Aerial photo used commercially

[Sundancer]

I guess it would, actually, if you made that kind of agreement with FedEx. . . the guy's point to me was that user agreements with cell carriers reserved the rights to images you "gave" them when you used their service. That was part and parcel of the use agreement.

I haven't researched it, not that interested. Someone else might want to be aware, or debunk, if they have an interest.

 

[LDJones]

Correct, I was referring to your situation.

Another point that you might not understand is that a company Facebook page is advertising. We're not talking about an individual page filled with duckface selfies. I think it's pretty clear that advertising is commercial photography.

The case quoted is one I'd happily represent a client in defending. I wouldn't count on it standing if ever challenged.

In the OP's case you need to look at the time of the flight. They weren't contracted to go do photography for the Facebook page. He took a friend for a ride. The friend took photos to document the adventure, as many passengers do. I never heard the friend was a professional photographer. Later, someone at his company said, "Gee, those are cool pics! I'm going to share them on our Facebook page!"

You can't criminalize behavior AFTER the fact. Turning this into some type of FAA violation is stupid.

 

[acrophile]

I guess it would, actually, if you made that kind of agreement with FedEx[.] [T]he guy's point to me was that user agreements with cell carriers reserved the rights to images you "gave" them when you used their service.

Yes, and my stated point was that there is no such clause in anyone's agreement. It's not even clear whether regulations would permit such a clause. It's sheer fantasy.

 

[tehmightypirate]

The case quoted is one I'd happily represent a client in defending. I wouldn't count on it standing if ever challenged.

In the OP's case you need to look at the time of the flight. They weren't contracted to go do photography for the Facebook page. He took a friend for a ride. The friend took photos to document the adventure, as many passengers do. I never heard the friend was a professional photographer. Later, someone at his company said, "Gee, those are cool pics! I'm going to share them on our Facebook page!"

You can't criminalize behavior AFTER the fact. Turning this into some type of FAA violation is stupid.

This was my understanding. Because honestly if I took someone up at any time ever during a work day and they took a photo and posted it to their private Facebook page this is fine. But then the photo was the shared, copied, or otherwise appeared on some commercial venture. Heck, someone could even steel it and it shows during the next Superbowl. How can I be held responsible for this?

Heck, what if we take a passenger up and they use a description of the events in their best selling novel? Should we make our passengers sign a wavier that they can't use any description, depiction, or anything in a commercial nature before we take them flying?

My friend I took up is a estimator for precast concrete products, I'm a structural engineer. Showing pictures of our plant from the air has 100% no impact on our business other than to "look cool" to our customers.

 

[ifly4fun]

Some 15 years ago as a newly minted PPL, I took a rental up and took some pictures of the marine terminals that I worked for. Some turned out pretty well and the boss' had them blown up and framed for the walls. The company was a non-profit, so maybe I don't have to surrender my cert quite yet.

 

[LDJones]

Some 15 years ago as a newly minted PPL, I took a rental up and took some pictures of the marine terminals that I worked for. Some turned out pretty well and the boss' had them blown up and framed for the walls. The company was a non-profit, so maybe I don't have to surrender my cert quite yet.

Uh, oh....the cats out of the bag now. Expect a fed to be knocking on your door later today.

 

[Sundancer]

Yes, and my stated point was that there is no such clause in anyone's agreement. It's not even clear whether regulations would permit such a clause. It's sheer fantasy.

I couldn't say; didn't read my own cell agreement, let alone everyone else's. Don't even know if it's codified (or not) in some other applicable instrument of law, or regulation. Again, just related what an acquaintence involved in photo journalism mentioned to me once. He seemed serious about it, so it stuck in my mind, in case I had a Walter Mitty experience, and got the next great magazine cover photo.

 

[acrophile]

I couldn't say; didn't read my own cell agreement, let alone everyone else's.

It would only take a minute (less time than you've already spent posting about this) to skim your agreement sufficiently to see that the rumor you're spreading here has no merit.

You're probably mis-remembering what your photographer friend told you. He may have been referring to social-media-site agreements rather than cell-carrier agreements. Social media sites (including PoA) do require you to give them rights to store, transmit, and display images you post; otherwise, neither you nor your friends would be able to see your posted photos when looking at your page. But even there, the rights you assign are non-exclusive, and there is absolutely no transfer of copyright.

 

[ifly4fun]

It would only take a minute (less time than you've already spent posting about this) to skim your agreement sufficiently to see that the rumor you're spreading here has no merit.

All too often the rumors continue to spread encouraging misplaced outrage over non-events. My favorite is the dollar coin rumor that "In God We Trust" has been removed and America must refuse these coins at every opportunity. Forget the fact that "In God We Trust" is clearly written on the spine of the coin. Hate to have a little thing like facts ruin some good outrage. FB Released 6 emoji's for "Reactions" yesterday - The one they needed most (the smily pile of poop) should have been included so the masses could call "BS" on the rumor posts.

Sorry for the rant.

 

[Sundancer]

You guys have a low bar for declaring "rumour spreading" ! Did I not clearly deny expertise, and further note I was repeating a comment that I had heard, and explicitly state I had not the foggiest idea if it had merit?

Geez, read with some focus, and attempt at minimal retention. . .again, no expert, don't care, mildly annoyed, but not invested. Do know enough law to say the agreement (which will remain unread by my eyes) does not cover the all the aspects of contract law or Fed regs. Else the reading would take a few vacation days.

Nothing to see here, move slong. . .

 

[PPC1052]

The passenger was a fellow coworker. So, technically we were both on the clock but otherwise no money was exchanged specifically for the photos and they were taken by the passenger not myself.

Short answer is I saw no compensation for my time other than my usual salary as an engineer. Though, this was right after lunch so I could easily say we were off the clock on our lunch break.

Probably ok, unless you sought expenses to reimburse you for your cost of the flight.

 

[petrolero]

Were the pics the purpose of the flight? Would you have made the flight anyway? No way this would be construed by the FAA as getting paid to fly. You're fine IMHO.

 

[cgrab]

When my brother asked my dad if he could join Mensa my dad heard the requirements and said he doesn't let his kids play with people who only have an IQ of 135.
I will make the same suggestion that you not play with this other pilot.

 

[BillTIZ]

There was no discussion on pre arrangement with the company to go get some pictures for the company to post on the web site. No intent, it just happened. Tell the troublesome trouble maker pilot that he has no clue what he's talking about.

He would have to call FSDO, file a written statement. Then FSDO would have to investigate, it might take a month or more for that to happen. Memories fade.

 

[N312RB]

Tell the other pilot to mind his own business and quite worrying about it.

There is nothing here to even worry about. You weren't paid to fly, he wasn't paid to take the picture, nothing was intentional, just spur of the moment.

Whoever posted that PDF... it has nothing to do with this situation at all.