Aerial photo used commercially

tehmightypirate

tehmightypirate

Line Up and Wait
Joined
Nov 1, 2013
Messages
635
Location
Maine
Display Name
Display name:
TehMightyPirate
So, stupid question that I wouldn't normally ask but another pilot is bugging me that what I did wasn't 100% legal and I want a double check.

Flew with no passengers to a corporate meeting on the clock. I'm 100% sure this is legal as it was incidental to the business and I'm not getting compensated for my flying (I just wanted an excuse to go flying).

Took a coworker up after lunch and we flew around one of our plants and he took some photos which I later posted on the companies facebook page. Once again, incidental to the business.

Landed, dropped them off, and flew home.

He claimed that the aerial photos my passenger took were commercial in nature and thus as I'm a PPL they were not legal. Can someone back me up here so I can get him off my case?
 
Last edited:
Depends on the quality of your lawyer and how much "justice" you can afford.

Personally I'm not rich enough for that grey water stuff.

Who sold the pics, you or your pax? Did you get ANY money from the pics he took?
 
DISCLAIMER: I'm not a lawyer.

My guess:

1) If your passenger took the pictures and you received no compensation for them, I think you're fine.

2) If you were compensated for the pictures the passenger took, I think the water might be a bit more murky.

3) If the pictures weren't taken for money, and no money was exchanged, you weren't doing any kind of commercial activity.
 
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.
 
Tell the other pilot to mind his own business and quite worrying about it. Company pay the guy to put the pic on their Facebook page? Is it a commercial op if I take a picture in the plane and post it on my Facebook page? I'm thinking you are fine.
 
tehmightypirate said:
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.
Click to expand...

So he took some pics, you never saw a buck from them and frankly you had no idea he was taking photos as you were paying more attention to your duties as PIC???
 
There's no gray area here unless we try to create one.

The problem lies in the company paying you for the time you were flying, and the subsequent use of the photos on the company's promotional FaceBook page, which is a commercial use. You and your coworker were essentially paid to take photos which were used commercially. (It really doesn't matter that they were used commercially; the point is you were paid for the time you spent flying the photo mission.)

Whoever is pressing this is a jerk, but you were, at the least, not careful.

If there's a way to retroactively get you off the clock during the time it happened, then the payment didn't happen.
 
So,somehow the pilot is responsible for hotmail passenger uses pictures made during a flight? I dint think so. The purpose of the flight was not a photo mission for work, it was transportation from a meeting back to home. Along the way, pax took some pictures (a normal,activity). Afterwards, the pax did something with the pictures. Pilot is not responsible for pax behavior.
 
The whole thing is incidental to employment. Legal. Unfortunately, you had a passenger and the Chief Counsel says you can't carry one. They're incorrect, but you'd have to persuade a judge if it comes to that before the Chief Counsel gets real. Tell him the law's on your side, Chief Counsel's on his.

dtuuri
 
PW_Plack said:
If there's a way to retroactively get you off the clock during the time it happened, then the payment didn't happen.
Click to expand...

Easily, we were on a 1 hour lunch break (which we were). Technically off the clock. So this then turns into I took a coworker up for a joyride, he took photos, his photos were then used on companies facebook page.

Interesting that this is more of a gray area than I would have liked but sounds like:

1) The other pilot is being a dick.
2) This is probably legal but would have to be fought in court to prove it.
 
tehmightypirate said:
So, stupid question that I wouldn't normally ask but another pilot is bugging me that what I did wasn't 100% legal and I want a double check.

Flew with no passengers to a corporate meeting on the clock. I'm 100% sure this is legal as it was incidental to the business and I'm not getting compensated for my flying (I just wanted an excuse to go flying).

Took a coworker up and we flew around one of our plants and he took some photos which I later posted on the companies facebook page. Once again, incidental to the business.

Landed, dropped them off, and flew home.

He claimed that the aerial photos my passenger took were commercial in nature and thus as I'm a PPL they were not legal. Can someone back me up here so I can get him off my case?
Click to expand...

Some people have too much time on their hands. :rolleyes:

You didn't take the photos for hire. You didn't sell them. Nothing to see here. Move along.
 
dtuuri said:
The whole thing is incidental to employment. Legal. Unfortunately, you had a passenger and the Chief Counsel says you can't carry one. They're incorrect, but you'd have to persuade a judge if it comes to that before the Chief Counsel gets real. Tell him the law's on your side, Chief Counsel's on his.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Does the Chief Counsel say you can't have someone on board for a local flight, or that you can't transport that person from point A to point B?
 
MauleSkinner said:
Does the Chief Counsel say you can't have someone on board for a local flight, or that you can't transport that person from point A to point B?
Click to expand...

The letter answers a scenario posed that involves transportation to a meeting. However it also mentions a scenario where no passengers are involved and there does not mention transportation. So, I dunno.

dtuuri
 
Who was really surprised?
Worldwide Warehouse Redistribution Services?

That's an acronym I'm not familiar with....
 
dtuuri said:
The letter answers a scenario posed that involves transportation to a meeting. However it also mentions a scenario where no passengers are involved and there does not mention transportation. So, I dunno.

dtuuri
Click to expand...

Note, I never transported a person. I flew to the meeting solo as I know that's legal.

I flew a pax during a 10 minute flight after lunch around the area, our plant, and over his house. Photos happened here.

I then flew solo back to my home base.
 
No one cares. Truly. And the other pilot is a weeny. No fan of the FAA, but they have bigger fish to fry.
 
No one cares. Truly. And the other pilot is a weeny. No fan of the FAA, but they have bigger fish to fry.

And your pax probably doesn't own the rights to the photos, if he used his phone to forward them - the carrier does.
 
Let's say I might know a photographer that isn't a commercial pilot. He has taken a few aerial photos and sold them. He happens to know quite a few commercial pilots that would say they were flying the plane at the time the photo was taken. Good luck with anyone trying to prove exactly when the photo was taken and who was flying the plane when it was (not using a phone to take the photos). Even if for some reason it went as far as someone saying they saw the non-commercial pilot flying and he was the only one in the plane and was taking photos, there's no law against taking aerial photos to practice for the commercial shoot.

Just saying, I might have met such a pilot...
 
Lowflynjack said:
Let's say I might know a photographer that isn't a commercial pilot. He has taken a few aerial photos and sold them. He happens to know quite a few commercial pilots that would say they were flying the plane at the time the photo was taken. Good luck with anyone trying to prove exactly when the photo was taken and who was flying the plane when it was (not using a phone to take the photos). Even if for some reason it went as far as someone saying they saw the non-commercial pilot flying and he was the only one in the plane and was taking photos, there's no law against taking aerial photos to practice for the commercial shoot.

Just saying, I might have met such a pilot...
Click to expand...

Did "this" pilot happen to own and fly a beautiful, shiny Cessna..? ;)....:D
 
Lowflynjack said:
Let's say I might know a photographer that isn't a commercial pilot. He has taken a few aerial photos and sold them. He happens to know quite a few commercial pilots that would say they were flying the plane at the time the photo was taken. Good luck with anyone trying to prove exactly when the photo was taken and who was flying the plane when it was (not using a phone to take the photos). Even if for some reason it went as far as someone saying they saw the non-commercial pilot flying and he was the only one in the plane and was taking photos, there's no law against taking aerial photos to practice for the commercial shoot.

Just saying, I might have met such a pilot...
Click to expand...

That's not commercial flying. You're not being hired to fly. The flying is incidental to your "business" of taking photos. I worked my way through college and law school doing photography full time. I did A LOT of aerial photography before I had my commercial certificate.

The OP's scenario is a non-issue that's being made into one by an idiot.
 
Alrighty, I will inform said pilot that the internet considers him an idiot. :)

Thanks for backing me up guys.
 
I faintly remember a discussion about a change in the 'photography for hire on PPL' ruling.

Either way you cut it this wasn't 'for hire'.
 
this is a thread that makes me wonder if there are any pilots on this site!
 
tehmightypirate said:
Took a coworker up after lunch and we flew around one of our plants and he took some photos which I later posted on the compan[y's] facebook page.
Click to expand...

Is that the putatively commercial use of the photos, or was there something else?

If you were conducting some kind of aerial survey that your company needed for some official purpose, and doing it in the middle of the workday, then I could imagine there being a problem, at least theoretically. But if it was just an essentially social post, then it seems fine.
 
If these pictures end up in brochures or printed advertising material, does that change anyone's opinion?

I think the FAA could make a case that the purpose of the flight was for aerial photography used in commercial advertising materials. Compensation is received in the form of your salary, and the fact that your job description doesn't remotely mention this function is just you and your company's way of trying to get around the regs.

If it were me, I would ask them to take the photos down and not do that again.
 
uncreative said:
If these pictures end up in brochures or printed advertising material, does that change anyone's opinion?

I think the FAA could make a case that the purpose of the flight was for aerial photography used in commercial advertising materials. Compensation is received in the form of your salary, and the fact that your job description doesn't remotely mention this function is just you and your company's way of trying to get around the regs.

If it were me, I would ask them to take the photos down and not do that again.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't change a thing.
 
tehmightypirate said:
Alrighty, I will inform said pilot that the internet considers him an idiot. :)

Thanks for backing me up guys.
Click to expand...

Well, I can't speak for the entire Internet, but as CFI for 36 years and a lawyer for 34 years I, personally, think he's an idiot! :D

There are plenty of gotchas out there for pilots. This isn't one of them.
 
This letter implies that it is not incidental, and you were likely in violation.

http://www.faa.gov/about/office_org.../2010/perry - (2010) legal interpretation.pdf

LDJones said:
That's not commercial flying. You're not being hired to fly. The flying is incidental to your "business" of taking photos. I worked my way through college and law school doing photography full time. I did A LOT of aerial photography before I had my commercial certificate.

The OP's scenario is a non-issue that's being made into one by an idiot.
Click to expand...
 
LDJones said:
Irrelevant to the OP situation. There was no commercial photography involved. Some personal photos were shared on a social media site. Sheesh. The ends some people will go to in order to find a problem.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Sundancer said:
No one cares. Truly. And the other pilot is a weeny. No fan of the FAA, but they have bigger fish to fry.
Click to expand...
Second hand info, but my impression was this:

You take a killer photo (with a camera, cell camera, whatever), and you use your cell service to send it somewhere, like to a buddy, your own email, Time Magazine, whatever. . .

Once you put it on the cell carrier's network, they own the rights, per the usual agreements customers (us) accept when signing up.

I have no expertise in this, and it may have been OBE since the journalist who told me about it brought it up. Took me by surprise.
 
Sundancer said:
Once you put it on the cell carrier's network, they own the rights, per the usual agreements customers (us) accept when signing up.
Click to expand...

That's like saying FedEx owns the rights if you send film via their service. There is no such agreement in either case.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top