Business News

Aerial photography ban proposed for all but government

In New Hampshire, an aerial photography ban has raised more questions than answer as fears regarding drones heat up – measured reaction or overreaction?

Published

7 years ago

February 26, 2013

The American Genius Staff

aerial photography ban

New Hampshire bill proposes aerial photography ban

Neal Kurk (R), member of the New Hampshire House of Representatives since 1986 has recently sponsored HB 619-FN to make aerial photography illegal in their state, which many are considering a look into the future. States are currently struggling with how to deal with advances in drone technology, particularly mini-drones, fueled by fears not only that the federal government is using drones on U.S. soil, but are using them abroad not only to take out terrorists, but suspected terrorists, even if American. Click to tweet.

UPDATE: Aerial photography ban amended, concerns continue

Much media attention has been showered on the topic, bringing light to the full array of uses, not just the CIA’s implementation of the technologies. According to Fox correspondent Catherine Herridge, the Federal Aviation Administration has already granted 327 licenses, and it projects as many as 10,000 licensed systems by 2017.

New Hampshire’s proposed aerial photography ban states the following:
[ba-quote]A person is guilty of a class A misdemeanor if such person knowingly creates or assists in creating an image of the exterior of any residential dwelling in this state where such image is created by or with the assistance of a satellite, drone, or any device that is not supported by the ground. This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects. In this paragraph, “dwelling” means any building, structure, or portion thereof which is occupied as, or designed or intended for occupancy as, a residence by one or more individuals. [/ba-quote]

Potential problems with this bill

Although the bill seeks to protect residents from being spied on or documented, it very clearly excludes government officials who may use drones for official business. Most protests against drones are not against hobbyists, Google Maps satellites, commercial flights, the film industry, or aerial photographers, rather against the government’s use of the devices.

The aerial photography ban is unclear as to the very specific non-threatening uses of aerial devices such as aerial real estate photography for listings, or if a homeowner is photographing their own home, and while it states that “This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects,” possibly implying that if no human is in any photo or video taken, it is acceptable.

More reading: Private Facebook status updates made visible by Storify

Additionally, it is unclear the implications of this bill on existing Google maps or existing images that have been taken via aerial device, and videography does not seem to be clearly addressed in the bill.

Fines for violations of a bill that could spread to other states

Rep. Kurk proposes a fine for violating the aerial photography ban, costing $62.71 per case in fiscal year 2014, rising to $64.40 per case thereafter, with an estimated $10,000 burden on taxpayers should someone appeal, and of course the $35,000 per year prison cost per person that fails to pay and is arrested.

Real estate photographer Larry Lohrman said, “Based on the public discussion that I’ve seen on this subject, I’m going to go out on a limb and make a wild guess and predict that this is not going to be an isolated incident. My guess is that other states will be doing this too. Particularly since so many cities are resisting use of UAVs by law enforcement.”

[ba-pdfviewer pdfurl=”https://theamericangenius.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/02/HB0619.pdf” width=”100%” height=”900px”]

0 Shares

Up Next

Topshop and Google+ team up for Fashion Week

Don't Miss

Chinese hackers: a cultural perspective

The American Genius Staff

The American Genius is news, insights, tools, and inspiration for business owners and professionals. AG condenses information on technology, business, social media, startups, economics and more, so you don’t have to.

37 Comments

Demtrev Tonstoski

February 26, 2013 at 4:03 pm

People have been able to do this with zoom lenes in planes for years. I don’t think this Rep. Kurk has thought through his bill very well.

Reply
Don

February 26, 2013 at 4:34 pm

“This prohibition shall not apply where the image does not reveal forms identifiable as human beings or man-made objects,” possibly implying that if no human is in any photo or video taken, it is acceptable.”

~This assumption is incorrect as a man made object could be cars, houses any other type of vehicle, fence, tower or any other man made object making the only permissible photos those of nature.

Reply
Scritti Politti

February 26, 2013 at 4:45 pm

Amateur-hour and embarrassing. The fact that people like this get elected explains why our country is in such dire straits. Local and state governments don’t control airspace. That’s the domain of the federal government and ONLY the federal government.

Everything about this reeks of ignorance. “Human beings or man-made objects”? So you can only take an aerial picture if there’s not a single person, building, boat, road, power line, or trash can in it? How about man-made lakes? Not to mention that this is totally arbitrary. Why are aerial pictures prohibited but not ground pictures? Is it based on some theory that people can hide behind trees or other foliage? What about those in barren areas who are just as visible from the ground as from the air?

Stupid, stupid, stupid.

Reply
@rh

February 26, 2013 at 5:21 pm

Drones could be useful in the motion picture industry, apparently not in New Hampshire.

Reply
- Shawn Woelfel
  
  February 26, 2013 at 10:41 pm
  
  Exactly.. this ban proposal is absurd.
  
  Reply
BlondeFurious

February 26, 2013 at 5:48 pm

Making this decision was easy for Kurk. It was simply a matter of getting paid well—or receiving some other significant favor—by the special interest group behind it or not getting paid well. He choose to get paid!

Kurk doesn’t have a difficult time living with himself over proposing bills like this either. He’s in a special class of 550 or so individuals that get to call the shots for the other 300 million Americans. He’s mostly exempt from living by the same rules the rest of us live by. That’s one of the perks of holding his office. Isn’t it wonderful the fine people of the United States elect representatives that cannot truly represent us because of the perks of their office?

Enough sarcasm… this is an awful, awful bill. In the hands of the masses the fantastic advantages of drone aerial technology far outweigh the negatives. Think of aerial crop scouting, validating insurance claims, taking overhead pictures of your property, leveraging another great tool for professional photography, filming independent films, etc…

The vast majority of people are law abiding, and desire to be so. Will there be people on the fringes who use aerial drone technology with malicious intent? Absolutely. I think people on the fringes do that with computers, animals, other people, guns, knives, food, financial schemes, mobile phones, etc., etc., etc. Those outliers are always going to be there.

What is the appropriate response to this bill? Throw it out! Demand any and all proposed legislation that caters to the fringe cases at the expense of the majority’s liberties to be rejected.

Reply
- BillinDetroit
  
  April 13, 2013 at 10:45 am
  
  “Demand any and all proposed legislation that caters to the fringe cases at the expense of the majority’s liberties to be rejected.”
  
  That casts fresh light on the current proposed gun confiscation laws now working their way through congress and through the legislators of several states.
  
  Reply
  - Robert Eidson
    
    April 18, 2013 at 1:47 am
    
    “Gun confiscation laws”? Who are these dumbass Constitutional experts?
    
    Reply
Shawn Woelfel

February 26, 2013 at 10:38 pm

Aerial photography and “drones” are two totally separate things. Drones are used by the Police and the government. Aerial photography is done with R/C models or an actual full scale aircraft. This ban proposal is due to people NOT knowing the difference between the two. A drone can do far more than any radio controlled model ever could, and if some whack job did build a model to do what drones can do.. then by all means.. lock him up. The ban proposals are getting way out of hand. You’re trying to ban someones hobby and even worse some peoples profession. Get real.

Reply
Keith mckenna

February 27, 2013 at 5:50 pm

Seriously Mr Kurk? Do you kiss your mama with the same mouth you use to propose such stupid bills with?

Reply
Tom Benedict

March 2, 2013 at 5:16 pm

Wow. So some kid setting a self-timer on his camera and tossing it into the air to make a photo of their back yard is suddenly guilty of a class A misdemeanor. Greeeeeeat…

And the next lawmaker who says, “But that’s not how the law would be used” needs to have their brain checked at the door to see if they have any actual live neurons inside. It’s not up to the author of the bill to enforce it. It’s up to the police and the judicial system. So if that’s not how the law should be used, that’s not how it should be worded.

Reply
Gerel Gruber

March 2, 2013 at 8:21 pm

Stupidity will get you anywhere including being continually elected I guess. Absurd coming from the Live Free or Die state, or did the motto change to Just Die recently? Google Maps et. al., real estate developers, tourism, news reporting, Freedom of Speech, land management, conservation, science and education, professional sports coverage, art, hot air balloons, gliders, public lands, private property rights, commercial enterprise, traffic and disaster reporting to name a few reasons why this law sucks. Limiting freedoms limits free enterprise which damages the economy among other things, but if you want to charge and fine a twelve-year old child as a terrorist for taking a photo with his camera from a plane in order to make up for lost revenue I guess that’s up to you Kurt.

Reply
Happeh

March 4, 2013 at 5:40 am

None of you attacking Mr Kirk have made any comments indicating you have truly thought this through.

Every one of you that says “this has been going on for years” has not followed that up with “on a limited basis”. How many airplanes, helicopters, model airplanes, model rockets or balloons have there been in the past taking aerial photos? Not very many.

But now that technology has improved so much, instead of buying a new TV, video game console, or clothes for the new school year, anyone can buy a drone that can fly all over the neighborhood taking pictures through people’s windows.

And since the law says “anything visible from the street is legal to take pictures of”, all of those people flying spy drones are going to be perfectly legal when they catch you and the missus through your open bedroom window, open living room window, open kitchen window etc, where you thought you were safe because you live on 5 acres that is completely fenced off.

If you really want to trash someone like Mr Kirk you should examine the issue from every angle so you look thoughtful and concerned, instead of looking like people who don’t care about the issue at all and are only here because you want to disparage Mr Kirk.

Reply
- HairyHerry
  
  March 4, 2013 at 5:05 pm
  
  I could take one of the two tiny spycams I possess and tape it on the end of a broomstick and use that to look over your fence to view your property. Does that mean we should now outlaw broomsticks, long sticks of PVC pipe, long lengths of copper tubing, long tree limbs, etc I could use to violate your PRIVACY? Get my drift on this?? This is why I’m commenting against the lack of logic that Mr. Kirk in this regard. There are already privacy laws existing in New Hampshire already, so why does Mr Kirk want responsible users of the technology to be barred from utilizing it, yet makes NO PEEP WHATSOEVER regarding his State’s usage of such? I will continue to disparage Mr. Kirk when he doesn’t use his functional cranium – a typical faux pas of nearly all legislators whom act on non-existent kneejerk reactions. In Other Words, I want him to seriously reconsider balancing his proposed Act, and if I were a New Hampshireman in the legislature in Concord, I’d insist on modification to balance this.
  
  Reply
- Christopher Jay Campbell
  
  March 6, 2013 at 1:28 pm
  
  Perhaps you should learn a little more about aerial photography. It is a huge business, from Google satellites to aerial surveys for proposed businesses. Before almost any chain restaurant is built, there is an aerial survey. Aerial photos are extremely popular in postcards, magazines, and advertisements. Aerial photography is not rare; the fact is, most inhabited places are photographed quite frequently. People even buy aerial portraits of their homes and businesses and hang them on their walls. Private companies, scientists, and researchers of all kinds rely extensively on aerial photography.
  
  The fact is, if you are outdoors, you are on public view. Someone probably sees you, whether from the ground or from the air. As for people taking pictures of you in your bedroom, there are already laws against voyeurism. However, if you are standing in your window looking out at the street, there is no way in the world that you are going to successfully argue that your privacy was violated. Think of all the photos in magazines and elsewhere showing people in windows, in stores, in restaurants, at sporting events, in their offices, etc. Do you really think a picture of a glass office building full of people is secured with model releases from every individual in the building? Your employer may have security camera photographing you at work and in the parking lot. Your hotel is filled with security cameras photographing you in all public areas. Security cameras watch to catch cheaters at casinos. Security cameras look for crime such as prostitution, robbery, and drug dealing in public parks and other public areas.
  
  Further, the proposed law is probably unconstitutional as an unreasonable restraint on freedom of expression. It is easily proven that the law provides no additional level of privacy that you do not already have. The courts are highly unlikely to uphold this law.
  
  Reply
- Robert Eidson
  
  April 18, 2013 at 1:50 am
  
  You sound like a strong supporter of that waco congressman. Need to check hospital records to determine when the full-frontal lobotomy was performed!
  
  Reply
HairyHerry

March 4, 2013 at 4:56 pm

What is the deal New Hampshire? Live Free Or Die?? Or are these just words on your license tags??? I’m glad some New Hampshiremen are asking questions now about this Act of Stupidity. This is problematic when 1) existing privacy laws are not being cited with this proposed act, 2) that the sponsoring legislator assumes this technology in the hands of We The People will be abused against their fellow New Hampshiremen, 3) that no issues regarding FPV craft in New Hampshire have been noted going into this proposed Act, 4) No mention that State Government should be EQUALLY BOUND as their Citizens, and 5) Not even at consideration would be a sunset clause to revisit this potential issue that does not even exist!
This is even a better reason why FPV hobbyists should unite. Texas is considering similar legislation now and before you know it, only the same government fascists who allow the banksters their free reign will be those with the ability to use this technology, no checks and balances by We The People because legislators would rather we remain as Sheeple instead of the People, despite the fact a NH lawmaker makes extremely little from their legislative activities.

Reply
HairyHerry

March 4, 2013 at 5:09 pm

Please! It’s our GOVERNMENT who is into the terrorism part of this. Are you really that much of a sheep? Read more of these comments, take your meds, and get a grip!

Reply
- vonskippy
  
  March 4, 2013 at 5:11 pm
  
  Apparently you’re so completely stupid that you can’t recognize simple sarcasm.
  
  Reply
  - HairyHerry
    
    March 4, 2013 at 5:32 pm
    
    Sorry about that. Understand that I did not sense sarcasm in this and I, HH hereby withdraws that comment against you as it’s the correct thing to do. Too many sheeple simply say Meh! at problematic matters as this and move on. Until enough take this and other issues seriously enough, we won’t even have a Country left worth living in.
    
    Reply
Christopher Jay Campbell

March 6, 2013 at 1:13 pm

Okay, so people are afraid of being spied upon by government drones. So let’s outlaw all aerial photography except spy photos made by government drones. How does this make any sense at all?

Reply

Business News

Will House Democrats pass the new Senate stimulus package?

(BUSINESS NEWS) A new stimulus package for the COVID-19 pandemic has come from the senate, the question now is will the House Democrats accept and pass it?

Published

3 days ago

March 26, 2020

Dawn Brotherton, Staff Writer

Congress can’t seem to agree about COVID-19 relief. Yesterday, the Senate and the White House came to an agreement on a $2 trillion economic stimulus package. The Democrats are now the hold-up. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has publicly stated that the House will be reviewing the bill, but there is no commitment as to whether the bill will pass or not. The Hill reported that some House Democrats are concerned that they have not provided any input.

What’s in the measure?

According to CBS News, the actual text of the measure hasn’t been released, but they did get information from Minority Leader Chuck Schumer about some of the contents:

• Expanded unemployment benefits to boost the maximum benefit and to give laid-off workers full pay for four months
• Direct payments to individuals making less than $99,000
• $130 billion for hospitals
• $367 billion in loans for small business
• $150 billion for state and local governments
• $500 billion for large businesses
• Creates an oversight board to govern large loans
• Prohibitions to prevent President Trump and family from getting federal relief

Will the measure pass?

Pelosi has said that this measure is a big improvement over the Republican’s first proposal. It seems as if she is working hard to move the measure through the House, but given the current state of politics, it’s hard to believe that anything will be done without some debate. Many Democrats have pushed for a food stamp increase, which is not in the current measure. However, the Democrats did win on the oversight board that protects the employees of the companies who are getting loans. Money for states was another Democrat victory in the current measure.

If the bill can pass the House unanimously, lawmakers won’t have to vote on the floor. If the House can’t agree, the House will need to reconvene and amend the Senate measure or pass their own measure. Under the COVID-19 travel restrictions and quarantine issues, it might be difficult to get anything done quickly. The urgency is real, but so is the responsibility. The Democrats want the money to do what Congress intends, not for CEO compensation or stock buyouts.

Business News

MLMs under investigation for claiming they have a COVID-19 miracle cure

(BUSINESS NEWS) Guys, there is currently no cure for COVID-19 and it’s definitely not being sold by your friend in an MLM or whatever their company calls themselves.

Published

4 days ago

March 24, 2020

Brittany Vance, Staff Writer

It should go without saying that essential oils are NOT a cure for COVID-19, but unfortunately, the MLMs are at it again. Yes, that’s right, there are people trying to market their oils, pills…etc. as a way to stave off the pandemic that is currently upon us. So before we go any further, may I remind y’all that there is no miracle cure to treat or prevent the virus.

Do not use MLM products as a replacement for the actions laid out by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), like social distancing and vigorous hand washing.

Don’t get me wrong, if you or your friends or relatives want to use MLM products on top of the advice given by doctors and scientists, go ahead. But advertising that these products can cure a disease that’s currently spreading across the world isn’t just irresponsible, it’s dangerous. Even if you don’t catch it, you’re still at risk of spreading the virus.

As of right now, the FTC is investigating seven companies over COVID-19 related claims, but you should be suspicious of anyone claiming they have something that will help. Do your homework. Sources like the CDC and WHO (World Health Organization) are great places to start if you’re unsure about information that you see on social media or hear from a friend. Disinformation is everywhere, so it’s vital to keep track of sources.

If you do stumble across a friend or family member trying to slip in MLM sales during this global crisis, be civil in your rebuttals. Many people join MLMs because they’ve been struggling to make money elsewhere. MLMs are notorious for targeting immigrants and stay-at-home moms. With COVID-19 bringing a slew of job loss, financial circumstances for many are more precarious than ever, which could very well put pressure on people in MLMs.

In short: MLM corporations that advertise a miracle cure? I didn’t think these companies could be more evil, but I was wrong. Your friend on Facebook touting their essential oil as a miracle cure? Definitely not great, but there might be more going on than meets the eye, so be honest with them, but also be kind.

It’s no magic cure, but a drop of kindness could go a long way right now.

Business News

COVID-19: Should I even bother applying for jobs right now?

(BUSINESS NEWS) COVID-19 has sent shockwaves through the business world, and many are asking if they should even TRY to get a job right now. It’s… it’s complicated.

Published

5 days ago

March 23, 2020

Lani Rosales, COO + News Director

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, most people are either working from home, or nervously in an office setting right now, or are already unemployed, and there is a collective anxiety that rolled in like a fog overnight. Many are wondering if they’ll have a job tomorrow, and worse, folks already unemployed are wondering if there is any hope in sight.

I won’t sugar coat this – it sucks.

This whole thing sucks. For some sectors, despite the government working toward relief efforts, this is devastating. Truly. For other sectors particularly those in tech or corporate life (which is where our focus is for this story), there is a recovery in the future.

It’s universally awful, but it’s not an impossible situation.

In fact, this could turn out to be a major advantage for you if approached properly.

Before I tell you the bad news, then the good news, and then offer advice, let me first assert that employment is a topic close to our hearts here at AG. Although you’re reading this on the pages of an entrepreneur news site, you may also know that for nearly a decade, we’ve operated the Austin Digital Jobs group on Facebook (and hosted quarterly recruiting mixers that average 450 attendees (which are obviously on pause right now)), but you might not know that we also launched the Remote Digital Jobs group on Facebook.

We’re in the trenches with job seekers, employers, career coaches and the like. Every day. Which means we’re having hundreds of conversations about how COVID-19 is impacting employers and job seekers.

So… let’s start with the bad news first.

It’s no secret that there is an air of uncertainty right now. We’re collectively holding our breath, prepared for the worst but hoping for the best. The universal virus we’re all infected with right now is anxiety – employer and employee alike.

Some employers are moving forward as normal because their industry is thriving in this time, others are hard hit and looking at their reserves and hitting pause on hiring.

Many companies have a hiring freeze in place right now, but they’re not public about that in any way, so as a job seeker, you’ll never know which are in this situation.

Others are following bad advice from venture capitalists and are considering blindly axing people. Some already have.

Layoffs are here. Not en masse yet, but if a company has no money, it can’t pay employees, and smaller companies are currently facing that reality.

But here is the good news. For YOU, anyways.

In this time where an entire workforce has been sent home to work, some folks are going to shine as they are reliable, communicative, and think creatively. Unfortunately, others are going to struggle and sink.

Sinkers open up critical spots on the team that need to be filled to keep operations moving. That could be a spot free up for you!

Further, employers are reconsidering their roster right now. They may be trimming some figurative fat.

For example, one small software development company in Austin told us they would make it through the storm if they made the hard decision to let go of two senior developers they had hired who had negotiated extremely high salaries. With those two salaries cut, two people have lost their jobs, but the company will now hire one senior developer and pay them an Austin salary, not a California salary they had originally paid to attract that tippity top talent.

That could be good news for you. And there are plenty of companies doing just this.

Additionally, companies are looking at their future hiring needs for “when this all ends,” and we’re being told that many companies are currently hiring for the summer, which sounds far away, but is about as long as the hiring process often takes anyhow.

While not a total win, we’re hearing news that implies companies don’t expect COVID-19 to wipe out their business, or hold them back indefinitely.

So should you even bother applying for jobs right now?

The answer is: Yes, absolutely, but you’re going to have to change your approach.

Job interviews are going virtual, so get ready. You’re going to have to test out all of your video platforms with Zoom being the most common, followed by Skype – don’t wait until you’ve landed an interview to test your tech. You’ll have to test your lighting and sound (and probably wear in-ear headphones with a standard mic). Do that today if you can, even if it’s just a friend you’re video chatting with as a test. Here are some quick tips.

You’re going to be tempted to apply to as many jobs as possible and play the numbers game.

That feels good because you’re seeking to control something in this time of uncertainty, but you’re working against yourself and missing opportunities. Plus, it’s lazy. Sorry, it’s true.

Take the time to groom your resume and cover letter. Send it to everyone you know and ask if they’ll pretend to be an employer and opine when they have time, that you’re looking for criticism, not praise.

If you have savings and can afford a professional resume writing service to help you, make that investment right now. If you have comfortable savings, hire a reputable career coach to speed up the process and work with you on your strengths and weaknesses.

Every application you submit should be refined for that specific employer. Before applying, read the job posting three times in a row. Then, read the company’s Career page, their About page, and see what they tweet. This will all tell you what’s important to them (plus, the keywords you’ll need to use to get past the applicant tracking system robots and into the hands of a humans are IN THE JOB LISTING, so use them). This will help you to tell your story in a way that answers their needs.

Take the time to get to know each company before introducing yourself, it’ll make an immediate difference. This is why you can’t really apply to 100 places in one day, it’s unrealistic and puts you at a disadvantage.

Aside from transitioning to video interviews and customizing every application for quality, these times call for some things I’m scared to ask you for, but this pandemic demands grit and patience.

And that’s so much easier said than done.

You’ll have to keep pressing forward, even when you don’t feel like it, and even when it’s hard to get out of bed in the morning. And you’ll have to really wrap your mind around the fact that employers aren’t moving as quickly as they were just a month ago. Response times are slower, so landing an interview takes more time, and post-interview decisions will take even longer.

And that doesn’t sound appealing when you’re worried about paying rent in a few days. It’s not appealing, and we are by no means minimizing that fact or your feelings about it. These are the cold realities of these COVID-19 times.

In these desperate times, your only choice is to take a deep breath and approach job hunting the right way, knowing that companies are shuffling the deck right now. It won’t be in fast motion, but there’s a chair for you about to open up, and you should be pushing your hardest to be the one to fill it.

From the depths of our hearts – know that we’re pulling for you.