9 ms·

UK to bring in drone registration

68 points by dan1234 9y ago

reallydattrue 9y ago
License means More Tax. Why am I not surprised? - Car License. - TV License. - Remember Personal Radios needed a License. - Gun License. - Travel License (passport). Now Drone License. sigh What else can the UK Government think of taxing?
- lexicality 9y ago
  Irony
  - renesd 9y ago
    Bronzy
- IshKebab 9y ago
  I mean, most of those make sense - a 'car licence' (I assume you mean road tax?) pays for roads (in theory). A TV licence pays for the BBC. A radio licence presumably paid for the BBC before there were TVs. Passport fees pay for embassies and other foreign services. It is hard to see how an expensive drone licence would be justified though.
  - petepete 9y ago
    Radio only licences existed until the 70s and would cover people who used a radio but not a TV. TV licences include radio.
  - joaodlf 9y ago
    TV licence is a big nuisance, and to me it's just old media clinging on to the power it holds. I go home and accidentally start streaming through the BBC iPlayer (I wanted to watch a catch up program but my finger slipped), am I breaking the law? Am I considered a criminal by the state? If they want to enforce this properly they need to do it at the device level. If I'm not supposed to watch TV then make it impossible for me not to do so, put a login behind it or something. Not to mention the ABSURD methods they go to intimidate you into paying, even when you don't watch live television (in my case, I don't even own an aerial cable), every month I get a threatening, amateur looking, in red writing, letter telling me about my crimes and that I will just end up in court.... If I kept these letters I'd have to rent a garage just to store them, have these people ever heard about saving trees? :) It's a silly tax, with silly regulations and silly enforcement that needs to go.
    - tome 9y ago
      > I wanted to watch a catch up program but my finger slipped You're required to have a TV licence to watch catch up programs: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/help/tvlicence https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/help/tvlicence This rule has been in force for some months now. > am I breaking the law? Am I considered a criminal by the state? I imagine the case law on this issue is very well understood by now. I don't know the answer but I doubt there are any legal uncertainties. > the ABSURD methods they go to intimidate you into paying, even when you don't watch live television I'm not sure what it's like for those like you who have device but no aerial. I have no device. Once every two years I get a letter asking me to fill in a web form to confirm I still have no device. It's annoying, sure, but your reaction seems massively over the top.
      - nicky0 9y ago
        I get a letter from the BBC every month threatening me with court action if I don't buy a TV license.
        EliRivers 9y ago
        Is it from the BBC? They outsourced licencing many years ago.
        nicky0 9y ago
        Parts of the operation are contracted out to Capita, who act as agents for the BBC under the "TV Licensing" trade name.
        DanBC 9y ago
        Have you filled out the web form?
        nicky0 9y ago
        No I quite enjoy the threatening letters, they tend to repeat after about 6 months but every now and again you get a new one.
  - TheAceOfHearts 9y ago
    What's a TV license? I've genuinely never heard of that being a thing, although I'm in the US. I own a TV but I don't watch any public broadcasts or cable, so requiring a license for that seems weird at first glance.
    - dan1234 9y ago
      Basically, TV Licence pays for state run TV & radio services. In the UK, this also means we don't have any advertising on the BBC channels or website, which is nice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence
      - Amezarak 9y ago
        The US has public radio and television without advertising as well, but instead of licensing it is funded through personal and corporate donations, together with government grants coming out of the general budget. On a few programs you might get the host of the showing saying at the end mentioning one of the sponsors, but that's the worst it gets. The website (for radio, I don't see any on the TV website)) does have a few non-awful display ads, but streaming everything is free. In my personal opinion this is a more progressive model - poor people don't have to pay money for public television access.
        petre 9y ago
        Other (mostly European) countries rely on a tax to fund or partially fund state TV/radio so that the government doesn't broadcast government propaganda over state TV or control it by cutting their budget. It's also easier for them to make cultural shows as opposed to Oprah style reality TV that's the equivalent of clickbait and sells ads. In some of these countries state run TV is the most propaganda/advertising free TV. BBC is one example.
        Amezarak 9y ago
        NPR and PBS neither air reality TV type content, or are outlets for government propaganda. I understand that's one stated reason for the license tax, but the American model pretty well proves that it isn't necessary to get independent content that's not ad-driven.
  - EliRivers 9y ago
    The "car licence" connection to paying for roads was ended in 1937 [1], and the Road Fund itself in 1956 [1]. The Vehicle Excise Duty since 1936 has just been taxation, not earmarked for anything in particular. [1] http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01482.pdf http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01482.pdf , page 6
- orf 9y ago
  Personal radios need a license? I'm guessing you mean two-way walkie-talkies? That's only if they use part of the spectrum regulated by Ofcom. If you use some of the unregulated spectrum then it's fine. The rest of the licenses make sense. The TV license is particularly important as it pays for the BBC, keeping it relatively free from government interference whilst still creating top-notch content.
  - EliRivers 9y ago
    Not walkie-talkies. Personal radios needed a licence. Back when the TV licence was the TV and radio licence, and there was also a separate radio licence. Radio licences were withdrawn back in February 1971.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Kenji 9y ago
  The UK Government is currently in a chokehold of the authoritarians. See also the prime minister's plans about crypto and the (opt-out) porn block and planned required identification to access porn. We can only hope they don't get much done and are busy with Brexit.
  - petre 9y ago
    What do you expect from an ex home secretary? Policing everything like it's the Soviet Union.
- EliRivers 9y ago
  I believe it is that case that the UK government does not insist you have a passport to travel. Practical considerations may make it difficult without one (many private companies, for example, won't let you onto their conveyance without one because they don't want to be lumbered with taking you back again when the destination country refuses to let you in for lack of passport) and the destination country might not let you in without one, but that's not the UK government insisting you be licenced to travel. It's not illegal under UK law, I understand (or it certainly didn't used to be; the maybot did seem to run an awfully authoritarian Home Office so maybe that's changed), to simply wander down to the sea, get on a yacht, and sail across to another country. I have myself gone to France without a passport (which may have been illegal under French law; I certainly have the right to travel there freely, but I don't know what they insist people carry), gone shopping, and come back again, and I know someone coming back through border control who simply gave his name and address.
  - bonzini 9y ago
    IIRC the United Kingdom has no national ID cards, but generally if your country has one they are an acceptable way for EU citizens to travel within the Union (and they were even when the EU was the EEC). Getting your ID in Italy is about one Euro (printing photos is more expensive than that) and it's valid for ten years. All that's required for an Italian is a means of being identified by an officer; the national ID card is just a convenient one. A driving license is enough of you prefer.
- nicky0 9y ago
  You missed Dog License if you are doing historical ones...
  - petre 9y ago
    You need a dog license in some parts of Switzerland and a six month course to get one. It's mostly because of irresponsible persons that abandon dogs.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Not for fish, though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1RGwaCUjm0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1RGwaCUjm0
- magnat 9y ago
  > What else can the UK Government think of taxing? Thingie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmOHx5Ftez8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmOHx5Ftez8
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- Daviey 9y ago
  > - Remember Personal Radios needed a License. CB's do not anymore... these were deregulated just a few years ago. To Add to the list: - Fishing License - Dog License (re-introduce!)
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
petepete 9y ago
I generally don't have a problem the idea of registration, but 250g is way too low a limit. If 2.2kg is the FAA's lowest risk category, the limit should be closer to that.
- jahewson 9y ago
  It's not a limit. 250g is the minimum weight at which drones are regulated. There would be little point in a new law which excludes drones under 2.2 kg as that is nearly all drones. FAA is not a good example to cite either as their position on drones is a total mess and their existing regulations are a patchwork of legacy rules designed to cover model aircraft.
  - petepete 9y ago
    > It's not a limit. 250g is the minimum weight at which drones are regulated. So 250g is the maximum limit for unregulated drones.
codebeaker 9y ago
Currently mentoring a startup in this space (not in the UK). For us it's because of mandatory insurance for 3rd party liability, and as a non-drone owner who's seen plenty of idiots wielding them, I'm all for it. I prefer the light touch (ala Mopeds/Scooters) where it's simple and easy, insurance at a flat rate, easy to transfer ownership. Something akin to cars with a v5 document, etc would be overkill. I don't really have an opinion on the weight limits, how much does something have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor vehicle to crash?
- krona 9y ago
  how much does something have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor vehicle to crash? I think things should be put in to context a bit. Seaguls where I live usually weigh more than 1-1.5Kg, and they are arguably more dangerous to be around if you happen to be a child holding an icecream!
  - codebeaker 9y ago
    Great point, in fact I've been bird struck whilst riding a motorcycle and that's DANGEROUS. I dare say though that I trust the bird's self preservation instinct more than I trust flakey wifi and an FPV pilot somewhere a few hundred meters away.
DrNuke 9y ago
I act as an advisor for DronesBench http://www.dronesbench.com http://www.dronesbench.com and we think there should also be some sort of drone efficiency certification for the consumer market (from 250g to about 4kg, under 250g they are toys according to EASA legislation draft), same as other electro-mechanical devices or machines, with a concise parameter to be sported on the drone's plate. Too much a difference from the value declared by the vendor may imply hidden defects of the drone and therefore the possibility of a crash. We are actively proposing our DronesBench Index to IEEE and EASA for the legislation to come, with encouraging response from IEEE at the preliminary level. It remains to be seen if and how things progress in a formal way.
- peteretep 9y ago
  I'd love to see noise regulation. Nothing more irritating than being somewhere peaceful and beautiful when a couple of douchey drone flyers decide to ruin the quiet
  - branchless 9y ago
    This is why I usually carry a toilet roll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTIet1jcYM4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTIet1jcYM4
  - sillysaurus3 9y ago
    "Noise regulation" is just a euphemism for "ban drones" since drones are always noisy.
    - The_Sponge 9y ago
      Well then, ban drones.
  - fh973 9y ago
    I am all for reducing noise in our environment. But you hardly hear my copters if a car or motorcycle passes. Most AC makes more noise. I don't understand this irrational phobia. Is the fact that it is flying triggering some deeper mechanisms in the brain? It reminds me of my two year old's reaction to wasps.
madaxe_again 9y ago
While I laud the intent, I doubt bad actors will register their drones, so it'll be a burden for legitimate pilots and no deterrent whatsoever for folks who use them to fly contraband into prison etc.
- RodericDay 9y ago
  "no deterrent whatsoever"? I really don't think this is correct. It may not be a foolproof deterrent, but it's certainly a deterrent. I don't like when this argument is trotted out for gun control and I don't like it here.
  - madaxe_again 9y ago
    How is it a deterrent? Honestly, I can't see it. If I currently owned an unregistered drone and was using it to shunt contraband into prison, how would this legislation change anything for me? It wouldn't increase my downside. Also, with guns, it's you, there, holding the gun, so it can be enforced. With drones, you could be in a moving car a mile away. How does that get enforced?
    - EliRivers 9y ago
      Well, suddenly simply being in possession of the unlicensed drone is an offence, so you're now at risk every second its in your car or in your house. Being a criminal, you probably interact with the police more often than non-criminals, and if they find it in your house or car or in some other way in your possession, they've got you.
- eterm 9y ago
  Like many laws, it's not really supposed to act as a deterrent, it's just an easier way to administer the law. If you find someone flying a drone dangerously, at the moment it's hard to know where to draw the line at what is legal, which then makes it difficult to prosecute someone who's flying drones recklessly (such as flying over airports). If you have drone registration, then in the same scenario you can either take away their license (an action which doesn't require proof beyond reasonable doubt) or if they aren't licensed, you have a very easy law to prosecute against (flying without a license).
thinbeige 9y ago
OT: Is it just me who does not see huge business opportunies in drones? Don't get me wrong. Drones made a huge leap the recent years and from a hardware manufacturer's POV there is business. There is also great stuff like drone races, drone cams and selfie cam drones. But will there be really much more? Are safety concerns, public regulation and limited use cases in many areas (such as urban areas) giving drones a hard time?
- sjcsjc 9y ago
  Drone Wars - Robot Wars in 3D.
  - Daviey 9y ago
    Airmageddon, made by the same person as Robot Wars. I was on there. :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja_epw7qnkc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja_epw7qnkc
- dan1234 9y ago
  Delivery companies are probably the largest potential users IMO. Imagine the potential chaos if all those the Deliveroo/Just eat drivers were replaced with drones heading to and from restaurants and takeaways with no formally defined routes.
  - dogma1138 9y ago
    That won't happen you can't fly drones in London outside of a few designated areas which are registered flying fields. It might work in less dense populated areas but I don't see drone delivery as a thing in any U.K. city ever happening.
- eterm 9y ago
  Drone registration could actually boost the drone-business market. Businesses should welcome registration because people won't just look at it and think "well I could do that myself!" because of the additional hurdle; hurdles that businesses will happily jump through. It'll separate drones more clearly into "toy" grade drones and business grade drones. The businesses for drones are anywhere that you want equipment (particularly cameras but not necessarily) that previously it was too difficult or expensive to put a person for either due to practicality or safety reasons. Drones are now reasonably cheap self-stabilising mobile platforms. They won't be going away, they'll just be incorporated into other businesses where appropriate. It's easy to laugh at drone-races and selfie-cams but as drones become more reliable, more efficient and quieter they'll just naturally find use cases.
phatbyte 9y ago
Portugal will introduce drone registration and insurance as well.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Yeah, I'm just waiting to see how that will be enforced.
  - fh973 9y ago
    Like everywhere else, it will be irrelevant in practice. But some lawyers made their career step. If some people would adhere to speed limits like they praise "drone regulations", the world would actually be safer.
dTal 9y ago
>The plans also include the extension of geo-fencing, in which no-fly zones are programmed into drones using GPS co-ordinates, around areas such as prisons and airports. So will open source drone firmware become illegal?
- WJW 9y ago
  Not if it includes geofencing, obviously. There might be an opportunity to alter/delete the geofence, but that would not be different in a legal sense from "chipping" a moped for example. The chippability of mopeds does not make all mopeds illegal and selling properly geofenced drones with open source firmware would also be legal. Altering a drone to remove the geofencing and then flying it would be illegal though.
abledon 9y ago
Cant believe its taking this long... and only in the UK! these things can be retrofitted to be _dangerous!_
- wyager 9y ago
  I can't tell if this comment is sarcastic or not. Could you expound on this a bit? What kind of retrofitting are you talking about, and how would registration help? The US also has drone registration as of a year or two ago, under the FAA. I'm not really sure what that accomplishes either, though. They might just be gradually ramping up to more aggressive restrictions.
  - rhinoceraptor 9y ago
    The FAA registration was actually struck down (as of May 2017) for violating the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The FAA is explicitly barred from regulating hobby model aircraft. Interestingly, the FAA still promulgates the notion that you have to pay them $5 for the privilege of flying.
- konart 9y ago
  >only in the UK I'm kind of offended here. Motherland Russia had this first!
prodmerc 9y ago
Could you, I don't know, require a license on high power handheld lasers? I see imbeciles shining what looks like 100+ mW laser pens (very cheap, very easy to get) on people. Now, I don't like laws banning stuff, but these handheld 150-2000 mW lasers can seriously damage someone's eyes. And I'm not going to risk blindness or poor eyesight for the rest of my life because some idiot thought it looked cool. What's a legitimate use for them? It seems to me that they exist only because "high power, fuck yeah". 50mW is enough for pointing at stuff, and you need industrial lasers to cut something. Shining them in the sky and at people is already illegal, technically, but this is a real case where preventing purchase would be better.
- slim 9y ago
  And acid
  - sargun 9y ago
    What's a legitimate usage of acid? Plenty. Cooking. Engraving. Cleaning.
- sargun 9y ago
  I used to own a bunch of 750 - 5000 mW portable (pen, and a plugin) lasers. Historically, I've used them for stargazing (i.e. pointing out stars for other people to look at), burning / igniting things I don't want to get near (and where I'm too lazy to remote ignite), and engraving.

68 points by dan1234 9y ago

License means More Tax. Why am I not surprised? - Car License. - TV License. - Remember Personal Radios needed a License. - Gun License. - Travel License (passport). Now Drone License. sigh What else can the UK Government think of taxing?

lexicality 9y ago
Irony
- renesd 9y ago
  Bronzy
IshKebab 9y ago
I mean, most of those make sense - a 'car licence' (I assume you mean road tax?) pays for roads (in theory). A TV licence pays for the BBC. A radio licence presumably paid for the BBC before there were TVs. Passport fees pay for embassies and other foreign services. It is hard to see how an expensive drone licence would be justified though.
- petepete 9y ago
  Radio only licences existed until the 70s and would cover people who used a radio but not a TV. TV licences include radio.
- joaodlf 9y ago
  TV licence is a big nuisance, and to me it's just old media clinging on to the power it holds. I go home and accidentally start streaming through the BBC iPlayer (I wanted to watch a catch up program but my finger slipped), am I breaking the law? Am I considered a criminal by the state? If they want to enforce this properly they need to do it at the device level. If I'm not supposed to watch TV then make it impossible for me not to do so, put a login behind it or something. Not to mention the ABSURD methods they go to intimidate you into paying, even when you don't watch live television (in my case, I don't even own an aerial cable), every month I get a threatening, amateur looking, in red writing, letter telling me about my crimes and that I will just end up in court.... If I kept these letters I'd have to rent a garage just to store them, have these people ever heard about saving trees? :) It's a silly tax, with silly regulations and silly enforcement that needs to go.
  - tome 9y ago
    > I wanted to watch a catch up program but my finger slipped You're required to have a TV licence to watch catch up programs: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/help/tvlicence https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/help/tvlicence This rule has been in force for some months now. > am I breaking the law? Am I considered a criminal by the state? I imagine the case law on this issue is very well understood by now. I don't know the answer but I doubt there are any legal uncertainties. > the ABSURD methods they go to intimidate you into paying, even when you don't watch live television I'm not sure what it's like for those like you who have device but no aerial. I have no device. Once every two years I get a letter asking me to fill in a web form to confirm I still have no device. It's annoying, sure, but your reaction seems massively over the top.
    - nicky0 9y ago
      I get a letter from the BBC every month threatening me with court action if I don't buy a TV license.
      - EliRivers 9y ago
        Is it from the BBC? They outsourced licencing many years ago.
        nicky0 9y ago
        Parts of the operation are contracted out to Capita, who act as agents for the BBC under the "TV Licensing" trade name.
      - DanBC 9y ago
        Have you filled out the web form?
        nicky0 9y ago
        No I quite enjoy the threatening letters, they tend to repeat after about 6 months but every now and again you get a new one.
- TheAceOfHearts 9y ago
  What's a TV license? I've genuinely never heard of that being a thing, although I'm in the US. I own a TV but I don't watch any public broadcasts or cable, so requiring a license for that seems weird at first glance.
  - dan1234 9y ago
    Basically, TV Licence pays for state run TV & radio services. In the UK, this also means we don't have any advertising on the BBC channels or website, which is nice. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television_licence
    - Amezarak 9y ago
      The US has public radio and television without advertising as well, but instead of licensing it is funded through personal and corporate donations, together with government grants coming out of the general budget. On a few programs you might get the host of the showing saying at the end mentioning one of the sponsors, but that's the worst it gets. The website (for radio, I don't see any on the TV website)) does have a few non-awful display ads, but streaming everything is free. In my personal opinion this is a more progressive model - poor people don't have to pay money for public television access.
      - petre 9y ago
        Other (mostly European) countries rely on a tax to fund or partially fund state TV/radio so that the government doesn't broadcast government propaganda over state TV or control it by cutting their budget. It's also easier for them to make cultural shows as opposed to Oprah style reality TV that's the equivalent of clickbait and sells ads. In some of these countries state run TV is the most propaganda/advertising free TV. BBC is one example.
        Amezarak 9y ago
        NPR and PBS neither air reality TV type content, or are outlets for government propaganda. I understand that's one stated reason for the license tax, but the American model pretty well proves that it isn't necessary to get independent content that's not ad-driven.
- EliRivers 9y ago
  The "car licence" connection to paying for roads was ended in 1937 [1], and the Road Fund itself in 1956 [1]. The Vehicle Excise Duty since 1936 has just been taxation, not earmarked for anything in particular. [1] http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01482.pdf http://www.parliament.uk/briefing-papers/SN01482.pdf , page 6
orf 9y ago
Personal radios need a license? I'm guessing you mean two-way walkie-talkies? That's only if they use part of the spectrum regulated by Ofcom. If you use some of the unregulated spectrum then it's fine. The rest of the licenses make sense. The TV license is particularly important as it pays for the BBC, keeping it relatively free from government interference whilst still creating top-notch content.
- EliRivers 9y ago
  Not walkie-talkies. Personal radios needed a licence. Back when the TV licence was the TV and radio licence, and there was also a separate radio licence. Radio licences were withdrawn back in February 1971.
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Kenji 9y ago
The UK Government is currently in a chokehold of the authoritarians. See also the prime minister's plans about crypto and the (opt-out) porn block and planned required identification to access porn. We can only hope they don't get much done and are busy with Brexit.
- petre 9y ago
  What do you expect from an ex home secretary? Policing everything like it's the Soviet Union.
EliRivers 9y ago
I believe it is that case that the UK government does not insist you have a passport to travel. Practical considerations may make it difficult without one (many private companies, for example, won't let you onto their conveyance without one because they don't want to be lumbered with taking you back again when the destination country refuses to let you in for lack of passport) and the destination country might not let you in without one, but that's not the UK government insisting you be licenced to travel. It's not illegal under UK law, I understand (or it certainly didn't used to be; the maybot did seem to run an awfully authoritarian Home Office so maybe that's changed), to simply wander down to the sea, get on a yacht, and sail across to another country. I have myself gone to France without a passport (which may have been illegal under French law; I certainly have the right to travel there freely, but I don't know what they insist people carry), gone shopping, and come back again, and I know someone coming back through border control who simply gave his name and address.
- bonzini 9y ago
  IIRC the United Kingdom has no national ID cards, but generally if your country has one they are an acceptable way for EU citizens to travel within the Union (and they were even when the EU was the EEC). Getting your ID in Italy is about one Euro (printing photos is more expensive than that) and it's valid for ten years. All that's required for an Italian is a means of being identified by an officer; the national ID card is just a convenient one. A driving license is enough of you prefer.
nicky0 9y ago
You missed Dog License if you are doing historical ones...
- petre 9y ago
  You need a dog license in some parts of Switzerland and a six month course to get one. It's mostly because of irresponsible persons that abandon dogs.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Not for fish, though: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1RGwaCUjm0 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1RGwaCUjm0
magnat 9y ago
> What else can the UK Government think of taxing? Thingie https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmOHx5Ftez8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MmOHx5Ftez8
deleted 9y ago
[deleted]
Daviey 9y ago
> - Remember Personal Radios needed a License. CB's do not anymore... these were deregulated just a few years ago. To Add to the list: - Fishing License - Dog License (re-introduce!)
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]

petepete 9y ago

I generally don't have a problem the idea of registration, but 250g is way too low a limit. If 2.2kg is the FAA's lowest risk category, the limit should be closer to that.

jahewson 9y ago
It's not a limit. 250g is the minimum weight at which drones are regulated. There would be little point in a new law which excludes drones under 2.2 kg as that is nearly all drones. FAA is not a good example to cite either as their position on drones is a total mess and their existing regulations are a patchwork of legacy rules designed to cover model aircraft.
- petepete 9y ago
  > It's not a limit. 250g is the minimum weight at which drones are regulated. So 250g is the maximum limit for unregulated drones.

codebeaker 9y ago

Currently mentoring a startup in this space (not in the UK). For us it's because of mandatory insurance for 3rd party liability, and as a non-drone owner who's seen plenty of idiots wielding them, I'm all for it. I prefer the light touch (ala Mopeds/Scooters) where it's simple and easy, insurance at a flat rate, easy to transfer ownership. Something akin to cars with a v5 document, etc would be overkill. I don't really have an opinion on the weight limits, how much does something have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor vehicle to crash?

krona 9y ago
how much does something have to weigh to take out an eye, or cause a motor vehicle to crash? I think things should be put in to context a bit. Seaguls where I live usually weigh more than 1-1.5Kg, and they are arguably more dangerous to be around if you happen to be a child holding an icecream!
- codebeaker 9y ago
  Great point, in fact I've been bird struck whilst riding a motorcycle and that's DANGEROUS. I dare say though that I trust the bird's self preservation instinct more than I trust flakey wifi and an FPV pilot somewhere a few hundred meters away.

DrNuke 9y ago

I act as an advisor for DronesBench http://www.dronesbench.com http://www.dronesbench.com and we think there should also be some sort of drone efficiency certification for the consumer market (from 250g to about 4kg, under 250g they are toys according to EASA legislation draft), same as other electro-mechanical devices or machines, with a concise parameter to be sported on the drone's plate. Too much a difference from the value declared by the vendor may imply hidden defects of the drone and therefore the possibility of a crash. We are actively proposing our DronesBench Index to IEEE and EASA for the legislation to come, with encouraging response from IEEE at the preliminary level. It remains to be seen if and how things progress in a formal way.

peteretep 9y ago
I'd love to see noise regulation. Nothing more irritating than being somewhere peaceful and beautiful when a couple of douchey drone flyers decide to ruin the quiet
- branchless 9y ago
  This is why I usually carry a toilet roll. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTIet1jcYM4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XTIet1jcYM4
- sillysaurus3 9y ago
  "Noise regulation" is just a euphemism for "ban drones" since drones are always noisy.
  - The_Sponge 9y ago
    Well then, ban drones.
- fh973 9y ago
  I am all for reducing noise in our environment. But you hardly hear my copters if a car or motorcycle passes. Most AC makes more noise. I don't understand this irrational phobia. Is the fact that it is flying triggering some deeper mechanisms in the brain? It reminds me of my two year old's reaction to wasps.

madaxe_again 9y ago

While I laud the intent, I doubt bad actors will register their drones, so it'll be a burden for legitimate pilots and no deterrent whatsoever for folks who use them to fly contraband into prison etc.

RodericDay 9y ago
"no deterrent whatsoever"? I really don't think this is correct. It may not be a foolproof deterrent, but it's certainly a deterrent. I don't like when this argument is trotted out for gun control and I don't like it here.
- madaxe_again 9y ago
  How is it a deterrent? Honestly, I can't see it. If I currently owned an unregistered drone and was using it to shunt contraband into prison, how would this legislation change anything for me? It wouldn't increase my downside. Also, with guns, it's you, there, holding the gun, so it can be enforced. With drones, you could be in a moving car a mile away. How does that get enforced?
  - EliRivers 9y ago
    Well, suddenly simply being in possession of the unlicensed drone is an offence, so you're now at risk every second its in your car or in your house. Being a criminal, you probably interact with the police more often than non-criminals, and if they find it in your house or car or in some other way in your possession, they've got you.
eterm 9y ago
Like many laws, it's not really supposed to act as a deterrent, it's just an easier way to administer the law. If you find someone flying a drone dangerously, at the moment it's hard to know where to draw the line at what is legal, which then makes it difficult to prosecute someone who's flying drones recklessly (such as flying over airports). If you have drone registration, then in the same scenario you can either take away their license (an action which doesn't require proof beyond reasonable doubt) or if they aren't licensed, you have a very easy law to prosecute against (flying without a license).

thinbeige 9y ago

OT: Is it just me who does not see huge business opportunies in drones? Don't get me wrong. Drones made a huge leap the recent years and from a hardware manufacturer's POV there is business. There is also great stuff like drone races, drone cams and selfie cam drones. But will there be really much more? Are safety concerns, public regulation and limited use cases in many areas (such as urban areas) giving drones a hard time?

sjcsjc 9y ago
Drone Wars - Robot Wars in 3D.
- Daviey 9y ago
  Airmageddon, made by the same person as Robot Wars. I was on there. :) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja_epw7qnkc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja_epw7qnkc
dan1234 9y ago
Delivery companies are probably the largest potential users IMO. Imagine the potential chaos if all those the Deliveroo/Just eat drivers were replaced with drones heading to and from restaurants and takeaways with no formally defined routes.
- dogma1138 9y ago
  That won't happen you can't fly drones in London outside of a few designated areas which are registered flying fields. It might work in less dense populated areas but I don't see drone delivery as a thing in any U.K. city ever happening.
eterm 9y ago
Drone registration could actually boost the drone-business market. Businesses should welcome registration because people won't just look at it and think "well I could do that myself!" because of the additional hurdle; hurdles that businesses will happily jump through. It'll separate drones more clearly into "toy" grade drones and business grade drones. The businesses for drones are anywhere that you want equipment (particularly cameras but not necessarily) that previously it was too difficult or expensive to put a person for either due to practicality or safety reasons. Drones are now reasonably cheap self-stabilising mobile platforms. They won't be going away, they'll just be incorporated into other businesses where appropriate. It's easy to laugh at drone-races and selfie-cams but as drones become more reliable, more efficient and quieter they'll just naturally find use cases.

phatbyte 9y ago

Portugal will introduce drone registration and insurance as well.

icebraining 9y ago
Yeah, I'm just waiting to see how that will be enforced.
- fh973 9y ago
  Like everywhere else, it will be irrelevant in practice. But some lawyers made their career step. If some people would adhere to speed limits like they praise "drone regulations", the world would actually be safer.

dTal 9y ago

>The plans also include the extension of geo-fencing, in which no-fly zones are programmed into drones using GPS co-ordinates, around areas such as prisons and airports. So will open source drone firmware become illegal?

WJW 9y ago
Not if it includes geofencing, obviously. There might be an opportunity to alter/delete the geofence, but that would not be different in a legal sense from "chipping" a moped for example. The chippability of mopeds does not make all mopeds illegal and selling properly geofenced drones with open source firmware would also be legal. Altering a drone to remove the geofencing and then flying it would be illegal though.

abledon 9y ago

Cant believe its taking this long... and only in the UK! these things can be retrofitted to be _dangerous!_

wyager 9y ago
I can't tell if this comment is sarcastic or not. Could you expound on this a bit? What kind of retrofitting are you talking about, and how would registration help? The US also has drone registration as of a year or two ago, under the FAA. I'm not really sure what that accomplishes either, though. They might just be gradually ramping up to more aggressive restrictions.
- rhinoceraptor 9y ago
  The FAA registration was actually struck down (as of May 2017) for violating the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012. The FAA is explicitly barred from regulating hobby model aircraft. Interestingly, the FAA still promulgates the notion that you have to pay them $5 for the privilege of flying.
konart 9y ago
>only in the UK I'm kind of offended here. Motherland Russia had this first!

prodmerc 9y ago

Could you, I don't know, require a license on high power handheld lasers? I see imbeciles shining what looks like 100+ mW laser pens (very cheap, very easy to get) on people. Now, I don't like laws banning stuff, but these handheld 150-2000 mW lasers can seriously damage someone's eyes. And I'm not going to risk blindness or poor eyesight for the rest of my life because some idiot thought it looked cool. What's a legitimate use for them? It seems to me that they exist only because "high power, fuck yeah". 50mW is enough for pointing at stuff, and you need industrial lasers to cut something. Shining them in the sky and at people is already illegal, technically, but this is a real case where preventing purchase would be better.

slim 9y ago
And acid
- sargun 9y ago
  What's a legitimate usage of acid? Plenty. Cooking. Engraving. Cleaning.
sargun 9y ago
I used to own a bunch of 750 - 5000 mW portable (pen, and a plugin) lasers. Historically, I've used them for stargazing (i.e. pointing out stars for other people to look at), burning / igniting things I don't want to get near (and where I'm too lazy to remote ignite), and engraving.