Paparazzi are going to ruin our Hobby/Work for us.


S

SDB777

Member
Wouldn't the prudent thing to do be to sue the individual flying the "____"-copter that sold the photo to the tabloid? After all, there are probably already laws in place about flying over property, people, too close to buildings or whatnot in place.....make the guilty pay from their bank account.


Most of the comments are from very 'low information' people that are regurgitating only what the media tells them. I really enjoy reading about shooting 'drones' from the sky with a shotgun, after you start spreading birdshot on the 'people'.....that will be fun in court!







Scott (fools are foolish....low information media types are just stupid) B
 

R

R_Lefebvre

Arducopter Developer
I do wonder if there might be a market for anti-paparazzi-drone services at events. I just wonder what would be the best and safest way to neutralize them without risking people on the ground. I have though that flying a larger helicopter overhead would force them to ground due to the downwash.
 

Old Man

Old Man

Active Member
I've had inquiries from people asking how our devices can be prevented from operating in certain areas. Things are indeed going to get bad for us relatively soon due to the lack of respect for others demonstrated by far too many people.
 


Old Man

Old Man

Active Member
They have those in every gun shop;) Actually had someone ask me today how hard it would be to hit an MR with a shotgun for cryin' out loud. Then there was that Chinese company marketing 2.4 jammers a couple months back....
 

jfro

jfro

Aerial Fun
From the article "
In Britain, Civil Aviation Authority regulations say that small remote-control craft can fly in any normal airspace for private use, but are required to stay 150ft from other people and buildings, and 450ft from public assemblies.
The operators are banned from using data or images obtained from flying close.
Many fear, however, that there’s little to be done in the face of technology that can be purchased so cheaply and is proliferating so rapidly."

Some stiff privacy laws are needed. Both from the news and police. Pretty simple, although here in the U.S., we don't do simple. Money interests will more than likely set the laws.

In a messed up world we have, enforcing a law may be hard. However, simple answer to that is make it worth the ambulance chasers, I mean lawyers, time. Make some laws that both the police can enforce and the lawyers can file civil suits on. That will stop some of this idiots. Allow for some serious fines and damages to all involved with drone and all photo related snooping.

We need a massive rewrite of our privacy laws anyway for the sake of the celebrities and other people in the news. What they go through with the news hounds is just unreal.
 

S

stitch1615

Member
R_Lefebvre said:
I do wonder if there might be a market for anti-paparazzi-drone services at events. I just wonder what would be the best and safest way to neutralize them without risking people on the ground. I have though that flying a larger helicopter overhead would force them to ground due to the downwash.
Click to expand...


How about Israel's Iron Dome? It seems to work OK.

While they are entitled to a certain amount of privacy, going to the bathroom, having sex with a stranger, or giving birth, they have chosen to be celebrities and are darn well compensated for it. many worth millions for acting or singing. It's not like they contribute to world peace or find cures for diseases but they get a lot for what they do.
It's interesting to some of the more mundane of us who really have no life and have to live it thru these people.
It's all boring to me but I have a life.

Anyway, guards stationed with shotguns and rubber bullets could do the trick.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.
Top