Hi, this is Wayne again with a topic “Live at SXSW: Drone lawyer wins federal case”.
Hey this is mike sinisi executive editor for make magazine, and we are here with brennan shulman, the drone lawyer who just won uh the first ever uh case against civilian drone flight uh federal court uh threw out the uh the case against trappy parker. So um tell me: how did this come about uh? Well, how did the fine come about, or the case? Oh, okay? Well so you know trappy raphael. Perker is probably one of the best known radio control model pilots who takes videos in the world, and he was flying at the university of virginia in connection with a a potential commercial that they wanted to make about their medical center and the faa somehow noticed the Fight maybe saw the video online and objected to the manner in which he was flying and also said. This is a commercial flight, therefore making his operation a uis operation, subject to regulation, so they pursued a penalty against him uh, and you know, as of last week, a judge at the ntsb has said there are no regulations concerning model aircraft or drone uh fight, and So this was the first ever um of of of its type where they had been pursued by the faa. A flyer of an unmanned aircraft had been pursued by the faa. Is that correct? This is the first attempt to penalize someone for flying a commercial uas that i’m aware of there certainly have been years of cease and desist letters in which people have been instructed not to operate for business purposes. But this is the first time that i’m aware of that they’ve ever attempted to enforce any regulation or policy, and so the um the fine was put forth in october. If i’m not mistaken uh – and so it’s been a number of months that uh – this has been uh underway uh thrown out last week, which is incredible. Congratulations again, um! Is that normal that length of time for a process like this yeah? It’S typical of litigation, that you have a series of of written brief briefs that are filed, that that took a number of months uh? The the motion was submitted to the judge uh by the end of december, and so it took about two or two and a half months to get a decision which really is actually uh pretty much normal uh or actually pretty uh. You know pretty fast in terms of the way you know deciding a novel issue of law that no one else has ever considered before and now that this has been thrown out, um, it sort of opens the doors for people to be able to fly more freely. What what happens with with uh with with uh civilian flyers that want to do more stuff uh with their planes? Well, first of all, the decision i’ve heard is being appealed. So it’s important to to note that you know i’m not providing legal advice to any of your viewers or readers about what they should or shouldn’t do. I think, to the extent that there’s someone who thinks that the decision has an impact on what they want to do, either as a business or individually, they really do need to consult with their own attorney. Okay, um for uh for the the entire application of of drone flight. I mean this is something that we’re really just at some of the first uh steps of uh of what this is turning into um. How do you envision the future – or you know just just from um, on the interest side like what? Where do you see this heading uh? If, aside from restrictions, legislation, regulation um application wise? How do you imagine this this just developing and growing? It’S really incredible.
The number of people who’ve contacted me over the past few months to tell me about projects they’re working on and potential applications for the technology it to me, it’s like being at the dawn of the internet in the mid-90s not done of the internet, but the dawn Of the commercialization of the internet, when you had all these potential ideas that were going to change the world in ways that we really couldn’t imagine back then, and we’re really at that moment in terms of of drones or unmanned aircraft systems, particularly the small models that Can be operated low to the ground and do things like cinematography or or infrastructure, inspection or search and rescue agriculture is supposed to be the number one use in the future. I mean these are all industries that are going to change the way they do things as a result of this technology, and i think for the better, not just in terms of economics, but also in terms of safety. If you can, if you can inspect power lines or cell phone towers, without putting people up on the tower, who could fall off and get killed, i think that’s a net benefit yeah, absolutely um.
What type of uh restrictions are there uh internationally? Do you know beyond outside of the u.s? What are people allowed to do? Uh in other countries, other other parts of the world there’s a range of approaches in other countries. Some countries have expressly permitted uh commercial operation of drones, including australia, japan, canada, the united kingdom. Those frameworks, those legal frameworks, tend to turn on the weight of the drone that you want to fly and how high you want to fly it off the ground, but there’s there is a way forward in those countries, unlike here according to the faa, where it’s been Banned since 2007., there are other countries who have taken a strict approach and have prohibited commercial operations for now similar to what the faa’s position is here. What is it uh about drone flight that uh the faa so intent on um on pursuing what you know with with with raphael – and i think you mentioned it uh earlier in the day that there were 17 other letters that you had heard about people being served. Why why is there such an interest from the faa and on looking into this – i i think back in 2007 or even before, then the faa considered all of these systems to be aircraft. They were mostly used overseas in in the wars to kill people or to ser or to surveil the battlefield, and i think there was an expectation or understanding at the time that this technology would be useful in the united states for law enforcement purposes.
For border patrol. For surveillance, you know things that were that were governmental in nature, high altitude, large systems and they weren’t thinking at all about. You know these quadcopters and other five pound foam models like the one that that raphael was flying in virginia and and how those would be used. So when they took the approach of saying you know, we need we’re going to ban this activity until we have rules in place.
I think it was with that in mind. Nobody wants any of these devices flying in the path of of manned aircraft. I mean that’s clear, you know, that’s not the point of the decision. I certainly don’t think the decision is a license to go out and fly wherever you want irresponsibly, but i think in 2007 there was a misunderstanding or at least a different understanding about what this technology was and what it could do and now we’re in a very Different place technologically, and we still don’t have the rules in place. It’S been seven years of not having any rules in place and a policy-based ban, and i think it really stems from that early misconception about what this technology was going to be it’s interesting. So we’re now at a point where there’s been one official ruling um, we can start building up and determining uh sort of an additive process of what types of uh. What type of regulation will be beneficial to everyone uh, rather than the starting with? No one can do anything, and we can start we chip away from that. It seems like that’s, maybe a a better model for uh for the the large community. That really wants to get involved with these things yeah, i think one of the main points of the decision is, i mean if you read it, it’s hard to read it’s it’s a lot of legalese, but it’s not a legal technicality right. The the point of having a notice and comment rule making process is really it’s a function of our democracy to have. We have federal agencies that are authorized to create rules and regulations that that can be binding on the public, but before they do that they’re required under the under the administrative procedures act. This is the statute that governs this process, to consult with the public, to provide notice and an opportunity for members of the public corporations that might be affected by the proposed rule to have input, so they can go down and testify in front of the agency.
They can send in written comments and say you know. This proposed regulation is going to have negative consequences on on safety, on the economics on the jobs that we that we employ in the field, and so i think that that opportunity to comment has been completely lacking. Since 2007, because at that point in time the faa simply said this is banned and foreclosed the possibility of developing a real industry. Now i think there is that opportunity for the public to get involved for constituencies to say you know we’re here.
We have an interest in what the regulation looks like and to use the notice and comment process to be heard. Well, uh it’ll be interesting to see how things move forward and um. I’M excited that uh that we we’re in the spot. We are now uh and um appreciate your hard work, so yeah uh, obviously keep us filled in as things move forward and um for those of you guys who are our flyers out.
There remember fly safely reply responsibly, um and uh. If, if you get in trouble contact your lawyer don’t get into trouble, but yeah, first and foremost, don’t get in trouble. Yeah thanks brendan .