image
Page 37 of 37 FirstFirst ... 27353637
Results 361 to 367 of 367

Thread: TEXANS! Call your reps today! Tell them NO on bill HB 912!

  1. #361
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Plano, Texas
    Posts
    1,443
    Ah yes.. I was assuming the link a few posts back was the latest.

    Ok, i feel better.. That's an ASSLOAD of exceptions; 5 pages worth to be precise.. Surely we can fit into one of them.

  2. #362
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Hillsboro, OR
    Posts
    310
    I have a friend who is an attorney and from what he said and based on section 423.005 is that if you take pictures the person or place could use the law against you, not like some SWAT team sting is going to go down at some field in the middle of no where. His thought was it is more geared to guys not spying on their exwifes/ ex girlfriends or turning in a slaughter house dumping blood in the creeks.

    I would hope all of us are using FPV for fun, not for stalking and evil.

  3. #363
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    322
    Quote Originally Posted by sailingeric View Post
    His thought was it is more geared to guys not spying on their exwifes/ ex girlfriends or turning in a slaughter house dumping blood in the creeks.

    I would hope all of us are using FPV for fun, not for stalking and evil.
    Would turning in a slaughter house dumping blood in the creek be considered evil? Stalking maybe, yes. Either way, this law seems like it is a privacy protection law trying to enforce people from being "Peeping Toms" and "Tattletales" lol
    Last edited by Canelo; 19th September 2013 at 03:02 PM.

  4. #364
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX - Just NW of Houston, TX
    Posts
    562
    If you follow the bill from it's original draft you quickly realize the underlying true intent is to keep photographic evidence out of the courts. The rest is "privacy" dressing.

  5. #365
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Tomball TX - Just NW of Houston, TX
    Posts
    562
    I just worry about the "scared by the media" person who calls the cops and tells them that the drone is spying on them. I tell the cops.. I was not conducting surveillance and he says... tell it to the judge. I can't see the cops even attempting to interpret that law as it stands.

  6. #366
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Hillsboro, OR
    Posts
    310
    Quote Originally Posted by Canelo View Post
    Would turning in a slaughter house dumping blood in the creek be considered evil? Stalking maybe, yes. Either way, this law seems like it is a privacy protection law trying to enforce people from being "Peeping Toms" and "Tattletales" lol
    No.. something like that is not evil. But PETA disurpting a legal hunt would be.

  7. #367
    Forum Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    26
    I am no lawyer & don't even play one in the bedroom.

    However, I read the whole thing, made some notes & my own conclusions & I will share them with you here. The conclusions are my own personal opinion & should NOT be considered legal advice, since I am NOT a lawyer. Did I mention, I am not a lawyer?

    THE DREADED TEXAS DRONE LAW....

    MY CONCLUSIONS:
    Definition: Capture - Recording for later playback or distribution.

    Operating a UAV that does NOT capture images:
    Operating a UAV that does not capture images, but only transmits live images for real time viewing without capture is not an offense under Texas Law. UAV image capturing is only covered by the Texas Privacy Act, and if no image is captured (recorded), then there are no laws covering the operation of a UAV operation aside from FAA airspace laws. Therefor, any enforcement of any kind of UAV operation by any law enforcement authority is not applicable or lawful since there is no image capturing (recording).

    Operating a UAV that DOES capture images:
    Capturing images of public space, and people in the public space is perfectly legal if the video is not enhanced beyond normal human vision. Additional acceptable uses include capturing images for the purpose of a search & rescue (ie CAPSAR, or working with the FD or police) is perfectly legal. More acceptable uses include capturing images of real property with owner or Real Estate Broker consent
    Therefor, any enforcement of any kind of UAV operation by any law enforcement authority is not applicable or lawful unless the captured video image is done with intent of surveillance without permission. Additionally, if an image was incidentally captured that violates the law, then it cannot be used for enforcing the law or any kind of prosecution. If an illegal capture occurs, it is defensible and not prosecutable by merely destroying the image. Professional or scholarly research by professors, teachers, employees of institutions, and students are exempt from this law. There are a lot of other exemptions for state & utility entities as well.

    How is the law broken?
    The law is only broken when capturing of an image is done so with the intent of surveillance of a person or private property without consent. Therefore, the intent of surveillance must be proven before any type of enforcement can be made.

    THE LAW: (excerpts from the bill as passed & signed by the Gov)
    AN ACT relating to images captured by unmanned aircraft and other images and recordings; providing penalties.
    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS:
    SECTION 1. This Act shall be known as the Texas Privacy Act.
    SECTION 2. Subtitle B, Title 4, Government Code, is amended by adding Chapter 423 to read as follows:
    House Bill 912, Chapter 423, USE OF UNMANNED VEHICLES AND AIRCRAFT

    Section 423.002 NONAPPLICABILITY
    (a) It is lawful to capture an image using an unmanned aircraft in this state:
    Article (3) as part of an operation, exercise, or mission of any branch of the United States military;
    Article (6) with the consent of the individual who owns or lawfully occupies the real property captured in the image;
    Article (8) if the image is captured by a law enforcement authority or a person who is under contract with or otherwise acting under the direction or on behalf of a law enforcement authority:
    -Item (D) in connection with the search for a missing person;
    Article (13) if the image is captured by a Texas licensed real estate broker in connection with the marketing, sale, or financing of real property, provided that no individual is identifiable in the image;
    Article (15) from a height no more than eight feet above ground level in a public place, if the image was captured without using any electronic, mechanical, or other means to amplify the image beyond
    normal human perception;
    Article (16) of public real property or a person on that property;

    Section 423.003
    OFFENSE: ILLEGAL USE OF UNMANNED AIRCRAFT TO CAPTURE IMAGE.
    (a) A person commits an offense if the person uses an unmanned aircraft to capture an image of an individual or privately owned real property in this state with the intent to conduct surveillance on the individual or property captured in the image.
    (b) An offense under this section is a Class C misdemeanor.
    (c) It is a defense to prosecution under this section that the person destroyed the image:
    Article (1) as soon as the person had knowledge that the image was captured in violation of this section; and
    Article (2) without disclosing, displaying, or distributing the image to a third party.
    (d) In this section, "intent" has the meaning assigned by Section 6.03, Penal Code.

    Secction 423.005. ILLEGALLY OR INCIDENTALLY CAPTURED IMAGES NOT SUBJECT TO DISCLOSURE. (a) Except as otherwise provided by Subsection (b), an image captured in violation of Section 423.003, or an image captured by an unmanned aircraft that was incidental to the lawful capturing of an image:
    Article (1) may not be used as evidence in any criminal or juvenile proceeding, civil action, or administrative proceeding;
    Article (2) is not subject to disclosure, inspection, or copying under Chapter 552; and
    Article (3) is not subject to discovery, subpoena, or other means of legal compulsion for its release.
    Last edited by stollem; 27th September 2013 at 02:17 PM. Reason: (missed a couple lines)

Page 37 of 37 FirstFirst ... 27353637

Similar Threads

  1. Close call.
    By Dallibab in forum AIR SHOWS...
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 16th October 2011, 06:44 PM
  2. Very Close Call
    By Garbach in forum AIR SHOWS...
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 2nd June 2011, 12:24 AM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •