The article elides (through ...) the really really important first bullet point of the law they cite, which says: "1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby o

The article elides (through ...) the really really important first bullet point of the law they cite, which says: "1) the aircraft is flown strictly for hobby or recreational use; " IOW the article says: "that the FAA’s Special Rule contradicts the intent of Congress when it passed the FAA Modernization and Reform Act in 2012, part of which states: “[T]he Federal Aviation Administration may not promulgate any rule or regulation regarding a model aircraft, or an aircraft being developed as a model aircraft, if . . . the aircraft is operated in accordance with a community-based set of safety guidelines and within the programming of a nationwide community-based organization.”" The "..." is the part about it being strictly flown for hobby or recreational use. The is the only part elided in this quote This is really shady writing, as the rest of the article makes a lot of arguments about how this law affects commercial use, that they want an FAA interpretation that doesn't exclude commercial use, and the lawsuits around this set of clauses, but leaves out the main problem for these folks: the law doesn't say what they want it to.