Thanks for your predictions. I would bet against these scenarios, however. The speed and efficiency of aerial scouting and delivery is too great to ignore. The amateurs and hobbyists may grow tired, but commercial interests will be pushing ahead. It's in our interests to promote innovation while respecting everyone's rights too.

shoot. when streets were first mapped out-did private property owners throw up cry? no peeping toms. there are rules on the books about that. but anyone can drive on your street and snap a pic. where were you when that was ok?

Thanks for asking, but it will be a while. Hopefully we will be able to get a prequel out in fall.

If your drone falls in my yard, I am going to sue for a million dollars for emotional distress.
That should stop it.

Because they don't fly over property? Isn't that the intrusion?

The government probably has satellites good enough to read the license plates on your car, if they care enough to look.

As with computer security, I don't think most people can protect against the government (again, if they care enough to look), so I wouldn't bother trying. But there are plenty of other potential threats we can and should protect against.

dear OA, you never know. I am wondering what my fathers' neighbors thought when an airplane landed in a corn field to deliver the first Scarlet Fever antibiotic and vaccine in the Midwest. Others in the family did not fare so well.My aunt was left deaf and his aunt died. We must respect private property. Yes, we will have to start putting signs in our yards (or you all will) stating what/who you allow on your property and what/who you don't. Come clean. You are no Amazon fan. :) those photo drones-I'd be shooting them down

In the small village where I live, it seems property rights sometimes do not even extend to private property, only to whatever public privacy where, where unless a riot happens, the citizens have to put up with garage door tagging if left open, vehicles that do not move every 10 days being tagged as junk vehicles no matter how new, cops using binoculars to see through windows to catch someone toking, going through trash cans by side of house, etc. Drones are the least of worry here although out of control drones might be a problem.

By the way, will there be another Hank Rangar novel?

Hello khalling,

Yes, we must get used to cars on the public right of way, which we as a society all need and enjoy. However, we adjust, build and choose our property according to our needs and desires based on existing conditions; that includes privacy. People choose, or are raised in environments with different amounts and expectations of privacy. Public property is public; private property is private.

I have lived most of my life in a very rural setting. I have a driveway and a sidewalk to my front door where you will find a doorbell. I expect the occasional stranger, or delivery person to use those facilities. My back yard is fenced and surrounded by woods, except for a gated walkway down to my lake frontage. I do not expect to find people there without my prior knowledge and approval. I have the right to ask them to leave, I expect them to take their eyeballs with them. No? Now, some people live in the city right on top of each other and have different expectations. A jury of my peers made of local rural folk deciding what is a "reasonable expectation of privacy" may not be the same as a jury constituted of New York City folk. For me when it comes to privacy and the forth amendment, I will decide in favor of the privacy of the citizen.

If Amazon wants to deliver by drone to my house, they haven't seen what my dog, if not restrained, does to a vacuum cleaner. :) Yes it will get worked out and I suspect what sounds like a good idea may turn out very differently. Now as far as delivering say, emergency supplies/medicine, to remote locations, while flying at a respectful altitude between... fine. Disturbing the peace, harassing livestock, or spying on your neighbor, etc., ... something will surely be worked out, but the drone owner may not approve, regardless of law.
Regards,
O.A.

great points on peeping tom laws. but we get used to cars travelling up and down the street. Google maps, google world. in the US, unless we have a gate, can cars pull up your driveway? If they do, are you running out with a shotgun. well, don't pull up a driveway in Arkansas. I did that once...it's disruptive like vehicles became in the early 1900s. they'll figure it out. and if they piss too many customers off (Amazon)-well, they'll have to pay their price.

why not cars?

Hello Thoritsu,
Nicely put in a nutshell.
Respectfully,
O.A.

IMHO, I predict the whole thing will morph into another giant taxpayer funded government alphabet soup pyramid with a convoluted regulation book rivaling the US tax code. A new and lucrative revenue stream will be generated for the legal system and a new army of little Napoleon bureaucrats will be let loose to slap around the citizenry (little Suzie next door can't be allowed to play with her new Barbie copter without government oversight!).

Meanwhile, most personal drones will end up gathering dust in the closet because after the initial novelty wears off, they are just plain boring to keep fooling with or just too expensive to keep fixing after crashing. Add to that the crushing regulations needed to support and justify the new government alphabet soup pyramid mentioned above and it just won't be worth bothering with the darn things at all even if you're not bored and have a good reason for wanting to have one.

Hello BrettRocketSci,
I don't see why the minimum ceiling restrictions placed on all aircraft should not apply except when operating a personal drone over private property with the landowner's permission. At the very least drones should only be allowed to fly over private property at altitudes too great for their cameras to gather detail sharper than google earth is allowed release. Technology should not allow one to effectively relocate their eyeballs and place them somewhere where they can violate your expectation of privacy in order to avoid physical trespass, yet accomplish the same violation. It is analog with allowing them to place hidden cameras on your property. In many states/cases this would violate "Peeping Tom Laws." http://www.quickanddirtytips.com/busi...
Whether personal aircraft or government, the law is in flux, but it should not be so. It should adhere to previous decisions and respect the spirit of the Katz v. United States decision. http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/cgi/v...
Unfortunately over time the courts have not been consistent in upholding the spirit of the forth amendment and protected our reasonable expectation of privacy and this new technology will only exacerbate the problem and expose the failure of our courts. If drones with powerful cameras are allowed to overfly your fenced, private back yard and view your activities without your knowledge and consent, they have clearly been allowed to violate your expectation of privacy. It will give the voyeurs carte blanche.
Respectfully,
O.A.

just leave it by the door -- or in the kitchen handy --
and make it a sport if you become annoyed. . ours
is next to the refrig on the counter! -- j
.

Good idea.
However, I'm not about to be standing guard with my handy-dandy laser 24/7. I'm thinking more of something you can set up and then leave it to do its job without you being bothered.

Well, this argument also extends to whether you can shoot down or otherwise immobilize a drone flying over your house.

This isnt well thought out yet, but if someone was annoying me and spying on me with a drone, I would see to it that it wasnt flying over my house. If it was a police drone, I probably would find a way to keep it from spying on me somehow in a non lethal and not noticeable fashion.

lasers can harm visual drones' cameras, I bet. . buy
one before they're outlawed, sir! -- j
.

with the advent of military-quality satellites, we lost
our privacy sunbathing outdoors -- the only change
is the audience, Brett. . now, those on the north side
of St. Maarten can fly over the south side's nude beach
and take a look, just like the satellite owners and
their customers. . it's now interference with sunlight
and the intrusion of noise / physical presence which
must be fought. . if a drone "comes at" me, I have
a shotgun ready. . if it's noisy and I'm listening to
the birds, I have an alternative. . lasers are fun, too!
the police are too far away and too slow. -- j
.

Should use rules already established for manned aircraft. Simple.

This is already a problem. There is established case law that if an officer can see through an unobstructed window into personal property (car or house) they can act on what they see regardless of a warrant. The problem is that in general, those officers have a reason for being there in the first place, where as a drone can be set on a pattern to wander by looking for the proverbial trouble. That is where we run into Fourth Amendment issues.

Your property rights do not extend up to infinity or even the distance a gun will fire

I know in some juridictions, owning the land confers property rights to the airspace above it. So in those areas, a drone within the property lines is trespassing and as such can be dealt with as if it's controller were actually bodily invading the property.

there are drones and then there are space satellites that can track an individual from many miles up...where is privacy rights???...good question...