Is it illegal to take a photo of someone's home?

D

DMD3.

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Nov 8, 2014
Messages
474
Location
Tifton, Ga
Display Name
Display name:
DMD3.
I've always wondered, if you're flying and you take a photo of someone's home, is this illegal and could you be charged for it, whether that person be a celebrity, criminal, someone who was recently in the news, etc.? And I'm not talking about some random house that's included in a photo taken while flying. I'm talking about intentionally getting a picture of someone's house, posting it on the internet, and saying "this is so-and-so's home".
 
Generally no, but to use the photo for commercial purposes you may need a photo release. In addition, some localities have laws about taking pictures of people's homes by drone - those are generally rooted in privacy concerns.
 
Lachlan said:
They indicate who owns the homes in Google Earth? Who knew? (I guess Google knew...)
Click to expand...
They publish the address. I guess it is possible to disguise ownership through a corporation, but most people don't. I guess a renter would also be anonymous.
 
A lot of celebrities home addresses are public information.
 
The aerial mapping business has been at it for a long time. No.
 
Theres no expectation of privacy outside your home, so you're good.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk
 
No.

But if you're taking unsolicited photos of others property don't be surprised when you get some blow back from the land owner, some folks value their privacy.
 
I think this is an interesting topic because more and more people are buying 'drones', and most of them have a camera on them. Anyone can buy one and fly it someplace and film what they want. There are videos on YouTube where people test the 1st amendment by flying their 'drone' over military bases, prisons, and police stations. Some people have gotten arrested, some haven't. I watched a couple videos, and it seems their argument is that the police stations/prison/etc do not own the airspace several hundred feet above, and therefore it is open to the public. Which brings an interesting question: just how high does your 'airspace' around your home go? The highest object in your yard such as a tree?

I did some research this morning, and I could not find any precedent to answer your question. However, I did find some case law on how photography is (and isn't) protected by the first amendment. The ACLU has some resources on this as well.

Porat v. Lincoln Towers Community Association: "To achieve First Amendment protection, a plaintiff must show that he possessed: (1) a message to be communicated; and (2) an audience to receive that message, regardless of the medium in which the message is to be expressed."

Texas v. Johnson (1989): "In deciding whether particular conduct possesses sufficient communicative elements to bring the First Amendment into play, we have asked whether "[a]n intent to convey a particularized message was present, and [whether] the likelihood was great that the message would be understood by those who viewed it."

Gilles v. Davis: "More generally, photography or videography that has a communicative or expressive purpose enjoys some First Amendment protection"

Larsen v. Fort Wayne Police: "The first amendment however, does not protect purely private recreational, non-communicative photography"

DMD3. said:
And I'm not talking about some random house that's included in a photo taken while flying. I'm talking about intentionally getting a picture of someone's house, posting it on the internet, and saying "this is so-and-so's home".
Click to expand...

I'm no attorney, but based off my quick 20 minute google research, I'd guess if you have an audience and you have a message, it should be legal as long as you're not getting photos of them through their window.

(this isn't legal advice, i'm not an attorney and I don't play one on TV. This is just my guess)
 
shouldn't silly threads be down in 'hangar talk'?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top