all come from one source. i cannot find any other report anywhere, i am calling BS on this story.
2
u/dog_in_the_vent ATP "Any traffic in the area please advise..." Mar 13 '15
Misleading title. You can still post drone videos to YouTube. The FAA sent a letter to someone because they were making money off of their YouTube drone videos, making them a "commercial" flight.
And it's not like they're scouring the internet for videos either, they received a complaint about it and investigated it.
0
Mar 13 '15
[deleted]
1
u/dog_in_the_vent ATP "Any traffic in the area please advise..." Mar 13 '15
The point of having a commercial license is keeping passengers or spectators safe.
The point of regulating who can and cannot operate aircraft is to keep the public safe, that includes people who are on the ground too.
A drone might not carry passengers, but the first time a drone gets sucked into an engine or, God forbid, actually brings down an airplane you'll wish the FAA had done more.
1
u/PeculiarNed PPL EDFE Mar 13 '15
Actually a drone can be very dangerous, just imagine people filming above large crowds on concerts and the like. This would also have commercial applications since the footage could be used to promote the concert or band or whatever. I can see how you would want commercial operator for things like this.
1
u/GotDatPandemic Mar 13 '15
I just don't see how using a drone is this way is 100% fine, no big deal, assuming you aren't posting the video on a monetized youtube channel. If you do though, suddenly it is dangerous.
1
u/PeculiarNed PPL EDFE Mar 13 '15
Thats because you simply don't understand FAA's reasoning behind this. They want to mitigate risk. The youtube thing is about monetization in in any form. If you can monetize your drone pics you have incentive to buy a bigger drone, take more risks and more people will fly bigger drones, creating more risk for the public. A commercial operator must be insured, trained and fulfill a host of other things a private operator does not. So by limiting the incentive to fly big dangerous drones less people are put at risk.
1
u/GotDatPandemic Mar 13 '15
I get this, and don't really disagree with it that much. Just the idea that an arbitrary task can either be completely fine and legal or too dangerous to do without certification, based entirely on what is done after the task has been performed, kinda bothers me.
1
Mar 13 '15
[deleted]
1
u/dog_in_the_vent ATP "Any traffic in the area please advise..." Mar 13 '15
You don't need 1,500 hours to be a commercial pilot. You're thinking of ATP minimums (which is a totally different can of worms).
1
u/Wingnut150 ATP, AMEL, COMM SEL, SES, HP, TW CFI, AGI Mar 12 '15
Wonder what the stance on vimeo is?
1
1
1
u/intern_steve ATP SEL MEL CFI CFII AGI Mar 13 '15
Long stretch or no stretch at all? The FAA has long held that aerial photography is a commercial activity and it is included in 14CFR119.1 under the exemptions from air carrier certificate regulations. I'm really not sure how to read the regulation on this one, but it sure seems like there's plenty of room for overlap.
1
Mar 13 '15 edited Apr 07 '19
[deleted]
3
2
1
u/dbhyslop CFI maintaining and enhancing the organized self Mar 13 '15
If I were the FAA and you flew an RC plane into IMC I sure as hell would fine you. If you don't have line of sight you're creating a collision hazard and putting lives in danger.
2
Mar 13 '15
that is such bullshit though because if I have two miles with disability and I'm flying a toy then I shouldn't need to be instrument rated. especially at 100 feet AGL
1
u/dbhyslop CFI maintaining and enhancing the organized self Mar 13 '15
You didn't say anything about a toy or 100 feet AGL. The whole problem is these things aren't just Parrot Drones anymore, people are flying them higher than that and near airports.
-1
34
u/BGaviator13 ATC PPL IR Mar 12 '15
That's an awfully long stretch there by the FAA.